Forget France. Common sense surrenders.

on second thoughs maybe i won't give up smoking just yet

No 'ASININE' tag? What are you, nuts?

Screw that, I'm gonna take up smoking for my retirement fund.

How you doin', Betty?

Right... the judge can overturn the decision no? Thats pretty ludicrious. What would that person do with 28 billion? I would buy a country, you know, one of those shiatty ones.

Thats going to make a dent in my RJR stock.

This makes me wish I'd started smoking early so I could cash in too.

Awesome

shouldn't the tobacco companies be exempt by now due to double jeopardy? i mean, they've been sued successfully quite a few times now... how many is enough?

Can you say "appeal?"

Too bad the tobacco companies openly admit smoking is bad for you these days.

That's ridiculous. Obviously the judgment will be reduced down the road, but any dumbass that decides to smoke for X number of years deserves to die. Don't give me the line about how 'I didn't know it was bad for me *tee-hee', because that's total bullshiat. Smokers know damn well that it's bad for them. Hell, any idiot should be able to realize that burning something and then sucking it down your throat is probably going to result in a few negative consequences.

grrrrrrr....

I guess we really shouldn't be suprised that this happened in California, should we?

I guess this is just one more bullet in the dead, bloated corpse that once was "Personal Responsibility"

C'mon... you all know the words... sing along... "I'm not responsible, **insert deep pocketed corporation here** is and now I must get an obscene amount of money to 'teach them a lesson'."

sigh

Absolutely unreal. The fact that a person can be awarded that kind of money for willfully pursuing a habit which anyone with a brain knows is bad for you (screw this harmful disinformation crap...if a habit entails you drawing smoke into your body over and over again, it is not good for you) is appalling. Of course, this is California; a state where "intellect" has overrun common sense.

By the way, I'm a smoker so this isn't some whiny-assed anti-smoker criticism of this "victim".

This is like the fat people suing McDonalds for making them fat. People shouldn't get money for doing harmful things to there bodies willingly.

She'll be taking a dirt nap before she sees one dime of that money.

Betty Bullock? bwahahahahaa *cough*

this is just stupid.. plain old stupid

really makes me want to move to usa and do stupid shiat..
'america, the country where you can be a asshat, AND GET PAID!!'

SOmething tells me this will come down a bit in appeal. Like three orders of magnitude.

Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms are crappin' their skeletons.

my wife used to smoke...where's our cut!?!?

I agree with Dewitt !!

And i guess this proves that "Stupidity pays"!

I'm buying tobacco stocks today, the U.S. Supreme Court has held punies have to bear a reasonable relationship to compensatory damages.

Woo-hoo! It seems there are actually others who hold similar beliefs. Rock on DisplacedTexan, Dewitt, and Audun!

i'm starting to think that starting smoking may have been the smartest thing i've ever done. how ironic.

<dennis miller>

If you're saying you didn't know smoking was bad for you, you're lying through that hole in your trachea.

</dennis miller>

She started smoking at 17.... and somehow took all the way to 64 and lung cancer before realizing that maybe smoking wasn't good for you.

Don't give this woman money, give her a farking lobotomy, she's sucking up all my oxygen.

Bullocks! hehehe

anyhoot.

This jury should be shot! As a smoker I think it is F'n stupid to sue the tabacco companies. How can any dumb shiat not know smoking is bad for you? This lady needs to be killed just on her stupidity alone.

Oh, and by the way.

I've got $20 that says she's still sucking down a few cancer sticks everyday. Any takers?

I think I sat next to Betty in a bar once and her smoke got into my eyes. Shouldn't she should fork over a million or two for my pain and suffering?

I have no problems with this. As long as I get a cut.

This article sorta makes me think of a recent Dave Barry Column where he was discussing just how stupid that whole tobacco settlement is...

"No 'ASININE' tag? What are you, nuts?"

I submitted this from a yahoo story about an hour ago with the asinine tag...not that it matters.

Displaced Texan,

You are right. Un real. But the problem isn't isolated to California.Your home state of Texas has its share of judges and juries eager to hand over millions in "damages" on any legal pretext. Alabama, Florida and Mississippi courts are also adept at handing out somebody elses' money.

And yes, it will be reduced or overturned. But the schock value of such a number only encourages greed and extortion.

Dumb biatch, how can you not know that smoking is bad for you? I think she should get a big pile of shiat as an award...

I need a cigarette...

3Horn

*Kicks self for not using asinine tag*

...

*goes for cigarette*

Monkeyknife's got a point. The way I see it, shouldn't all the non-smokers be able to file suit against Ms. Bullocks for putting us at risk by subjecting us to second-hand smoke? If she's going to file suit for being a moron, I think non-smoker's should get a take of that for not being morons.

With all of these farking lawsuits being sought against all of these companys; we (the consumer) are all going to be broke in a matter of a decade or two.
The price of smokes will go even higher to compinsate for the funds being re-directed to lawsuits. The price of a big mac will also probably rise due to fat dumb asshats suing because they never heard of a salad.

Here is my little insignificant idea: Wait for a few years till these idiots have gotten rich off of coorperations. And the business have in turned jacked there prices in order to still stay in business, then go grab my encyclopedia and find all of these monkey dicks that brought these law suits and throw a suit back at them because they have made me broke because of there stupidity and lack of will power. I will keep buying these products because it is my god given right and they (the ass-hats) have taken away my right for my pursuit of happiness (because I can no longer afford it. I will begin a whole new version of as hat.

did that make any sense?
Any one wanna come aboard?

-Lath

This means she could fund Desert Storm II for...what...a day or so?

In other news the Tabacco Industry is raising the price of a pack of cigarettes to $1,000,000.00.

This isn't just stupid. This is obscene.
I'd like to crush out my Camel in that judges left eye.

I'm no fan of smoking, or Big Tobacco.

With that said, I think that this sort of award is a mistake. While Big Tobacco may owe states/insurers money for what they did, I think it's wrong to pay out to individuals. Basically it sets bad precedent and allows people to sue anything they label as "harmful." Yet another dent in the concept of personal responsibility.

God - I am so glad I smoke!

I lost so much my 401k last year I was wooried about my retirement.

This is great news!

And we ex-smokers who had the common sense to take responsibility and quit killing ourselves, - we get - what is it again? Oh yeah - ZERO (unless you count the extra 20 pounds)

Only could California--the land of fruits and nuts--produce a jury stupid enough to come up with a judgment like that.

i'm going to start smoking again so i can retire with billions.

Isn't it common knowledge by now that cigarretes are bad? Someone that old should know better...

Point well taken, CrackBack. It's not a California-specific issue. I do still think, however, that California has taken it to new heights. 28 B-b-b-billion???

And here I've been going to work every day like a sucker...

First they biatch about nobody doing anything to help the economy, then the same sorts of people pull something like this. And guess who will pay in the end?