Liability for cigarette manufacturers

[general counsel]

Should the cigarette companies have legal liabiity to consumers? On the one hand, they are producing a product that medical evidence suggests is both deadly and addictive, while at the same time they deny that nicotine is addictive. On the other hand, there is the concept of assumption of risk and responsibility for your own choices.

Ramming speed to all

general counsel

[AvengerRam]

I do believe that the cigarette companies have mislead (and possibly still mislead) the public as to the extent of the dangers of their product, and for that, liability should attach.

However, there does come a point at which the dangers are known and those who smoke should be required to accept the results.

[RamsFanSam]

The "tobacco money" that has been recieved by most states was not used to do what it was supposed to do. In Missouri, it was to partially be used to help people quit. I have been seriously considering quitting for the past 5 years...but the so-called programs offered here are basically commercials that repeat what the dangers of smoking are.
Instead of handing over money to the states to be misappropriated into pork barrel programs, the companies should sue the states for obstruction of justice, recoup the funds already paid out, and said funds should be bound by a judge to go directly into programs that really can help people quit.