An American Addiction Centers Resource

New to the DrugAbuse.com Forums?Join or

Should Smokers Be Allowed To Sue Tobacco Companies For Smoking-Related Illnesses?

Discussion in 'Tobacco / Nicotine' started by predagin, Jun 16, 2015.

  1. predagin

    predagin Member

    I think old people who smoke who didn't know the dangers when they started, should be allowed to sue. But younger smokers who knew the risks shouldn't. Sure tobacco companies make it even more addictive by adding ammonia and other chemicals to cigarettes, but younger smokers knew the risks when they started. There's even a warning on the cigarette packet. But I've heard of people in America trying to sue tobacco companies when they get a smoking-related illness. Why? Is it because they want money, or because they can't take responsibility for their own choices?
  2. drc52

    drc52 Active Contributor

    I don't think it is about taking responsibility, so much as it is about money. If I'd started smoking 60 years ago and found out I could sue the company for several hundred thousand dollars, I just might. Wouldn't you?
  3. Totalarmordestine

    Totalarmordestine Senior Contributor

    No they should not!! That includes me. I began smoking in the late 1960's, AFTER the first Surgeon General's report on the dangers of smoking, AND after my uncle died of lung cancer. I know, I know, I'm dumb. And, I'm addicted. But I knew the dangers back then, i was just too young and stupid to worry about it.
    I have no right to sue a tobacco company.
  4. tarverten

    tarverten Senior Contributor

    tobacco companies have limits within the law they can produce, so, if some one is going for the same money the same time some one getting some enjoyment if they barred the rules they will be punished if you found the companies are mixing ammonia you can report/complain to the concerned authority. in the economy government gets most of the money through taxes duties etc from tobacco and liquor but the same time govt passed a law to prevent the illness among mass, no one should smoke in a mob and making it a habit not to smoke in the public, anyway i appreciate your awareness please educate the people, with how a cigarette will deteriorate their lives towards death, my uncle died with severe smoking Habit
  5. blastguardgear

    blastguardgear Senior Contributor

    I think it's purely out of greed. If these people believed at any point that breathing in smoke is not bad for your health then they're morons. End of story. I know the risks of smoking. Everyone does, but it's still my choice to smoke because I enjoy it. I'm not a heavy smoker, and most of these cancer patients who have smoking related illnesses are on at least two packs a day. That to me, doesn't give them the right to sue. They f**ked up their own bodies. It's their fault.
  6. thepieeatingjay

    thepieeatingjay Senior Contributor

    NO..and don't tell me Old People did NOT Know the dangers of smoking. Anybody who is anybody knows the dangers of smoking, 50 years ago, AND Today. That is just a sorry excuse for being stupid. It is because of both. Money, and not taking responsibility for their own actions, and the judges shouldn't be so stupid to award them for their stupidity.
  7. shadowsupernature

    shadowsupernature Senior Contributor

    The ONLY older people that should even have that thought are the ones that smoked before the surgeon general's report was made public. They are the ones that can use the excuse of "we didn't know". ANYONE after that has no claim to it and should not be allowed any compensation. I say that because they knew it was harmful and they did it anyway. Just the way soda (especially pepsi and coke) are immediate ties to diabetes. People KNOW that, but they keep drinking it. Should those people have the right to sue? I don't think so.
  8. pwarbi

    pwarbi Community Champion

    If that was allowed it could open up a can of worms, alcoholics suing drinks manufacturers, people dependant on sleeping pills or even over the counter drugs could also do the same.

    There's enough warnings around and it's down to the individual to take responsibility, just because something is available, doesn't mean you have to take it and abuse it.