Suing Tobacco companies

by StinkyPantz 17 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  StinkyPantz

  What do you think about all of the lawsuits recently against tobacco companies?

  I see 3 sides to the issue:

  1. People should know better; it's clearly printed on the box how dangerous cigarettes are so they shouldn't sue.

  2. It hasn't always been known how bad they were. People that started smoking 50, 60 years ago had no idea and then got addicted before they knew it.

  3. The tobacco companies knew how addictive AND how harmful they were, so they should have to pay for the consequences.

  What do you think about this issue?
• 

  JH

  In the news today on TV, I heard that a Cigarette company in Montreal is closing because of poor sales. A couple of hundred people will lose their jobs. Less people are smoking it would seem, or competition is hard.

  Anybody who smokes knows that it is bad for your health. Can you really sue if you knew that it was bad in the first place?
• 

  teenyuck

  The warning labels have been on cigarettes since the 1960's. The addiction has been known about for decades.

  If you smoke and get ill, the only people who should reap the benefits are your doctors. They should get any money from lawsuits etc.

  The only people getting rich off of these lawsuits are the attorneys. They get a standard 40%. When the jury awards 50 million to some idiot who didn't know they would get emphysema, we all lose. The company has to raise prices, the insurance carrier raises rates on the company and the little guy pays the price.

  It is a farce and a waste of taxpayer money to have this type of lawsuit.

  Can you tell this stuff makes me mad?
• 

  searchfothetruth

  Teenyuck.

  I've got to agree with you (shock - horror)

  Lawsuits of this type are ridiculous, just like trying to sue McDonalds because you didn't know their food was fattening!

  The best way to get at cigarette companies is by not buying their products.

  I'm just as bad because I smoke...and only started after I left the Org. What an idiot!
• 

  drwtsn32

  just like trying to sue McDonalds because you didn't know their food was fattening!

  Yep, I was just about to compare tobacco law suits to a fast food law suit. Yeah, so tobacco companies try to hide the fact that smoking is bad. But common sense would seem to tell you that breathing in large amounts of smoke cannot be good for you.
• 

  teenyuck

  Search, it must be that JW connection....we are kindred spirits!
• 

  Shutterbug

  The company has to raise prices, the insurance carrier raises rates on the company and the little guy pays the price

  The idea was to punish the tobacco companys, which won't work, they simply pass the cost onto the current users of their products. Insurance companys pass their costs onto all of us, tobacco users or otherwise. In other words the only folks who are gaining out of this is the person who sued in the first place and the lawyers. One big scam. Bug
• 

  happyout

  I agree, but only to a certain extent. The warning labels actually weren't on the packages in the 60's it was well into the 70's, and the tobacco companies were still vehemently claiming until the last decade or so that cigarrete smoke wasn't dangerous. There are even people now claiming that second hand smoke isn't dangerous, and they have "scientific tests" that supposedly prove it. So, if someone got addicted while the tobacco companies were still practicing their mis and dis information campaigns, then they have a case. If, however, someone started smoking within the last 15 years or so, then they don't have a case, because by that time the information was factual and undeniable. I still don't understand why smoking tobacco is legal, the product causes injury and death when used "properly" and is a health hazard. I won't get on my soap box about that, though And yes, the lawyers are making way too much money from this and long drawn out cases.

  As for suing fast food companies, there is no way people who are capable of cognizant thought did not know a diet of fried foods was bad for you. It's one thing to sue a company for lying about their products like the tobacco companies, it's another to sue because you as a consumer are stupid.

  Happyout
• 

  badwillie

  Stinky - Applying this logic, we should be able to sue the WTS for the same reasons.
• 

  StinkyPantz

  Badwillie-

  Applying what logic?