2006鑰冪爺鑻辮7閫?鏂伴鍨嬬湡棰樿В鏋恄璺ㄨ€冪綉

銆€銆€闃呰鐞嗚В榪欓儴鍒嗗嚭7閫?鏃㈠湪鎰忔枡涔嬪錛屼篃鍦ㄦ剰鏂欎箣涓紝鎰忔枡涔嬪鐨勬槸鍙﹀涓ょ棰樺瀷澶卞幓浜嗚鍗冧竾鑰冪敓媯€(gè)楠岀殑鏈轟細(xì)錛岃€屾剰鏂欎箣涓殑鏄瘯绔熷幓騫村凡緇忚€冭繃涓€嬈′簡錛屼粖騫村啀鍑洪錛屽懡棰樹漢鍛樺榪欑棰樼洰鐨勬妸鎻′細(xì)鏇村ぇ涓€浜涖€?/p>

銆€銆€鎵€搴嗗垢鐨勬槸錛屼粖騫磋繖綃囦竷閫変簲鐨勯毦搴﹁姣斿幓騫寸殑灝忎竴浜涳紝鍏朵腑鐨?3棰樺熀鏈氨鏄€佸垎鐨勶紝鍙鐪媗ure涓€璇嶉噸澶嶄簡錛屽氨鍙互鍋氬嚭鏉ワ紝涓嶇鏄惁璁よ瘑璇ュ崟璇嶃€備絾鏄敱浜庡懡棰樹笓瀹跺湪鍑洪鏃跺鍘熸枃榪涜浜嗗垹鑺傦紝鏈夌殑鍦版柟涓轟簡闄嶄綆闅懼害涔熻繘琛屼簡鍗曡瘝鍜屽彞鍨嬬殑綆€鍖栵紝榪欐牱閫犳垚浜嗘枃绔犳暣浣撴€ф湁涓€瀹氱殑鍑忓急銆傝〃鐜板湪棰樼洰涓婏紝44鍜?5棰橀毦搴︽瘮杈冨ぇ銆?/p>

銆€銆€棰樼洰閫夎嚜Newsweek Nov. 25錛?2002涓€綃囧悕涓篍lectronic Morphine錛堢數(shù)瀛愬悧鍟★級鐨勬枃绔狅紝鏂囩珷浣滆€呮槸涓€鍚嶄笓鏍忎綔瀹禛eorge F. Will.鏂囩珷鍐欎綔鐨勬柟寮忔槸鍏稿瀷鐨勮タ鏂規(guī)姤鍒婁綋鈥曗€曞厛涓句竴涓緥瀛愶紝鍐嶄粠渚嬪瓙涓鏄庝竴涓櫘閬嶇殑紺句細(xì)鐜拌薄錛屾渶鍚庡紩鍑鴻嚜宸辯殑璇勮銆傝繖縐嶆枃绔犵殑鐗圭偣鏄綔鑰呬婦鐨勪緥瀛愪竴鑸兘姣旇緝濂界湅鎳傦紝浣嗘槸鍦ㄥ悗闈㈤槓閲婁綔鑰呰鐐圭殑鏃跺€欏氨鏈変竴瀹氱殑闅懼害浜嗐€?/p>

銆€銆€41. C.瑕佹牴鎹椂闂撮『搴忓拰David Williams瀵硅祵鍗氳秺鏉ヨ秺鐫€榪鳳紝杈撳緱閽辮秺鏉ヨ秺澶氳繖涓搴︽潵鍒嗘瀽錛岀浜屾鏁翠釜璁蹭粬璧屽崥涓婄樉錛屼笉鑳借嚜鎷旂殑榪囩▼錛岃€屼笖瓚婅緭瓚婂銆?/p>

銆€銆€42. A.姝ゆ璁茶祵鍦虹煡閬撲粬涓婄樉鍚庡浠栭噰鍙栫殑琛ユ晳鎺柦錛屼絾鏄粬瑕佽搗璇夎祵鍦猴紝灝變婦鍑轟簡璧屽満騫舵病鏈夌‘瀹炲疄鏂芥帾鏂界殑渚嬪瓙錛氭瘮濡備緷鏃у悜浠栬繘琛屽晢涓氭帹騫胯€屼笖涔熸病鏈夐檺鍒朵粬榪涘叆銆傛棰樿緝闅?/p>

銆€銆€43. B.綆€鍗曪紝鍙鐪媗ure涓€璇嶇殑閲嶇幇鍏崇郴鍗沖彲

銆€銆€44. F.姝ら姣旇緝闅撅紝鍙兘浠庢絀烘牸鐨勫悗闈㈢殑閫昏緫鍏崇郴鏉ユ帹嫻嬨€傚悗闈㈣鍒拌繃鍘葷殑character flaws or moral failings鎴戜滑浠婂ぉ渚濇嵁縐戝閮借涓簆hysical disabilities錛岃繖涓剰鎬濆拰閫夐」涓殑medicalizing more and more behavioral problems鎰忔€濇槸涓€鑷寸殑銆?/p>

銆€銆€45. D.姝ら榪樻槸搴旇浠庡悗鏂囦腑鎵劇瓟妗堬紝鍗崇湅姝ょ┖鍜屽悗闈竴孌電殑鍏崇郴錛屽悗闈㈠湴涓€鍙ュ氨璇村埌緹庡浗44涓窞鏈夊僵紲紝29涓窞鏈夎祵鍦猴紝榪欒鏄庤祵鍗氬湪緹庡浗寰堟櫘鍙?qiáng)锛岃€孌絳旀涓渶鍚庝竴鍙ヨ鍦ㄧ編鍥芥渶閲嶈鍜岀Н鏋佺殑璧屽崥鎺ㄥ箍鑰呮槸鏀垮簻錛屾濂藉彲浠ュ拰鍚庢枃鐩告帴銆?/p>

銆€銆€闄勪笂Newsweek涓婄殑鍘熸枃銆傜孩鑹茬殑鍦版柟鏄紜瓟妗堬紝钃濈殑鏂囧瓧鏄鍛介涓撳鍒犺妭鐨勯噸瑕佺殑孌佃惤銆?/p>

銆€銆€Electronic Morphine

銆€銆€Gambling has been a common feature of American life forever錛?but for a long time it was broadly considered a sin. Now it is social policy.

銆€銆€By錛?George F. Will

銆€銆€On the North bank of the Ohio River sits Evansville錛?Indiana錛?home of David Williams錛?52錛?and of a riverboat casino. During several years of gambling in that casino錛?Williams錛?a state auditor earning $35錛?00 a year錛?lost approximately $175錛?00. He had never gambled before the casino sent him a coupon for $20 worth of gambling.

銆€銆€He visited the casino錛?lost the $20 and left. On his second visit錛?he lost $800. The casino issued to him錛?as a good customer錛?a Fun Card錛?which when use din the casino earns points for meals and drinks錛?and enables the casino to track the user s gambling activities. For Williams錛?those activities became what he calls electric morphine.

銆€銆€By the time he had lost $5錛?00 he said to himself that if he could get back to even錛?he would quit. One night he won $5錛?00錛?but he did not quit. In 1997 he lost $21錛?00 to one slot machine in two days. In March 1997 he lost $72錛?86. He sometimes played tow slot machines at a time錛?all night錛?until the boat docked at 5 a.m.錛?then went back aboard when the casino opened at 9 a.m. Now he is suing the casino錛?charging that it should have refused his patronage because it knew he was addicted. It did know he had a problem.

銆€銆€In March 1998 a friend of Williams got him involuntarily confined to a treatment center for addictions錛?and wrote to inform the casino of Williams gambling problem. The casino included a photo of Williams among those of banned gamblers錛?and wrote to him a cease admissions letter. Noting the medical/psychological nature of problem gambling behavior錛?the letter said that before being readmitted to the casino he would have to present medical/psychological information demonstrating that patronizing the casino would pose no threat to his safety or well-being.

銆€銆€Although no such evidence was presented錛?the casino s marketing department continued to pepper him with mailings. And he entered the casino and used his Fun Card without being detected.

銆€銆€The Wall Street Journal reports that the casino has 24 signs warning錛?Enjoy the fun & and always bet with your head錛?not over it. Every entrance ticket lists a toll-free number for counseling from the Indiana Department of Mental Health. Nevertheless錛?Williams suit charges that the casino錛?knowing he was helplessly addicted to gambling錛?intentionally worked to lure him to engage in conduct against his will. Well.

銆€銆€It is unclear what luring was required錛?given his compulsive behavior. And in what sense was his will operative錛?/p>

銆€銆€The fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 錛圖SM-IV錛?says pathological gambling involves persistent錛?recurring and uncontrollable pursuit less of money that of the euphoric state of taking risks in quest of a windfall. Pathological gamblers often exhibit distorted thinking 錛坉enial錛?superstition錛?overconfidence錛夈€?They lie to friends and family to conceal their behavior錛?resort to theft or fraud to finance it錛?and succumb to chasing ever more risky and high-stakes gambling in attempts to recoup losses.

銆€銆€It is worrisome that society is medicalizing more and more behavioral problems錛?often defining as addictions what earlier錛?sterner generations explained as weakness of will. Prodded by science錛?or what purports to be science錛?society is reclassifying what once were considered character flaws or moral failings as personality disorders akin to physical disabilities.

銆€銆€However錛?at least several million Americans do have a disposition錛?a mental disorder錛?a compulsive disease that seems to make them as unable to gamble responsibly as an alcoholic is unable to drink responsibly. This is a small portion of the nation鈥榮 population but a large pool of misery for themselves and loved ones.

銆€銆€Gambling has been a common feature of American life forever錛?but for a long time is was broadly considered a sin錛?or a social disease. Not it is social policy錛?the most important and aggressive promoter of gambling in America is government.

銆€銆€Forty-four states have lotteries錛?29 have casinos錛?and most of these states are to varying degrees dependent on you might say addicted to revenues from wagering. And since the first Internet gambling site was created in 1995錛?competition for gamblers dollars has become intense. The October 28 issue of NEWSWEEK reported that 2 million gamblers patronize 1錛?00 virtual casinos every week. With $3.5 billion being lost on Internet wagers this year錛?gambling has passed pornography as the Web s most lucrative business.

銆€銆€The anonymous錛?lonely錛?undistracted nature of online gambling is especially conducive to compulsive behavior. But even is government knew how to move against Internet gambling錛?what would be its rationale for doing so錛?Government curbs on private-sector gambling enterprises look like attempts to cripple the competition to prevent others from poaching on the population of gamblers that government has done so much to enlarge.

銆€銆€David Williams suit should trouble this gambling nation. But don鈥榯 bet on it.

?鍛ㄩ浄