Big Tobacco to smokers: Bend over

The fact that so-called American citizens are celebrating the death of an industry, are celebrating the government's decision and or ability to tax an industry literally to death and the willingness of our government to pick and choose what industries are "moral" and not is alarming, sad and disgraceful.

Maybe the next industry they target is one you don't consider immoral -- of course then it will be different I am sure.

And the most obscene thing that has ever happened is there were a bunch of activist judges willing to throw the constitution out the window and award a bunch of weak-minded wusses big settlements because they were too fucking dumb to understand that if you put smoke in your lungs eight or ten times a day it might do harm to your body.

Fuck that.

This isn't about whether you like smoking or not -- it is the fact that you are too fucking dumb to realize that the government is far more immoral and corrupt than any industry it claims to need to regulate.

 

Translation: Zag believes anybody who doesn't agree with him is dumb and believes all issues are black and white. Let us know when you decide to join reality.

I don't consider the tobacco industry to be immoral. I know it is, as does anybody with any sense. Do I think smokers who get sick should get big settlements? No, I really don't. But there is a hell of a lot more gray area than you are willing to admit.

Nicotene is incredibly addictive. For the most part, people aren't taking that first puff when they are adults. They are getting addicted when they are far too young to understand the dangers involved. The tobacco industry relies on getting children addicted to its products to survive.

The cost of smoking in human lives is too high. You're damn right I'm rooting for the death of that industry. It deserves to die and this country would be better off without it.

 

Activist judges awarded those huge settlements? Hmm. Coulda sworn it was <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/smoke/smoke216.htm">juries in Florida and New Jersey</a> that did.

But I'm sure it's easier to blame "activist judges" when you don't agree with a court decision made by regular American citizens. Lot harder to blame the people, isn't it?

 

All my friends that have quit smoking in the past four to five years have quit because they wanted to get healthy, which is a great reason to quit. But I quit because it was just too damn expensive to keep up the habit. I was smoking almost a pack a day when I was in college which was costing me almost 40 bucks a week.

 

OOP, this country was built on the backs of tobacco farmers and the industry.

please don't refer to this as a moral issue. our country has shoved smoking down the throats of its people for more than 200. that, cannot be denied.

 

Seconded. Keep it up.

 

The fact that it has a tradition in this country does not mean it is right or that it is not a moral issue. Bottom line: Do we think it is ok to trade people's lives for money? It's that simple.

 

Activist judges didn't throw them the fuck out of court because they knew it would be political suicide.

And people are sheep -- it is very easy to make decisions like that against an industry that is unpopular - unfortunately that isn't the essence of being an American -- this is supposed to be a free society -- and that means people should be free to make decisions about their own lives (and yes, live with their consequences).

 

Translation -- emotions and knee-jerk reactionism should be allowed to trump basic civil liberties, the free market and the ability of people to make their own choices about their own lives.

And I suppose that you would also be in favor of the government taxing alcohol to the point where it is so expensive people stop drinking all together? How about junk foods? How about McDonalds, Wendys? How about automobiles?

People die in large numbers from all of those products, either directly or indirectly (in the same way as smoking) -- why aren't you all gung ho to have the government start taxing them to death and making choices in those areas as well?

And don't say it is different, because it is not.

You are rooting for big government, a nanny state and a society that is less free than our founding fathers intended it to be and that, my friend, is hammer and sickle territory.

 

of course it's not right. but uncle sam played the role of pusher and created a positive environment for firing up. folks 30 and older grew up in that environment, and some, quite a few, became hooked on smoking.

don't get me wrong, you're attempting to have an adult conversation about smoking in america. some others on this thread, not so much. only assholes attempt to demonize folks for their habits without attempting to see the bigger picture ... which, you didn't do. i only attempted to make this point with you because i know you aren't a douche.

 

Somebody either didn't read the entire thread, or he's relying on ridiculous generalizations. Neither would be a surprise coming from you.

Alcohol is not as chemically addictive as nicotene. Neither is unhealthy food. Neither of those industries relies on getting underage users of their products hooked to survive.

 

Thank you, tomas. We do mostly have adults in this conversation, including yourself. Just a few idiots who can't have a civil conversation.

I do understand what you are saying. I just don't think we should allow past mistakes to get in the way of positive change.