Perhaps GM Lars Bo Hansen had Gambitking in mind when he made his original suggestion. 
I agree with BigTy that you can have just as much fun, and perhaps win more games playing strong gambits and other sharp openings as you can playing weak or unsound gambits. I've lost games against strong players where I played the Latvian, and the real problem comes when you analyze the game later, and can't find any improvements for black other than 2...Nc6! or 2...Nf6!
By the way, what are the moves of the Garbage London Gambit? Sounds interesting!
For weaker players or players who are just learning though, they should probably play whatever they feel most comfortable with. I don't think there is any opening that will stunt your growth because you can always take up new openings as you improve.
.
Gambitking - You don't need to play gambits to have an exciting game. I mean, why play the Morra gambit when you can have great attacking chances in the open sicilian without giving away a pawn? Why play the Latvian and hope your opponent doesn't know how to bust it when you get a much better game with the Schliemann or Marshall attack. Why play the garbage london when you can play a dutch, KID or benoni and still get a sharp game?
Not only do these gambits stunt your growth as a chess player, they also handicap you! Really, giving pawns away at the start of the game may be fun, but essentially you are just making things tougher for yourself. I think gambits can be good for improving your tactics and attacking skills, but once you get to a certain level you won't be surprising your opponents anymore, and will instead have to fight for equality from the start. It is better IMO to build a repertoire based on sound lines now than to have to relearn a whole new repertoire once you get to the level where opponents are beating you everytime you use these gambits.