Possibly, but it would be a nightmare to implement, not sure how practical it would be. I would just like to see some kind of restrictions added to safeguard the vulnerable, more consideration of the locations of the betting shops and an outright ban on the idealistic advertising surrounding them.

Or just ban certain types like electronic gambling. One of the things I find to be particularly disturbing is the way that casinos are switching over to computer systems. Taking away the feel of the chips leaving the hand and reducing the amount of time necessary to deal a new hand.

Considering that games are tilted in favor of the house, it seems particularly poor to remove the last couple things that slowed the rate of loss down for the gamblers.

Note, I don't have any particular problem with gaming, but, the tricks that get employed are a different matter entirely.

I'm quite talented when it comes to gambling, which is why I refuse to ever do so again. At some point luck does trump skill.

Using your autistic brother to count cards while playing Black Jack doesn't count as "talented".

I'M JOKING! :D

What do others feel about the gambling industry boom?

It's cancer pure and simple( same with alcohol, drugs, prostitution etc) but it's the people's choice what they do with their money and marketing should be allowed since it's speech( and speech should be free of government censorship).

I hear that Newcastle striker Papisse Cisse is strongly against the concept... or was that payday loans, which are of course different to normal loans such as the Virgin Money branding he previously wore. Something about religious grounds, can't go wrong for him in any way.

It's not free speech it's privileged speech, which is another thing entirely. And a company isn't actually a person. They would still be allowed, as individuals, to say how great gambling is.

I don't have any problems with gambling.

Course, I've grown up in a country where parents take their kids to the local TAB so they can have a punt and where schools stop their work so teachers and students alike can see how their Melbourne Cup bets panned out.

I really tried ... but I ultimately can't figure out what you plan to do with the last cent .....

I know, I was joking. He caved because after taking a religious stance, he was photographed in a casino, blatantly gambling.

Sorry, that went right over my head. I didn't realise that he caved because he was snapped in a casino. What a twat!

That's just semantics. Companies do not engage in speech only individuals do. To say it's privilege speech means that people who associate under a (company) charter are not allowed to speak. Speech should be free of government censorship regardless of who speaks it (black, whites, poor people, "companies", press etc).

I am against strict rules/laws for everything. We already have enough of them.
In Germany the law for gambling was liberated some years ago.
Something that was good for a few (and tax) but ruined many and there families.
Don't forget another aspect of the gambling industry...its still a very easy way
to *wash your dirty money*.
Gambling has a high risk of addiction as such it should be handled the same way as
alcohol/tobacco and other drugs.
Sadly its a known fact, that lobbyism has prevent making better laws in Germany and the EU.
Now with Online-Poker etc. there is no way to restrict that.

Wait, Willy Wonka gambles? Where's the Oompa Loompa song for that?!? XD

Well to take the most pertinent point, people and the company would be free to say what they like. They could scream and shout about how wonderful gambling is. Journalists could write articles quoting them saying how wonderful gambling is. They could tell everyone who talks to them about how wonderful gambling is. They could come on GOG and tell us all how wonderful gambling is. Nothing would stop them.

However, free speech doesn't mean you have the right to say whatever you want wherever you want (shouting "FIRE!" in a crowded theatre is the clichéd example). Most (if not all) countries already have some restrictions on advertising (if only to stop outrightly blatant lies) and I think this can be a good thing if there is a clear demonstration of harm.

Obviously people here may disagree on the harm caused by gambling adverts but I find the free speech argument to be almost completely spurious. It's not a question of free speech at all. None of the people at these gambling companies are having their speech curtailed in any meaningful way.