You have to prove that you can take the loss

[maydna]

I believe it will not be effective for the government to limit losses to gamblers who play on gambling sites. Such regulations will make
gamblers and online casinos uncomfortable, because from the start we decided to play gambling of course we have to be prepared with
the risk of experiencing a loss. And most gamblers are adults who can manage restrictions when playing gambling, there is no need for
the government to interfere.

Acceptance is needed in gambling, losing can always happen and it will depend on us how we wanted to stop it. Government can't deal with online gambling limits since we can choose to play in different casinos. If there is a limit in one casino, then we can go in other casino which is useless for implementation of limits. A reminder of addiction in gambling and what it can cause to us can help for those start thinking of gambling.

The government can make that limit, but it is hard to control the limits if the gamblers are not doing by themselves. We have so many casinos that we can select to gambling, so we can spend the money as we want. And if we are losing the money without stopping for a while, but still continue playing, we will have more chances to lose more money.  But if we don't control ourselves, no matter if there is a limit for the gambler, the limit will be broken, which means we will lose the money, and of course, it will be difficult to get the money back.

[1715031938]

1715031938

[1715031938]

1715031938

[1715031938]

1715031938

[Insanerman]

Therefore even if you loose 100 Euro , you might have to get ready to prove that , the loss was indeed flexible and you can take it . Unfortunately now the Government is looking forward to regulate the online Gambling since , the revenues from the offline casinos have taken a strong loss , online Gambling is now being preferred since it's safer and much needed during the pandemic.

Well, it seems that the government is neutral there. It's nice to hear that they are taking actions on these kind of issues.
It's a little bit funny that they also took the advantage to get some taxes on them.
Am I right? If the government regulate the gambling site, they will also be having some money (tax) from the casino?
I'm okay with this since some countries are having trouble economically, it's a good way to add it on their tax collection.

[freedomgo]

This is insane, I never thought this would become a law, this is not gambler's friendly.
What they did is they want to limit including those gamblers who are responsible in what they are doing, come one, this is not good for the business TBH.

[carriebee]

Therefore even if you loose 100 Euro , you might have to get ready to prove that , the loss was indeed flexible and you can take it . Unfortunately now the Government is looking forward to regulate the online Gambling since , the revenues from the offline casinos have taken a strong loss , online Gambling is now being preferred since it's safer and much needed during the pandemic.

Well, it seems that the government is neutral there. It's nice to hear that they are taking actions on these kind of issues.
It's a little bit funny that they also took the advantage to get some taxes on them.
Am I right? If the government regulate the gambling site, they will also be having some money (tax) from the casino?
I'm okay with this since some countries are having trouble economically, it's a good way to add it on their tax collection.

During this pandemic the government find ways to generate income through collecting tax so by having this regulations mostly affected the small time gamblers that needs to prove the lose. What I can see with this regulation it can also avoid addiction to the gamblers. Also depends on how they can manage their loses during the game. And this is an awareness to the new players that there is always a risks in this kind of game.

[Janation]

This is insane, I never thought this would become a law, this is not gambler's friendly.
What they did is they want to limit including those gamblers who are responsible in what they are doing, come one, this is not good for the business TBH.

I hope they stick to UK though.

It will not affect all of the gamblers but the problem might spread to other countries as well. Still, that £100 per month cap is really small. I doubt an online gambler would bet such small amount in a month. I agree that this is not good for the business. Let's hope for the best though.

[Ridwan Fauzi]

Acceptance is needed in gambling, losing can always happen and it will depend on us how we wanted to stop it. Government can't deal with online gambling limits since we can choose to play in different casinos. If there is a limit in one casino, then we can go in other casino which is useless for implementation of limits. A reminder of addiction in gambling and what it can cause to us can help for those start thinking of gambling.

We can use it as an awareness, I think most of gambler didn't accumulate how much money that he spend to play gambling especially how much money that he suffered to lose. They are only play and if he lose they will add and make another deposit so on it will be like that. If this regulation is applied at least it will avoid foe those gambler who spend a lot of money in it. Although it will be hard thing to do, like gambling online especially that use crypto currency and gambling site that didn't have a licence from the government.

[bitbunnny]

This is insane, I never thought this would become a law, this is not gambler's friendly.
What they did is they want to limit including those gamblers who are responsible in what they are doing, come one, this is not good for the business TBH.

As far as I understood this would be valid for UK. Obviously the government found out that they have big problem with gambling addiction and they want to control it somehow. However, that doesn't mean that this will be successful solution and that will be accepted at first place. I guess it will not be easy to implement it

[FlightyPouch]

This is insane, I never thought this would become a law, this is not gambler's friendly.
What they did is they want to limit including those gamblers who are responsible in what they are doing, come one, this is not good for the business TBH.

As far as I understood this would be valid for UK. Obviously the government found out that they have big problem with gambling addiction and they want to control it somehow. However, that doesn't mean that this will be successful solution and that will be accepted at first place. I guess it will not be easy to implement it

I think it is not that hard to implement knowing that these online casinos are already regulated. They could just look into papers and documents they have and check these sites for that. These might make gamblers change their sites into online casinos not based in UK, well, if they wanted to evade that.

[KTChampions]

I wonder how they are going to implement this is this through surveys anyone can lie of course, and if casinos are they going to use lie detector test this is vague and unclear they do want to protect but to the point of proving is like changing the behavior of the gambler totally, they can recommend consultation but not to the point of imposing it to gamblers.

As practice shows, government agencies are absolutely indifferent to the effectiveness of their work - so you think about such details, but those who promote such regulation do not. That is why I am in favor of reducing government regulation in all areas (and in gambling too), since it is ineffective.

[BITCOIN4X]

As practice shows, government agencies are absolutely indifferent to the effectiveness of their work - so you think about such details, but those who promote such regulation do not. That is why I am in favor of reducing government regulation in all areas (and in gambling too), since it is ineffective.

Of course the government can do it, but they dont want to change the rules they have made. Many rules from all lines of government must be changed, but who cares. People are those who have to comply with government regulation and anyone who violates them will be sanctioned. I would also argue that if thats for the best, reducing the rules might be a socially acceptable solution.

[iTradeChips]

I think that the regulations and rules that were set in place by many governments are not sufficient enough to prevent gamblers from making drastic actions in their lives, especially to those facing severe depression, anxiety and addiction in gambling and other things related to it. Mental health I think should also be considered as a big loss would definitely affect their capability to interact in the real world. Make laws that would only allow gamblers with a strong mental faculty and just allow those who don't to only play lottery and small town legal gambling that only needs very small bets.

[michellee]

As practice shows, government agencies are absolutely indifferent to the effectiveness of their work - so you think about such details, but those who promote such regulation do not. That is why I am in favor of reducing government regulation in all areas (and in gambling too), since it is ineffective.

Of course the government can do it, but they dont want to change the rules they have made. Many rules from all lines of government must be changed, but who cares. People are those who have to comply with government regulation and anyone who violates them will be sanctioned. I would also argue that if thats for the best, reducing the rules might be a socially acceptable solution.

Maybe the government will revise its regulation, and make it simple, so there is no objection from the casino, and they can obey and follow the regulations. But suppose after the revision of the regulation, the casino is not following. In that case, the government can give sanction to them, and the worst is closing their casino temporarily until they can back on the right track. That can work if the casino and the government can unite to make it possible, so sooner or later, that can help the economy for both sides.

[Genemind]

I think that the regulations and rules that were set in place by many governments are not sufficient enough to prevent gamblers from making drastic actions in their lives, especially to those facing severe depression, anxiety and addiction in gambling and other things related to it. Mental health I think should also be considered as a big loss would definitely affect their capability to interact in the real world. Make laws that would only allow gamblers with a strong mental faculty and just allow those who don't to only play lottery and small town legal gambling that only needs very small bets.

This may not be sufficient but this might help, complying with the requirement to prove that you can handle your loss or to gamble further after reaching the 100£ cap will limit gambling addicts, especially those who are in the lower-income households. Anyway, the government can always change the rules or prohibition depending on the circumstances or what can be beneficial for both the government to collect taxes and to limit gambling addiction.

[DevilSlayer]

I think that the regulations and rules that were set in place by many governments are not sufficient enough to prevent gamblers from making drastic actions in their lives, especially to those facing severe depression, anxiety and addiction in gambling and other things related to it. Mental health I think should also be considered as a big loss would definitely affect their capability to interact in the real world. Make laws that would only allow gamblers with a strong mental faculty and just allow those who don't to only play lottery and small town legal gambling that only needs very small bets.

This may not be sufficient but this might help, complying with the requirement to prove that you can handle your loss or to gamble further after reaching the 100£ cap will limit gambling addicts, especially those who are in the lower-income households. Anyway, the government can always change the rules or prohibition depending on the circumstances or what can be beneficial for both the government to collect taxes and to limit gambling addiction.

There is pros and cons if the government will try to push that kind of regulations and laws where a certain gambler can only lose 100£, the pros is the government can help its citizens especially who became addicted to gambling where they keep spending their money on it than to buy important things and necessities for their family. The cons is it can violate the right of the gambler which is the freedom to what they want.

[iv4n]

I think that the regulations and rules that were set in place by many governments are not sufficient enough to prevent gamblers from making drastic actions in their lives, especially to those facing severe depression, anxiety and addiction in gambling and other things related to it. Mental health I think should also be considered as a big loss would definitely affect their capability to interact in the real world. Make laws that would only allow gamblers with a strong mental faculty and just allow those who don't to only play lottery and small town legal gambling that only needs very small bets.

Education my man, instead banning it, making all sort of regulations, isn't it easier to educate people and to teach them how to have fun and maybe win some money, but never to risk more they can afford to lose..Controling yourself is what you can learn to do, also you can learn how you can enjoy in risky gambling but to not get harmed too much if things go wrong way.
Restrictions, limitations, is not good when they are imposed.

[Debonaire217]

Isn't it a wrong timing for government to impose regulation to online gambling? Yes we need to protect people who became addicted to gambling, but we could do it by having advices and ads that will help them reduce gaming activity especially if they are losing. Because having a cap with regards to losses is unfair to casinos (House), gamblers could win allot but could limit loss. Plus, in this pandemic, we need tons of taxes from online casinos which could help our economy's sustainability. I'm sure most of the bigtime gamblers aren't really having a financial problem, the just want to have fun, then let them.

[serjent05]

This regulation might be problematic for some  , for sure now the crypto gambling sites will receive a notice and let's see what would be the height of regulation.

Do you really think so?

Crypto sites are based in tax havens and operate on the basis of loopholes to say the least. They don't usually hold gambling licenses.

It is more likely that they get a notice for operating without the gambling license than for that regulation. However, if after so many years operating in the dark, they haven't received it, I don't see why they are going to receive it now.

I don't know why this has been overlooked for so many years. Maybe it's a mixture of not understanding and downplaying the importance of crypto casinos, but the moment they realize their importance they will force them to buy licenses or they will block them.

I do think that the regulation will bring a problem to the government when it comes to implementation since as the quoted reply stated, most of the online gambling are based in tax haven territory.  Aside from that since it is online, a citizen of a country can easily access the site and play in it without licenses needed to that country.  So the problem lies on how they can regulate online casinos if a country doesn't have control on where that casino is base from.  More or less blocking the site would do but it can be easily solve by using tor and vpn.

[jademaxsuy]

I do think that the regulation will bring a problem to the government when it comes to implementation since as the quoted reply stated, most of the online gambling are based in tax haven territory.  Aside from that since it is online, a citizen of a country can easily access the site and play in it without licenses needed to that country.  So the problem lies on how they can regulate online casinos if a country doesn't have control on where that casino is base from.  More or less blocking the site would do but it can be easily solve by using tor and vpn.

I agree regulation is not a problem for the consumers for it is their safety were being after in this regulations. They can be protected and file a complain against any online casino that are not following or violating rules to which affect the consumers in their gambling activity. This is the mere purpose of regulation. However, regulation may become a problem to the online casino for they should folloe rules and regulations and submit theirselves with transparency to the government. Besides, they need to pay also the government that add their problem with the government regulations. Mostly user or people do not like regulations are those owners of online casino gambling.

[erikoy]

Isn't it a wrong timing for government to impose regulation to online gambling? Yes we need to protect people who became addicted to gambling, but we could do it by having advices and ads that will help them reduce gaming activity especially if they are losing. Because having a cap with regards to losses is unfair to casinos (House), gamblers could win allot but could limit loss. Plus, in this pandemic, we need tons of taxes from online casinos which could help our economy's sustainability. I'm sure most of the bigtime gamblers aren't really having a financial problem, the just want to have fun, then let them.

I think not because news talk about the rise of gambling online which resulted to higher bets and higher risk to its consumers or the community where government had the mandate to protect. The government action is to control all the possibilty of fraud activities or minimize at least the gambling effect to its users. National security also should be protected and government needed to act ahead before any national threats could arise. Other dark sides in gambling are backed by the terrorist and will be a to for them to get more resources especially to get more funds.

[Gotumoot]

I think it is a good one but there is a loop hole in this and they forgot that this is online and people could just easily create multiple account and use fake I.D's to do the KYC.
But I like their idea on having a soft cap on every gambler it would help a lot for those problematic gambler I think it would lessen those who are already addicted to it,
But they also need the help of the people around them to cure their gambling addiction.