As for your rebuttal, putting money on the table not only creates your risk, it also inextricably creates the potential for reward, which would otherwise be unaccessible to you.
Tell me: in what way is insurance not like betting someone that you will crash your car? He is willing to take the other side, betting that you won't, for a fee. If you're right, he pays you more than you paid him. If you're wrong, he keeps your money. Most of the time, he's right, so he can afford to make the payout much larger than the premium, although his fee will depend on your driving record and some other factors (age, gender, etc.).
In order for insurance to not be like gambling, something in this analogy must be essentially wrong, missing, not applicable, misstated, or otherwise in error. What is it? (The fact that The State mandates insurance but not gambling isn't it.)
Again, gambling is the creation of risk. Insurance is protection against a hazard (i.e., possibility of loss).
Also, insurance does not exist so its policyholders can “win,” but to restore a policyholder to the position he was in immediately before a loss. In gambling, the whole purpose is to win, to come out in a better position than what one was before placing a bet.