Responsibility for our own actions

Nanny state can bugger off re protecting adults from themselves as far as I'm concerned. How about addressing the problems some people have with addiction (drugs, gambling, whatever) by providing more mental health support?

Re credit cards limits, banks should always lend responsibly for all our sakes - look what happens when they don't - e.g. sub-prime mortgages.

I don't think it's a simple dichotomy - Nanny State vs talking responsibility for your own actions. Re betting, I think there is a real issue with the FOBT which are now the biggest money spinners for betting shops. There is real evidence that betting shops are much more common in very economically deprived areas. I don't see anything wrong with limiting the number of betting shops in a particular area ( not banning all of them) or limiting how much money the machines can be fed per minute ( again without banning them).

And I meant to add that once someone crosses the line into addiction/compulsive drinking or gambling, they are no longer capable of rational choice in the matter.

Compulsive gambling is an addiction. I don't think that betting firms can be held responsible for "failing vulnerable customers" - that would be like fining pubs for serving alcohol to alcoholics.

I don't see how an online betting firm would know what its customers could afford.

I absolutely agree MawBroon We were brought up to take responsibility for our actions.
My grandmother always muttered 'consequences, consequences " when we acted irresponsibly.
We have become a Nanny State there is no doubt.
It has become the norm to blame others for your position in life.