This paper will be used to satisfy my rigorous writing requirement, thus the stakes are high. I want to make an argument about how casinos should not issue high lines of credit aka “markers” to patrons when they are intoxicated. This should include issues of consent, dram shop laws for casinos, and current laws. I am concerned that casinos allow patrons to become intoxicated by allowing excessive drinking and providing free drinks to patrons while gambling. my concern is that they allow drunk individuals the ability to take out huge lines of credit while drunk and then the patron is liable for the credit they were issued. I believe that casinos should be held liable under dram shop laws and argue that although dram shop only holds taverns liable for the injury of a third party that when an individual suffers an economic loss it will end up becoming a third party injury when the individual files bankruptcy and commits crime to try to recuperate their money. This legal paper should also address arguments against my side and how they are flawed. Please feel free to argue that the laws should be repealed or however you see fit. This should include cases, good law, and why this is wrong. I would also like the paper to include how casinos encourage excessive drinking, no windows, bright lights, music, free drinks, and comps….etc. Throughout the country, casinos continue to issue lines of credit referred to as “markers” to patrons who are gambling. Many gamblers who have been issued a line of credit while intoxicated have attempted to use Dram Shop as a legal theory to either eliminate their debt or have it reduced, which almost always fail. Their argument is that they were too intoxicated to gamble and should not be held liable for debts they incur when they have issued a line of credit from a casino while drunk. I will argue that Dram Shop laws should hold casinos to a higher duty of care for their patrons as drunk people are not able to consent to lines of credit. ~~~For this or similar assignment papers~~~