A just decision?

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

R. J. Reynolds to pay gigantic fine to a single complainant.

 

And just what will the widow do with any money she finally receives after the lawyers fees?  Will she actually get any?  Litigation on this scale is very expensive.

[Easy Bakes 253]

R. J. Reynolds to pay gigantic fine to a single complainant.

 

And just what will the widow do with any money she finally receives after the lawyers fees?  Will she actually get any?  Litigation on this scale is very expensive.

 

RJ Reynolds plans to appeal against the court's decision, vice president and assistant general counsel Jeffery Raborn said in a statement.

"This verdict goes far beyond the realm of reasonableness and fairness, and is completely inconsistent with the evidence presented," he said.

``We plan to file post-trial motions with the trial court promptly, and are confident that the court will follow the law and not allow this runaway verdict to stand.''

 

 

 

I guess she might get some of that money in a decade or 2 when this actually gets out of court.

Has Exxon paid any of the penalties from the Valdez spill yet? or is that still in court too?

[Larks2242 251]

What a joke, I'm so sick of people bleeding the tobacco companies dry, Half the people that sued them and they had to pay for were probably asbestos victims yet no one went after that.

[Easy Bakes 253]

What a joke, I'm so sick of people bleeding the tobacco companies dry, Half the people that sued them and they had to pay for were probably asbestos victims yet no one went after that.

Actually they are going after those companies too.

[Duke87 1,070]

Billion. With a B. For one person. What. Yeah, that's not going to stand on appeal.

 

And maybe I'm just cynical, but the idea of suing a tobacco company for failing to properly disclose the harmful effects of their product is... I dunno, what do you freaking expect? The harmful effects of tobacco are well-known, well-documented, and well-advertised through PSAs and education in schools. If you can say with a straight face that you didn't know smoking would be harmful, you are a very special kind of stupid.

 

 

Although, this reminds me of Kurt Vonnegut's joke about suing the makers of Pall Mall because their product had failed to kill him as advertised.

[jmsepe 2,038]

Nah, this is not just for me. People should be responsible enough to know the consequences of their actions. If they are going to pay that widow then better yet they also pay everyone who died of lung cancer due to smoking. This case will continue to create more people claiming they did not know the bad effects of tobacco. 

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

In most jurisdictions attempted suicide is illegal.  Smoking cigarettes is attempted suicide, eh?

[hamsterTK 93]

You have to wonder what makes people want to smoke. Is it the culture you are surrounded by?

 

I'd be in favor of just raising the tax and restrictions on smokeable/chewable tobacco until nobody buys it anymore. I guess people could turn to electronic cigarettes. We should probably encourage similar methods of using cannabis too once that's legalized in more places.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Won't work.  All that will happen is a black market in tobacco products.  Taxing something like this is a very tricky balancing act.  You have to make enough on the tax to alleviate the damage to the public health system while not driving the market underground where no tax can be collected.

 

Smoking in public places can be banned but a man's home is his castle, and the SCOTUS has said that several times.  Hardly worth the expense of trying this again.  All the feds can maybe do is make it illegal to transport tobacco in any form across state lines.  I don't think it will stand in the face of the tobacco lobby.

 

Maybe it is time to start publishing the autopsy photos of smokers' lungs.  This has some legal objections on privacy grounds so the legislation will have to be very carefully drafted.  However, if the public purse contributed to the treatment, then things may be a little different.  The ACA may turn out to be an ally in this.

[flatron 83]

Honestly, the judge must be a nutter. What will come next? Sueing beretta because you accidently killed your husband?

[Larks2242 251]

You have to wonder what makes people want to smoke. Is it the culture you are surrounded by?

 

I'd be in favor of just raising the tax and restrictions on smokeable/chewable tobacco until nobody buys it anymore. I guess people could turn to electronic cigarettes. We should probably encourage similar methods of using cannabis too once that's legalized in more places.

 

This is exactly the problem, people want to force people to change their lifestyle when they don't want to, then the same people question why people become violent and enraged, why not just make everything anyone enjoys illegal and have us all equality miserable, sounds like a recipe for fairness. 

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Larks, you sound like you are ready to run a time-sharing service bureau.  The goal there is to have an equally dissatisfied set of users.

 

Smoking is not a pleasure.  For most it is an addiction that cannot easily be broken.

 

Have you seen any Shakers lately?  This religious sect banned sex outright and expected to expand by conversions only.  Died out sometime in the 1800s or earlier.

[Larks2242 251]

Larks, you sound like you are ready to run a time-sharing service bureau.  The goal there is to have an equally dissatisfied set of users.

 

Making everyone dissatisfied is not my goal, my goal is to leave people alone.

 

 

 

Smoking is not a pleasure.  For most it is an addiction that cannot easily be broken.

 

That is not the case for everyone, Cigar smokers are not addicted to them, and it is an enjoyable experience just as other people socially drink alcohol.

 

Nothing more wrong with a Rocky Patel or Montecristo once in a while then there is a beer or some fast food high in cholesterol, I'd much rather have the cigar. 

 

 

Have you seen any Shakers lately?  This religious sect banned sex outright and expected to expand by conversions only.  Died out sometime in the 1800s or earlier.

 

What the heck is a shaker? I fail to see how religion comes into play here.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

The Shakers were a religious off shoot of the Quakers who totally eschewed sex.  The mention was an example of what happens when you ban an essential pleasure.  All gone but a memory in some history books now.

[LexusInfernus 908]

Honestly, the judge must be a nutter. What will come next? Sueing beretta because you accidently killed your husband?

Can't do that. Gun manufacturers are protected by US laws from any and all responsibility for what happens when people abuse their products. Its why they haven't been sued into bankruptcy by grieving parents and next of kin after all the school massacres. 

[Larks2242 251]

 

Honestly, the judge must be a nutter. What will come next? Sueing beretta because you accidently killed your husband?

Can't do that. Gun manufacturers are protected by US laws from any and all responsibility for what happens when people abuse their products. Its why they haven't been sued into bankruptcy by grieving parents and next of kin after all the school massacres. 

 

 

That would be akin to suing Toyoda because someone hit and ran a child.

 

 

Can't do that either and rightly so, Its the same as with a warranty, using a product inconsistent with its labeling voids it, No company should be held reliable for any product that is intentionally misused.

 

For recalls however that is an entirely different manner.