I’m 67 years old and I’ve known smoking would kill me if I smoked since I was a kid. I don’t think anyone alive today wasn’t aware of it. I think they assumed the risk when they decided to smoke. Alcohol has killed more people (and still does) than tobacco but they don’t get the same treatment. Outlawing tobacco would be about as effective as it was when they outlawed alcohol.
Agree. You probably would not sue but seems that some of these cases are brought by surviving relatives. And they’re winning them. No one feels sorry for the cigarette co’s and that’s why their losing – more of a punishment for them than a reward for the smoker. I guess that’s why packs cost almost $6. Frankly I couldn’t afford to smoke.
Off the subject a little, but the best thing that ever happened for non-smokers was the elimination of smoking sections in restaurants. They moved the smoking outside. Of course the weather in Fl is often good for outdoor dining and you have to deal with the smoke if you want to sit outside.
The tobacco companies are not forcing anyone to buy their product. We are killing ourselves with our own free will. The same applies to the alchol companies and the food industry. We choose our purchases; they are not forced on us. People need to take responsibility for their own choices.
Way too simplistic. The tobacco companies did market to children, and the developing mind is especially sensitive to nicotine addiction. Heroin addicts have said that quitting heroin was easier then quitting smoking. The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. This is the reality of it. That being said, I agree that 65 Mil is a lottery mentality.
At this point, anyone who doesn’t know that smoking causes damage is an idiot. No one forces anyone to purchase cigarettes, no one places it in your hole and lights it up for you. These ridiculous lawsuits against the tobacco companies are about individuals not taking personal responsiblity for their own choices and actions. Granted the tobacco companies put components in their cigarettes that have absolutely no place in them, and they should be made to remove these highly hazardous chemicals. However, no one should be awarded any money because they got sick smoking. They assumed the risk when they lit up. People we can’t blame everything wrong/bad that happens to us on others, we have to take responsibility for the choices we make, the actions we take.
If I worked as the lawyer for this tobacco case, I’d ask for a dismissal based on the age of when the individual started. He was 12 years old. That’s the parents responsibility. So if I had a 12 year old son and he decided to take the neighbor’s chevy for a spin and kills someone and maybe himself, then the family of the deceased as well as myself should be able to sue General Motors; because they made a product that wasn’t small enough and easy enough to drive for a 12 year old? In the case of this smoker, his parents allowed him to smoke and when he turned 18, they already allowed him to be addicted that he couldn’t make the choice to stop, once again, not the tabacco companies fault, but the parents. Go after their estate if they have one.
Millions of us are paying for the ignorance of a few thousand. Attorneys don’t care and obviously the claiment’s families don’t either as they await their inheritances.
I think the tobacco companies should be punished (and put out of business) but I don’t think the the smokers should get any reward for their stupidity
I’m 67 years old and I’ve known smoking would kill me if I smoked since I was a kid. I don’t think anyone alive today wasn’t aware of it. I think they assumed the risk when they decided to smoke. Alcohol has killed more people (and still does) than tobacco but they don’t get the same treatment. Outlawing tobacco would be about as effective as it was when they outlawed alcohol.
Agree. You probably would not sue but seems that some of these cases are brought by surviving relatives. And they’re winning them. No one feels sorry for the cigarette co’s and that’s why their losing – more of a punishment for them than a reward for the smoker. I guess that’s why packs cost almost $6. Frankly I couldn’t afford to smoke.
They seem to be winning in Florida and a few other southern states.
Off the subject a little, but the best thing that ever happened for non-smokers was the elimination of smoking sections in restaurants. They moved the smoking outside. Of course the weather in Fl is often good for outdoor dining and you have to deal with the smoke if you want to sit outside.
The tobacco companies are not forcing anyone to buy their product. We are killing ourselves with our own free will. The same applies to the alchol companies and the food industry. We choose our purchases; they are not forced on us. People need to take responsibility for their own choices.
Way too simplistic. The tobacco companies did market to children, and the developing mind is especially sensitive to nicotine addiction. Heroin addicts have said that quitting heroin was easier then quitting smoking. The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. This is the reality of it. That being said, I agree that 65 Mil is a lottery mentality.
At this point, anyone who doesn’t know that smoking causes damage is an idiot. No one forces anyone to purchase cigarettes, no one places it in your hole and lights it up for you. These ridiculous lawsuits against the tobacco companies are about individuals not taking personal responsiblity for their own choices and actions. Granted the tobacco companies put components in their cigarettes that have absolutely no place in them, and they should be made to remove these highly hazardous chemicals. However, no one should be awarded any money because they got sick smoking. They assumed the risk when they lit up. People we can’t blame everything wrong/bad that happens to us on others, we have to take responsibility for the choices we make, the actions we take.
If I worked as the lawyer for this tobacco case, I’d ask for a dismissal based on the age of when the individual started. He was 12 years old. That’s the parents responsibility. So if I had a 12 year old son and he decided to take the neighbor’s chevy for a spin and kills someone and maybe himself, then the family of the deceased as well as myself should be able to sue General Motors; because they made a product that wasn’t small enough and easy enough to drive for a 12 year old? In the case of this smoker, his parents allowed him to smoke and when he turned 18, they already allowed him to be addicted that he couldn’t make the choice to stop, once again, not the tabacco companies fault, but the parents. Go after their estate if they have one.
Millions of us are paying for the ignorance of a few thousand. Attorneys don’t care and obviously the claiment’s families don’t either as they await their inheritances.
He can buy a lot of cigs with the award!
At least a carton, with the prices these days! Jeeesh!