Yeah but much less so than with hard drug addicts. When was the last time a roulette addict took a shit on your car or chasing people in the park? Or a roulette addict being even allowed in the casino having soiled himself?

Of course they could have externalities too, but their blast radius is mostly contained to their near circle of family instead of the entire society.

I think you'd be surprised at the number of people who wear diapers to the casino so they don't have to take a break from the machines.

Huh, I think you're splitting hairs at that point.

Splitting hairs? Really?

So to you there's no difference between someone voluntarily and consciously choosing to wear a diaper so he can continue doing an activity for longer without toilet breaks(some video gamers do that too), and someone who is soiled himself because his mind can't control the bowel movements due to being fried by hard drugs?

Yeh, they're technically both addicts, but gambling addicts tend to harass less people and cause less overall ER calls, petty crime, trash, feces in the neighborhoods, than hard drug addicts.

One is a much greater annoyance to general people on the street than the other. What actual arguments do you have to refute this other than just calling it splitting hairs?

> Yeah but that's a conscious decision, not one do to mental illnesses.

You tried to establish mutual exclusivity between conscious decisions and mental illness.

I refuted that.

Never said the impact on society of your examples were similar.