Gambling is often seen as a moral problem.  The gambler has a "weakness," which must be corrected, perhaps by some authority—perhaps parents if he (or she) is young, perhaps a pastor if he is older, perhaps a prison if he is completely morally profligate.

A question of morality?

Not if we "see":  The logic of randomness.

If the wheel is fair, its fluctuations are random.  And who's who is irrelevant: the odds are the same for all.  Egocentrism = gullibility.X
The logic of statistics.
If I think past results of the wheel  can influence future results, I am deceiving myself.  That's why that belief is "the gambler's fallacy."X
The logic of kinetic theory.
Kinetic theory is the physics teacher's demonstration (a bit oversimplified) that random events can have highly predictable outcomes.X
The logic of thermodynamics.
The predictability of random events gives us reliable science so that engineers might design engines of the greatest possible efficiency.   Entropy expresses the statistics of life, and silt is one of the life's little unpleasantnesses entangled with entropy.X
The logic of life.
We choose from alternatives, advantage being our goal.  Whether it's the entropy effects of our food or fuel, or the predictabilities of our gambling, statistics rules.  Statistics demands that to win we must be on the right side of the gambling table...and that to live we must ingest food and remove waste byproducts.X
The "weakness," is not so much moral as it is cognitive, because the logical errors of gambling lie just a bit beyond the edges of easy human comprehension.
"X" at the end of a chalk talk links to pages in our Web site.
When "blind" to these logics, we might fall back on our parents or preist for guidance.  Better yet, we can seek ways to overcome our blindness.