I get where you are coming from. In my younger days i was involved as a hunt saboteur despite the fact hunting with dogs was legal at the time. I do think gambling should be regulated but ultimately if you decide gambling is a legal passtime then, imeo, you are better off targeting support to those who need it rather than a blanket rule that may generate resistance.
I have sympathy with mao's view- bookies know who the problem gamblers are since they see them every day. Start enforcing established rules before creating new ones.
Enforcing the current laws will prove difficult. For a start, the gambling commission takes money from bookies (who doesn't these days) so they don't want to do anything. Secondly, all they can really do if they did decide to do anything is issue a fine that wouldn't even come close to having a serious effect on bookies' income. Thirdly, the bookies feel like they can get away with continuing to encourage problem gamblers because not following these rules is really difficult to prove. How do you prove that staff in a bookies know that a particular individual can't afford the money they are gambling, and how can you prove that the managers even knew what was going on? Its all very wishy washy.
I knew a guy who used to gamble on FOBTs. He told me a story where he had put £4000 in one of these machines in an afternoon. When he ran out of money, he repeatedly attacked the machine, breaking it.
The next day, he went into the exact same bookies and started playing on one of the machines. A staff member approached him, told him that he had scared the staff the previous day, asked him if he was sure he was ok to be gambling, and then made him a cup of tea to drink while he continued gambling (a tactic they use so that people don't leave the shop immediately if they win money).
There is nothing more important to these companies than keeping addicts addicted. Not staff safety, not the money they 'contribute' to the Gambling Commission, not nothing.
However, a law banning advertising is simple (like the £2 limit on machines). Its easy to enforce, its clear when the rules have been broken, and it would be effective. The current laws are impossible to enforce properly and work in favour of the bookies.
About support, I get what you are saying, but I disagree. Again look at something like gun control in America. The harm the prevalence of guns causes is clear, but the government offering support to victims of gun crime doesn't exactly help prevent that harm.
You can support an addict, but when people are there legally deliberately trying as hard as possible to get people addicted, supporting them later is not enough. Its too late and the damage has been done.