If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(KAIT Jonesboro)   Jury awards $23.6 billion in punitive damages against RJ Reynolds. To a single person   (kait8.com) divider line 158
    More: Florida  
•       •       •

11164 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Jul 2014 at 10:21 PM (8 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



158 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-07-19 07:10:10 PM
On the one hand, the decision appears to be a bit excessive and will likely be overturned on appeal.  On the other hand, if lightning does hit the shiathouse and the decision stands, it will put RJ Reynolds out of business, so that's not half bad.
 
2014-07-19 07:13:25 PM
Last year, Florida's highest court re-approved that decision, which made it easier for sick smokers or their survivors to pursue lawsuits against tobacco companies without having to prove to the court again that Big Tobacco knowingly sold dangerous products and hid the hazards of cigarette smoking.

I thought that had already been proven?
 
2014-07-19 07:21:17 PM
Tobacco alone isn't healthy but it's not the true culprit; the additives used to make the product more addictive are harmful.
Have a friend that worked for 'big tobacco' while going to school in a southern state. They add over 600 known carcinogens while growing and processing the cigarettes.

/css
 
2014-07-19 07:47:50 PM
I don't have all that much sympathy for people who willingly inhale large quantities of smoke directly into their lungs for 30 years and needed to be told it was bad for them. And was this dude's life really worth $40mill?
 
2014-07-19 07:50:13 PM

Prey4reign: On the one hand, the decision appears to be a bit excessive and will likely be overturned on appeal.  On the other hand, if lightning does hit the shiathouse and the decision stands, it will put RJ Reynolds out of business, so that's not half bad.


Well, it's certainly good to know that if RJ Reynolds goes out of business nobody will smoke anymore and the demand for cigarettes will drop to zero.

And if anyone anyone wants some they can always get the Chinese cigarettes that will be at Walmart soon.

Let's do this thing!
 
2014-07-19 07:59:24 PM
I'll never make jury duty, because ole smoker dude's family would get jack and squat from me.

/biatch, you knew it was bad for you
//biatch, you knew it was addictive
///biatch, people quit ll the time, they just toughen the fark up
////biatch, everyone told you to quit
 
2014-07-19 08:13:28 PM
Dear Exxon, Shell, and Koch Industries: Take a glimpse of your future and see how well science-denial works out in the long run.

/too bad Dave and Chuck won't be alive to see it.
 
2014-07-19 08:30:29 PM

JoieD'Zen: Tobacco alone isn't healthy but it's not the true culprit; the additives used to make the product more addictive are harmful.
Have a friend that worked for 'big tobacco' while going to school in a southern state. They add over 600 known carcinogens while growing and processing the cigarettes.

/css


Ammonia chemistry.
 
2014-07-19 08:41:19 PM

ecmoRandomNumbers: JoieD'Zen: Tobacco alone isn't healthy but it's not the true culprit; the additives used to make the product more addictive are harmful.
Have a friend that worked for 'big tobacco' while going to school in a southern state. They add over 600 known carcinogens while growing and processing the cigarettes.

/css

Ammonia chemistry.


Smoke organic if you choose to smoke.
 
2014-07-19 08:44:44 PM

basemetal: I'll never make jury duty, because ole smoker dude's family would get jack and squat from me.

/biatch, you knew it was bad for you
//biatch, you knew it was addictive
///biatch, people quit ll the time, they just toughen the fark up
////biatch, everyone told you to quit


Yeah, I'd have to agree

/this award is as dumb as the state is was awarded in
//ex-smoker
 
2014-07-19 08:48:50 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: basemetal: I'll never make jury duty, because ole smoker dude's family would get jack and squat from me.

/biatch, you knew it was bad for you
//biatch, you knew it was addictive

Yeah, I'd have to agree


These suits don't win because cigarettes are bad for you, they win because tobacco companies spent decades trying to convince everyone that they weren't.
 
2014-07-19 08:55:44 PM

dookdookdook: MaudlinMutantMollusk: basemetal: I'll never make jury duty, because ole smoker dude's family would get jack and squat from me.

/biatch, you knew it was bad for you
//biatch, you knew it was addictive

Yeah, I'd have to agree

These suits don't win because cigarettes are bad for you, they win because tobacco companies spent decades trying to convince everyone that they weren't.


The warnings on the packs have been there since the 60's, and it hasn't been any secret cigarettes aren't good for you. I understand what you're saying, but I still feel there has been adequate information for an adult to make an informed decision for quite some time

/not saying I wouldn't find the tobacco company guilty, either
//but that award is still ridiculous
 
2014-07-19 09:04:05 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: The warnings on the packs have been there since the 60's, and it hasn't been any secret cigarettes aren't good for you. I understand what you're saying, but I still feel there has been adequate information for an adult to make an informed decision for quite some time


The warnings were there due to government regulations.  The tobacco companies themselves were working hard to send the exact opposite message.  In fact, the roots of the Tea Party can be traced back to attempts by tobacco companies to astroturf anti-regulation/excise tax movements in the 80's and 90's.
 
2014-07-19 09:33:39 PM

dookdookdook: Dear Exxon, Shell, and Koch Industries: Take a glimpse of your future and see how well science-denial works out in the long run.

/too bad Dave and Chuck won't be alive to see it.


The funny part is it's some of the same foundations (Heartland, etc) and in some cases the SAME PEOPLE attacking the science.
 
2014-07-19 10:25:57 PM
Stupid.  Smoking is bad for you.   The woman's husband no doubt knew what he was doing was not healthy.  I say this as a long time smoker.  I am choosing to continue with a known unhealthy activity.  It's not the fault of the company making the cigarettes.  It's my own farking fault.

/I have cut down to about a pack a week instead of a pack a day
 
2014-07-19 10:29:28 PM

OgreMagi: /I have cut down to about a pack a week instead of a pack a day


Good for you. I think that's different than booze. There are exceptions of course but for a real alkie, you have to quit the sauce 100%.
 
2014-07-19 10:29:44 PM
i1182.photobucket.com
 
2014-07-19 10:30:42 PM
Well their products did deprive him of many valuable working years. If their products costs him,, say, 30 years of 40 hour weeks for 49 weeks a year, it seems only fair that RJR should pay him his ordinary wage of
 $401,360.54 per hour.
 
2014-07-19 10:31:55 PM
Jul 19, 2014  R.J. Reynolds Descendant Bets on Bankrupt Crumbs Cupcake Chain
 
2014-07-19 10:32:59 PM

flucto: Well their products did deprive him of many valuable working years. If their products costs him,, say, 30 years of 40 hour weeks for 49 weeks a year, it seems only fair that RJR should pay him his ordinary wage of
 $401,360.54 per hour.


*facepalm*

a freeking banker... figures..
 
2014-07-19 10:33:14 PM
There has to be a timeline where these types of lawsuits won't work anymore with tobaco companies finaly admitting they are addicting. I don't think anyone who started smoking in the 2000's can claim they had no idea and it's all the tobaco company's fault.
 
2014-07-19 10:35:15 PM
Now he's the richest guy in his cemetery.
 
2014-07-19 10:36:39 PM

dookdookdook: Dear Exxon, Shell, and Koch Industries: Take a glimpse of your future and see how well science-denial works out in the long run.

/too bad Dave and Chuck won't be alive to see it.


im sure all those executives are terrified of the awful things that will happen to their massive corporations, decades after they are dead and enough money is rotting in banks to support do-nothing children for multiple generations.
 
2014-07-19 10:42:26 PM

zamboni: Prey4reign: On the one hand, the decision appears to be a bit excessive and will likely be overturned on appeal.  On the other hand, if lightning does hit the shiathouse and the decision stands, it will put RJ Reynolds out of business, so that's not half bad.

Well, it's certainly good to know that if RJ Reynolds goes out of business nobody will smoke anymore and the demand for cigarettes will drop to zero.

And if anyone anyone wants some they can always get the Chinese cigarettes that will be at Walmart soon.

Let's do this thing!


On the third hand, if the decision stands, it might give other potential plaintiffs to bring more suits against the other tobacco companies who still manufacture and sell their nicotine sticks in the USA and they will also be driven out of business.  Then, anyone who can't figure out a way of stopping smoking will have to smoke Chinese cigarettes.
 
2014-07-19 10:42:40 PM
As ripe for jury nullification as this is . . . man, it would be so sweet if it were to stand.
 
2014-07-19 10:43:01 PM
No one panic. This is the jury's opinion on damages; the judge will cut it down to within normal, sane limits.

And if you want real insanity, look up Kent cigarettes. They had asbestos filters.
 
2014-07-19 10:43:16 PM

zamboni: Prey4reign: On the one hand, the decision appears to be a bit excessive and will likely be overturned on appeal.  On the other hand, if lightning does hit the shiathouse and the decision stands, it will put RJ Reynolds out of business, so that's not half bad.

Well, it's certainly good to know that if RJ Reynolds goes out of business nobody will smoke anymore and the demand for cigarettes will drop to zero.

And if anyone anyone wants some they can always get the Chinese cigarettes that will be at Walmart soon.

Let's do this thing!


There it is just like clockwork. We can't do everything, so we should do nothing.
 
2014-07-19 10:45:47 PM
The compensatory damages, of 13m, fine.  I think there is certainly some liability for the conduct of the tobacco companies and even if that seems a bit excessive, so be it.  However, it is hard to believe any circumstances that warrant the conduct deserves the equivalent of the GDP of Uganda to one family (and their lawyers).  The tobacco companies didn't hold anyone down and force them to smoke for 30 years, at some point, regardless of the disinformation given by one side, you have to take responsibility for your own actions.  All this does is guarantee that their decision will be overturned and the work they put into the case will be undone.  Congrats to the ineffective message you sent.
 
2014-07-19 10:45:57 PM

flucto: Well their products did deprive him of many valuable working years. If their products costs him,, say, 30 years of 40 hour weeks for 49 weeks a year, it seems only fair that RJR should pay him his ordinary wage of
 $401,360.54 per hour.


Your cakes and chicken is addictive. Pay me.
 
2014-07-19 10:46:35 PM
Good thing that Reynolds guy is a person that will feel remorse over their past actions
 
2014-07-19 10:47:12 PM
Importing kreteks for the in-crowd niche market, I can dig. Except that's illegal now due to the FDA ban.

But the US importing Chinese cigs!? WTF??
 
2014-07-19 10:48:16 PM

Prey4reign: On the one hand, the decision appears to be a bit excessive and will likely be overturned on appeal.  On the other hand, if lightning does hit the shiathouse and the decision stands, it will put RJ Reynolds out of business, so that's not half bad.


If RJ Reynolds is put out of business, then from whom will I purchase aluminium foil?
 
2014-07-19 10:50:28 PM

basemetal: I'll never make jury duty, because ole smoker dude's family would get jack and squat from me.

/biatch, you knew it was bad for you
//biatch, you knew it was addictive
///biatch, people quit ll the time, they just toughen the fark up
////biatch, everyone told you to quit


Have you ever been a smoker? I have, and I quit. And having been through that process I can tell that most likely you know nothing of it. I blame no one who fails to quit.
 
2014-07-19 10:50:43 PM
37.media.tumblr.com
 
2014-07-19 10:51:28 PM
I don't see how anybody in this day and age can make a credible case that they didn't know the dangers of smoking.
 
2014-07-19 10:55:20 PM

ecmoRandomNumbers: JoieD'Zen: Tobacco alone isn't healthy but it's not the true culprit; the additives used to make the product more addictive are harmful.
Have a friend that worked for 'big tobacco' while going to school in a southern state. They add over 600 known carcinogens while growing and processing the cigarettes.

/css

Ammonia chemistry.


Grr.. the link actually says that they didn't find elevated levels of nicotine but completely failed to address the time dimension; not just serum levels, but delivery to the brain. that's what the grrs for.
 
2014-07-19 10:55:36 PM
img.fark.net
www.vaportalk.com

OgreMagi: Stupid.  Smoking is bad for you.   The woman's husband no doubt knew what he was doing was not healthy.  I say this as a long time smoker.  I am choosing to continue with a known unhealthy activity.  It's not the fault of the company making the cigarettes.  It's my own farking fault.

/I have cut down to about a pack a week instead of a pack a day


Dude just vape, there's basically no way it's nearly as bad for you, and it tastes a lot better.
media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com
 
2014-07-19 10:56:26 PM

dookdookdook: MaudlinMutantMollusk: basemetal: I'll never make jury duty, because ole smoker dude's family would get jack and squat from me.

/biatch, you knew it was bad for you
//biatch, you knew it was addictive

Yeah, I'd have to agree

These suits don't win because cigarettes are bad for you, they win because tobacco companies spent decades trying to convince everyone that they weren't.


As recently as 1996 Republican Party presidential nominee Bob Dole declared without a hint of irony that "nicotine is no more addictive than milk."

Now for Bob Dole to have said that, two things were almost certainly true:

1) Bob Dole was in the pocket of big tobacco, and
2) Bob Dole thought it would score him points with the public to say it.

For item 2 to be true, there had to be a significant portion of the population who remained unconvinced of tobacco's dangers.

And for that to be true, someone had to be going around trying to convince the public that all the public health warnings about tobacco were false.

Do you suppose that someone was, say, a charity? Maybe the Save the Children Foundation? Ronald McDonald House? Or was it maybe the public school system?

I can think of likelier suspects...

Large damage awards represent the people using the only outlet still available to them (in locations without tort reform) to meaningfully protest the arrogance and lack of accountability of corporate America.

The corporations own the House of Representatives. They own the Supreme Court. But they still don't own the jury box, and never will. Which is why they're so committed to defanging the civil justice system through draconian and aproductive tort reform.

If you want corporate America in any meaningful way accountable to law, oppose tort reform.
 
2014-07-19 10:56:50 PM
I'm just tired of seeing those anti-smoking ads with the farked up people breathing through a pipe in their neck and no teeth and babies who are almost dead. I get what you're trying to do but I don't smoke, I don't need to see that shiat.

I do drink though and my liver's probably farked so where's my money? Oh, I have personal responsibility, nevermind.
 
2014-07-19 10:59:03 PM

Blue_Blazer: Dude just vape, there's basically no way it's nearly as bad for you, and it tastes a lot better.


Yeah but you look like a hipster douchebag doing it. But it's better than breathing through a hole in your throat and it sticks it to the tobacco companies. And the rest of us don't have to deal with it.
 
2014-07-19 11:00:10 PM
i291.photobucket.com
 
2014-07-19 11:00:40 PM

cchris_39: I don't see how anybody in this day and age can make a credible case that they didn't know the dangers of smoking.


You might have a point if the plaintiff's husband hadn't died in 1996.
 
2014-07-19 11:00:50 PM
i.crackedcdn.com
 
2014-07-19 11:01:56 PM
 FTA :   a lawsuit filed by the widow of a longtime smoker who died of lung cancer in 1996.

So, he was a long time smoker.  How old was he?  Forty?  Ninety?

/ obviously it doesn't matter
// $$
 
2014-07-19 11:02:06 PM

Raider_dad: There has to be a timeline where these types of lawsuits won't work anymore with tobaco companies finaly admitting they are addicting. I don't think anyone who started smoking in the 2000's can claim they had no idea and it's all the tobaco company's fault.


Lessee...

According to the CDC's site (http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/Data_statistics/sgr/history/index.htm), the first Surgeon General's report on the dangers of smoking came out in 1964. Based on that and subsequent reports,

the U.S. Congress adopted the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act of 1965 and the Public Health Cigarette Smoking Act of 1969. These laws-
Required a health warning on cigarette packages
Banned cigarette advertising in the broadcasting media
Called for an annual report on the health consequences of smoking


This has been done. Now, according to CDC, while the tobacco companies collectively spend nearly $8.5 billion annually to advertise their products (about $23 million PER DAY), and do everything in their power to block legislation and regulation, a more worrying consideration is this:

State spending on tobacco prevention and control does not meet CDC-recommended levels.1,5,6

In fiscal year 2014, states will collect $25.7 billion from tobacco taxes and legal settlements, but states will spend only 1.9% of the $25.7 billion on prevention and cessation programs.

No states currently fund tobacco control programs at CDC's "recommended" level. Only two states (Alaska and North Dakota) fund tobacco control programs at the "minimum" level.


Investing less than 15% (i.e., $3.3 billion) of the $25.7 billion would fund every state tobacco control program at CDC-recommended levels. http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast_facts/ind e x.htm

 So to answer your question, anti-tobacco campaigns and education have been going on for 50 years; there is certainly no reason anyone who has been smoking for less than that time can possibly claim they had "no idea" it was bad for them and might harm them. It seem that putting all the blame on "Big Tobacco" is a little unfair, no matter how actively they try to suppress information; that cat is out of the bag.

HOWEVER, the states have a mandate from the Federal government to do more to promote smoking-cessation campaigns, and this is NOT being done by ANYONE; even states not beholden to tobacco production for their finances. Perhaps we are suing the wrong people, and someone needs to be suing the states on behalf of claimants, not RJR and Philip Morris.
 
2014-07-19 11:03:40 PM

Mugato: Blue_Blazer: Dude just vape, there's basically no way it's nearly as bad for you, and it tastes a lot better.

Yeah but you look like a hipster douchebag doing it. But it's better than breathing through a hole in your throat and it sticks it to the tobacco companies. And the rest of us don't have to deal with it.


I disagree, but even if you're right, I'll accept "hipster douchebag" 1000x over before I'd ever smoke again.
 
2014-07-19 11:05:16 PM

Gyrfalcon: Raider_dad: There has to be a timeline where these types of lawsuits won't work anymore with tobaco companies finaly admitting they are addicting. I don't think anyone who started smoking in the 2000's can claim they had no idea and it's all the tobaco company's fault.

Lessee...

According to the CDC's site (http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/Data_statistics/sgr/history/index.htm), the first Surgeon General's report on the dangers of smoking came out in 1964. Based on that and subsequent reports,

the U.S. Congress adopted the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act of 1965 and the Public Health Cigarette Smoking Act of 1969. These laws-
Required a health warning on cigarette packages
Banned cigarette advertising in the broadcasting media
Called for an annual report on the health consequences of smoking

This has been done. Now, according to CDC, while the tobacco companies collectively spend nearly $8.5 billion annually to advertise their products (about $23 million PER DAY), and do everything in their power to block legislation and regulation, a more worrying consideration is this:

State spending on tobacco prevention and control does not meet CDC-recommended levels.1,5,6

In fiscal year 2014, states will collect $25.7 billion from tobacco taxes and legal settlements, but states will spend only 1.9% of the $25.7 billion on prevention and cessation programs.

No states currently fund tobacco control programs at CDC's "recommended" level. Only two states (Alaska and North Dakota) fund tobacco control programs at the "minimum" level.

Investing less than 15% (i.e., $3.3 billion) of the $25.7 billion would fund every state tobacco control program at CDC-recommended levels. http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast_facts/ind e x.htm

 So to answer your question, anti-tobacco campaigns and education have been going on for 50 years; there is certainly no reason anyone who has been smoking for less than that time can possibly claim they had "no idea" it ...


But the government is always lying, therefore, smoking is better for you than vitamins!
 
2014-07-19 11:06:02 PM

Piizzadude: flucto: Well their products did deprive him of many valuable working years. If their products costs him,, say, 30 years of 40 hour weeks for 49 weeks a year, it seems only fair that RJR should pay him his ordinary wage of
 $401,360.54 per hour.

Your cakes and chicken is addictive. Pay me.


Let's move on to Dunkin' Donuts and Krispy Kreme. Surely there are papers in their files that indicate their tasty and addictive product is bad for your health, but are they sharing that information with us? Heck, no!

It's their fault I'm fat, dammit.
 
2014-07-19 11:07:28 PM
See that's what happens when you appeal a class action lawsuit.  You open yourself up to individual cases.  At this rate 5 more people sue and you've just approximated total of class action.  Sucks to be RJ Reynolds but they rolled the dice.
 
2014-07-19 11:08:45 PM

Piizzadude: [i.crackedcdn.com image 550x392]


He had a dog too.
 
Displayed 50 of 158 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report