undefined | Better HN

0 pointsquantified10d ago0 comments

Ah, the old "let's not have gun control, criminals can always find a gun" again. Except that when there are fewer guns around it is manifestly harder for more criminals to find.

In a very strict sense, you are right. But people influence other people, and people who wouldn't act this aggressively otherwise find themselves inspired to after taking a bet.

0 comments

onion2k10d ago

Ah, the old "let's not have gun control, criminals can always find a gun" again. Except that when there are fewer guns around it is manifestly harder for more criminals to find.

That's not my argument though. Gambling is not the equivalent of a gun in this situation. Gambling is the catalyst, sure, but the crime is making death threats. Removing all the reasons why people might make death threats in order to stop the death threats is going to be tricky.

If you want an analogy it's like the argument is 'Let's not have banks because they only encourage bank robbers!', and I'm here arguing that really we just need to make bank robbery a crime.

riffraff10d ago

But the argument for not having cash so that it does not encourage robberies is a real argument and it does indeed work.

ATMs have long had devices that stain cash if you try to steal from them. Bank cashiers used to have "we don't have the keys to the vault" signs. Vaults that open at fixed times beyond the control of the cashiers are a thing.

Regulation and enforcement are important but removing opportunity and motive are also important.

quantifiedOP9d ago

Removing the reason you have to make death threats is the key. You don't go around looking for reasons to make death threats, making them somewhere else if you can't for a bet.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse