Has

[shit4brains]

I started smoking when I was 14, peer pressure, everyone was trying it. I'm 25, quit last year, cold turkey, hardest thing I've ever done, but well worth it..

 

[Mustang Sally]

There's a series of anti-smoking commercials on tv here, sponsored by the Heart & Lung Association, I think. There's one with an old man. He says something like:

"My wife always nagged me to quit smoking. Even threatened to stop kissing me if I didn't. I told her, it's my lungs, it's my life. I had no idea the life I would lose wasn't mine, it was hers. I lost my wife to lung cancer. My wife was my life."

That one makes me cry every time.

 

[Laurel]

So -- did anyone point a gun at these people and say "smoke?" No, not really. However, I think of their marketing tactics as criminal behavior anyway. I don't believe in a kinder, gentler Philip Morris, or a snack food RJ Reynolds. I think they should be fined out of existence. And that is my two cents.

I agree. It's strange how people who consider themselves "tough on crime" will allow corporations to literally get away with murder. If I were out on a street corner handing out lethal poison to people and telling them it was 'harmless', I could potentially be convicted of murder. That's what the cigarette companies did - they knowingly sold lethal poison to an unknowing public, with no warning labels of any kind. Obviously, no sane person was under the impression that smoking was healthy. But that's not the point.

A criminal act is a criminal act. If I forget to look both ways before stepping out in the street and some drunk driver mows me over, he is guilty of murder. If I walk into a bad neighborhood with hundred dollar bills taped to my shirt and some hoodlums beat the crap out of me and steal my money, they are still guilty of theft. If I get drunk & naked at a frat house and end up gang-raped on a pinball machine by a bunch of frat jocks, they are still guilty of rape. If I decide to take up smoking cigarettes that the tobacco companies put billions of dollars into making more lethal and more addictive, all the while telling the public that smoking is NOT addictive and NOT all that bad for you, they are still wrong. Should I have been smarter? Absolutely. Do my actions excuse their behavior, or make it less illegal or immoral? Absolutely not.

 

[Whispersecret]

You made some good points, Laurel, but they haven't told anyone it's harmless for a long time. I'm not saying they're lily-white. Obviously they are guilty of some nasty shit. However, blame-shifting is starting to be a national pasttime, and one that can sometimes yield big money in the form of lawsuits.

 

[naudiz]

I have an aunt who is in and out of the hospital. She's been on an oxygen tank to breathe for years, but she still smokes (leaves the tank inside and goes out on the porch). The hospital visits occur when her heart and lungs start to fail from the smoking. She can't smoke in the hospital, and she'll get well enough that she can go home. Sure enough, that's when she lights up again, and it's only a matter of weeks before she's back in.

I haven't lost anyone close to me as a result of smoking yet, but it looks like it's only a matter of time.

 

[Laurel]

You made some good points, Laurel, but they haven't told anyone it's harmless for a long time. I'm not saying they're lily-white. Obviously they are guilty of some nasty shit. However, blame-shifting is starting to be a national pasttime, and one that can sometimes yield big money in the form of lawsuits.

Smoking is definitely a stupid thing to do if you care about your health. However, that doesn't excuse the tobacco company's cover-ups and lies - any more than my stupidity for picking up a hitchhiker excuses his actions when he murders me, steals my car, and dumps my body in a ditch.

People are so very willing to vilify individual criminals - murderers, thiefs, frauds. When corporations act the same way - violating the same ethical and legal codes - we're all supposed to turn our heads because they did it to make money, after all, and that's what's important.

Crime is crime is crime, no matter if it's committed by a poor black woman or a rich white CEO. The recent push in the country to point the finger at the victim is very, very scary.

 

[Whispersecret]

Oh, I'm in agreement with you, mistress. I got a big happy feeling at the end of Erin Brokovich, too!

 

[CreamyLady]

I don't think of my viewpoint as shifting blame. I maintain that what the companies did was absolutely reprehensible, wrong, criminal -- you think of a negative adjective, and I'll apply it.

The stupidity of the victim never, ever excuses the criminal. It may make us scratch our heads and wonder, but it is no excuse for that behavior.

There is definitely enough blame to go around here. No one should start smoking, ever, but do note that many people started when they were children. Children, for the most part, are incapable of weighing the long term effects of their actions. Also, think of Joe Camel and the really cool ads pitched right in their direction.

So, this is not shifting blame. It is merely stripping away the spurious defense that no one was ever forced to smoke. Of course not, but the fact that this poison is sold, and that the purveyors of this shit expect to make horrendous profits from the sale of the same, is abhorrent.

That we stand for it is unbelievable.

 

[Laurel]

Oh, I'm in agreement with you, mistress. I got a big happy feeling at the end of Erin Brokovich, too!

LOL!

 

[Laurel]

off topic...Have you seen the real Erin Brokovich? There should be a way for overly busty women to donate their spare boobflesh to us petite girls. Seriously! Like a blood bank, only it would be a boob bank.

 

[Whispersecret]

I'd be happier if I could shift some of my ass and hips upward. I got plenty of flesh, just in the wrong places.

 

[Whispersecret]

CL, you're right. Tobacco is a bad example for my shifting blame argument. I should go to bed. My brain isn't functioning at full capacity. I withdraw my tobacco argument. Don't sue them for their money. Make 'em smoke.

 

[Guest]

So we'll pay a few billion in lawsuits. We've diversified into all kinds of companies now. Besides, the growth is overseas in 3rd world countries. 5.9 billion potential customers. Think the political parties give a shit? They've been in our pocket for 50 years.

So smoke up you fucking losers!

 

[Ambrosious]

WhisperSecret

Ok, let me see if I get this. People should be held responsible for smoking, because the warnings are there-but not held responsible for violating a company policy that they had also read a warning about. Is this right, or am I reading something else into your words?

The other point I have is general in nature, not directed at anyone in particular.

Also, the book Jury Duty brought up a very good point. Tobacco is the ONLY product on the market that will kill you if you use it exactly as it is intended to be used. If you light it up, inhale the smoke, dip the snuff, chew the chaw, you're more likely to die. How long would Jello stay on the market if it killed you when you ate enough of it?

 

[CreamyLady]

Jello just might; one could smother in it during a wrestling match!

 

[Whispersecret]

Re: WhisperSecret

[Whispersecret] Ok, let me see if I get this. People should be held responsible for smoking, because the warnings are there-but not held responsible for violating a company policy that they had also read a warning about. Is this right, or am I reading something else into your words?

<stomps her foot> WAAAHHH! Why can't I be sympathetic to some old blue collar workers without someone coming down on my ass!?

WOOF.

1. Yes. Smokers who started smoking with the knowledge that it's harmful and addicting should not blame the tobacco companies for any health problems they develop.

2. Perhaps I'm guilty of being swayed by a well-written, but slanted article, in the paper. But, yes, given the fact that I highly doubt most of the employees actually sat down and read that booklet (Who knows how long the thing was and how tiny the type was?) I still think they should have been warned. One warning. Not a lot to ask in exchange for 10, 20+ years of work for a chemical company.

(Ambro, did you notice how I responded to you? )

 

[Ambrosious]

WS

Not one referral to Amb-noxious. Impressive.

Woof back at ya'.