I don't know, maybe I'm an old fart, but I hadn't held a sum of money large enough to buy a pack of cigarettes until I turned 16.

I presume my parent knew what they were doing, so, yeah, nanny state.

▲

freehorse 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Regulating gambling is not "nanny state", esp in relation to kids. Your personal experience as a kid, about whether you had money or not, is completely irrelevant as an argument.

	▲	aboardRat4 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Not at all. My experience in this case indicates that there is a correct behavioural pattern which avoids the issue entirely and requires zero government's intervention. But if you insist on having a regulation, okay, I'm fine with it. What about the following regulation: each time a minor is found gambling or smoking, his/her parents are fined 100x times the stake/the price of cigarettes?