| Welcome to Campfire Soapbox. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Suing Big Tobacco | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 3 2005, 07:23 PM (507 Views) | |
| brewster | Oct 3 2005, 09:18 PM Post #16 |
![]()
Winemaker Extraordinaire
|
John;
Do you really think they have any??? |
My Favourite CampsiteBow Valley Provincial Park, Kananaskis Country, Alberta | |
![]() |
|
| brewster | Oct 3 2005, 09:21 PM Post #17 |
![]()
Winemaker Extraordinaire
|
Chris, it's all very fine to say that if you don't smoke, it's not hitting you financially, but unfortunately, the resultant medical costs DO hit you, either from County Hospitals, or higher insurance premiums - non-smoker clauses might help, but I have serious doubts if it would be enough... |
My Favourite CampsiteBow Valley Provincial Park, Kananaskis Country, Alberta | |
![]() |
|
| brewster | Oct 3 2005, 09:25 PM Post #18 |
![]()
Winemaker Extraordinaire
|
I may have stated the original question badly, however - If a government collects taxes, it is essentially part of the distribution system, and profiting from the sale. How can they then turn around and SUE another part? They have GOT to be as guilty as the Tobacco companies! As someone else mentioned, the dangers have been well known for many years now! |
My Favourite CampsiteBow Valley Provincial Park, Kananaskis Country, Alberta | |
![]() |
|
| corky52 | Oct 3 2005, 09:26 PM Post #19 |
|
Member
|
Jackie, Person next to you can't smoke in CA, I find that fair. Person next to you can go out and get in their car and kill a family due to slowed reflexes. Cost of alcohol far exceeds the cost of smoking, never seen smoke cause a murder or a beating. |
![]() |
|
| DylansMom | Oct 3 2005, 09:32 PM Post #20 |
![]()
Jackie-Sioux Falls, SD (in Arizona for the moment)
|
Corky, I seriously doubt that the cost of drinking exceeds the cost of smoking. Smoking and its related illnesses, including killing by second hand smoke, kill a LOT of people every year. Again, no statistics, but am willing to bet it is more deaths than caused by drunk driving. And slowed reflexes while driving isn't just due to drinking.....old age does that as well. Heck, anyone can be in a car accident at any time, drinking doesn't have to cause them. While I totally agree that drunk driving is a very bad thing, I just don't see it causing as many deaths as smoking. And while more and more states are making smoking in public places illegal, there are some we have been in that it is still allowed. |
|
Greg, Dylan & Jasper too! 2005 F350 King Ranch PSD Crew Cab 4x4 Dually; 2005 Carriage Carri-lite KIQ View My Pictures Here
| |
![]() |
|
| corky52 | Oct 3 2005, 09:43 PM Post #21 |
|
Member
|
Jackie, Believe as you wish, it still ain't true! AZ that you're in now allows smoking in most places, just have to have a separate area. Take your fan as "separate" is mostly in the mind over there.
|
![]() |
|
| DylansMom | Oct 3 2005, 09:45 PM Post #22 |
![]()
Jackie-Sioux Falls, SD (in Arizona for the moment)
|
Ya, "seperate" areas is the stupidest thing they ever thought up! I guess we'll do a lot of take out!
|
|
Greg, Dylan & Jasper too! 2005 F350 King Ranch PSD Crew Cab 4x4 Dually; 2005 Carriage Carri-lite KIQ View My Pictures Here
| |
![]() |
|
| DylansMom | Oct 3 2005, 10:12 PM Post #23 |
![]()
Jackie-Sioux Falls, SD (in Arizona for the moment)
|
Corky, here ya go...........Check this link NOTE:
So, 440,000 deaths and 8.6 million with medical problems.....that adds up to a whole lot of costs. And that doesn't even take into consideration the people who die from fires caused by smoking in bed, or falling asleep while smoking. It happens more than you think! I doubt drinking can compare. |
|
Greg, Dylan & Jasper too! 2005 F350 King Ranch PSD Crew Cab 4x4 Dually; 2005 Carriage Carri-lite KIQ View My Pictures Here
| |
![]() |
|
| roscoe | Oct 3 2005, 10:21 PM Post #24 |
|
Member
|
Sue the tobacco companies to the hilt. Double the tax on the product but please don't ban it. These poor souls puffing away outside in our state are helping to educate our children and lowering my taxes. A terrible obnoxious habit to be sure but everyone has the right to puff away. I heard they were thinking of banning the despots from lighting up on public lands due to the threat of forest fires and the emphasema found in certain wildlife. Maybe they should charge them for a smoking permit and let them be.
|
![]() |
|
| DylansMom | Oct 3 2005, 10:39 PM Post #25 |
![]()
Jackie-Sioux Falls, SD (in Arizona for the moment)
|
Ok.....lawn darts (remember them???) were banned because three, that's right, THREE kids died from them....but yet MILLIONS can die from tobacco and that's ok. Screwy isn't it?????
|
|
Greg, Dylan & Jasper too! 2005 F350 King Ranch PSD Crew Cab 4x4 Dually; 2005 Carriage Carri-lite KIQ View My Pictures Here
| |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | Oct 4 2005, 04:10 AM Post #26 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
Well, there's a hidden cost. Then by the Harm Principle smoking should be regulated so smokers cannot smoke or cannot collect damages. I should not have to pay for other people's poor choices. |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| eb belote | Oct 4 2005, 05:18 AM Post #27 |
|
Member
|
the goverment has stoped the price suport for tobacco so in the future you will see farmers that are still growin gold leaf bein sued. just my opinion back before 1776 you could be put to death for destroryin a hill of tobacco |
![]() |
|
| passinthru | Oct 4 2005, 05:24 AM Post #28 |
![]()
John - Gainesville, FL
|
Chris
Do you drink Miller Beer? Or ever use Kraft food products? Altria owns Kraft and a 1/3 interest in Miller. I think the alcohol costs to society are much higher than the tobacco costs as does Corky. In that I drink very little (maybe 2 beers a month) and don't smoke, I only have a financial interest in either. Altria is up 60% this year and pays a healthy dividend. ![]() Here is a site that says the cost of alcohol to society is $148 billion/yr. alcolol I've always thought it intereting how drinkers, and smokers for that matter, defend their rights to both knowing both are bad for them. |
| Faster horses, younger women, older whiskey, more money... | |
![]() |
|
| cruiser | Oct 4 2005, 07:07 AM Post #29 |
![]()
Member
|
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION et al. v. BROWN & WILLIAMSON TOBACCO CORP. et al. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No. 98—1152. Argued December 1, 1999–Decided March 21, 2000 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), 21 U.S.C. § 301 et seq., grants the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), as the designee of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), the authority to regulate, among other items, “drugs” and “devices,” §§321(g)—(h), 393. In 1996, the FDA asserted jurisdiction to regulate tobacco products, concluding that, under the FDCA, nicotine is a “drug” and cigarettes and smokeless tobacco are “devices” that deliver nicotine to the body. Pursuant to this authority, the FDA promulgated regulations governing tobacco products’ promotion, labeling, and accessibility to children and adolescents. The FDA found that tobacco use is the Nation’s leading cause of premature death, resulting in more than 400,000 deaths annually, and that most adult smokers begin when they are minors. The regulations therefore aim to reduce tobacco use by minors so as to substantially reduce the prevalence of addiction in future generations, and thus the incidence of tobacco-related death and disease. Respondents, a group of tobacco manufacturers, retailers, and advertisers, filed this suit challenging the FDA’s regulations. They moved for summary judgment on the ground, inter alia, that the FDA lacked jurisdiction to regulate tobacco products as customarily marketed, that is, without manufacturer claims of therapeutic benefit. The District Court upheld the FDA’s authority, but the Fourth Circuit reversed, holding that Congress has not granted the FDA jurisdiction to regulate tobacco products. The court concluded that construing the FDCA to include tobacco products would lead to several internal inconsistencies in the Act. It also found that evidence external to the FDCA–that the FDA consistently stated before 1995 that it lacked jurisdiction over tobacco, that Congress has enacted several tobacco-specific statutes fully cognizant of the FDA’s position, and that Congress has considered and rejected many bills that would have given the agency such authority–confirms this conclusion. Held: Reading the FDCA as a whole, as well as in conjunction with Congress’ subsequent tobacco-specific legislation, it is plain that Congress has not given the FDA the authority to regulate tobacco products as customarily marketed. Pp. 8—40. O'connor sided with the more conservative wing of the court against Ginsberg, Breyer, Souter, and Stevens. My own personal feeling was that nicotine is a drug and should be controlled by the FDA. How about you? |
|
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from a religious conviction. Blaise Pascal (1623 - 1662) | |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | Oct 4 2005, 10:46 AM Post #30 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
"Do you drink Miller Beer?" No. That's just it, as a consumer I have a choice, I can drink a beer whose company has not raised prices because they were sued. Of if it's a tobacco company that has diversified into other products, I can buy another brand. I might pay those higher prices, but don't have to. Now on the insurance argument, I can see the argument better. Part of my premium goes to pay off the insurance companies other losses. I may never make a claim but have rates climb because of that. |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Soapbox · Next Topic » |




My Favourite Campsite







1:04 PM Jul 11