He made the actual speech on 60 Minutes, this past Sunday, but here is the actual article transcript:

“CBS) A weekly commentary by CBS News correspondent Andy Rooney.

I've been thinking of quitting work and suing big companies for a living, instead. Suing has become a popular American pastime and I'd like to get in on some of the easy money. There were more than a million and a half civil lawsuits in California alone last year.

A jury in Los Angeles awarded $28 billion to a woman who has lung cancer and says it's because the Philip Morris Tobacco Company talked her into smoking with their advertising. We all hate the tobacco companies but smoking wasn't even a little bit her own fault?

That's the trouble. Nothing is anyone's own fault anymore. You probably don't remember the name Stella Liebeck, but she was the woman who spilled coffee in her lap in a car and got big bucks when she sued McDonald's because the coffee was too hot.

Every big company gets sued. Kellogg's and Black & Decker got sued by a New Jersey couple who put one of Kellogg's Pop-Tarts in the toaster and then left the house. The Pop-Tart caught fire and did some damage to their kitchen.

We have a cottage on a lake. I tried to buy a new diving board for the dock and couldn't find one. You know why? The companies that make diving boards have practically been sued out of business.

The same with ladders. It costs a company almost as much for insurance as it costs them to make the ladders.

Doctors are leaving Pennsylvania because they've been sued so much there.

A man named Caesar Barber sued McDonald's, Burger King, KFC and Wendy's because he weighed 270 pounds and claimed he got fat eating their food. He had a couple of heart attacks and said they never told him their food was bad for him.

If someone is killed when his car turns over going around a curve at 90 miles an hour, his family sues the car manufacturer or the company that made the tires. If he hits a telephone pole, they sue the telephone company.

The wife of a man who was murdered sued the company that made the gun. The tobacco companies, the gun manufacturers and the tire companies have it coming but the amount of some of these awards don't make sense.

now who I'd sue if I quit my job here. I started working at CBS in 1949 - look at the condition I'm in! Hair grey, face wrinkled, brain dead, all bent over. I'm a mess. I didn't get this way anyplace else. CBS did it to me and I'll bet if I get a trial lawyer and sue, I could quit working on 60 Minutes and retire.

I'd split the billions I'd collect 90 percent-10 percent with the trial lawyer. He'd get 90 percent - I'd get 10. “

Only in America, only in America...

I know, somebody start sueing laywers for sueing people :D

I'll sue you all - sue everyone - Muhahahahahahah. :D

*in come the men in white coats* :bawling:

I'll sue you all - sue everyone - Muhahahahahahah. You go ahead and do that. I'll just sue you for sueing me and seeing as you just got dragged off by those men in white coats I'm quite confident I'll have a strong case ;)

So true. How can we stop such madness?

Originally posted by mind21_98
So true. How can we stop such madness?

Sue the court system.

Hey... thats not a bad idea...

Actually we should sue the federal govt to force them to screen lawsuits and throw out frivilous suits before someone even has to reply to the suit

I've always said that it's sad that people no longer need be concerned over their own stupidity. Do something stupid, sue, and become rich and stupid.

I think they just have it backwards. If you were penalized for being stupid, instead of rewarded I think you'd find a lot of people suddenly kicking their grey matter into first gear before doing things.

Greg Moore

get the mossad to come in and whipe out all the idiots....jk...The government needs to screen to much BS sueing crap goes on now a days'.

Little known facts about the Stella Liebeck case, which can be said to have achieved "urban legend" status:

1) The coffee she was served was hot enough to cause burns that required skin grafts.

2) Her case was overturned on appeal and she never got that huge award.

I'm surprised 60 Minutes didn't do any research before using her as an example.

For more information:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=%2B%22Stella+Liebeck%22+%2Bmcdonalds&spell=1

More information on the McD's coffee case:

McDonald's had received complaints that it kept its coffee too hot. People would sometimes get serious burns from trying to take a sip. Yes, McD's has to keep their coffee hot - but they were often keeping it too hot. I guess the jury collectively decided that the only way to get McD's to stop storing molten lava behind the counter was to finally make them pay out damages to someone who had been harmed by their too-hot coffee and then maybe, just maybe, they'd change their internal procedures.

Doesn't mitigate the lack of common sense the woman showed in storing a hot beverage in between her thighs...but lack of common sense doesn't stop many people from doing things.

I think the McDonalds thing was ridiculous, but I'm glad Philip Morris was sued. It is her fault too, but I'd like to see tobacco companies hurting, becuase the fact is, they capitalize off of killing people.

I would sue the people who makes pantyhose that won't stay up even if you get the right size. Think about it... you're walking down the street and feel your pantyhose slowly slide down over your buttocs and lower. Major uncomfort!

Doesn't mitigate the lack of common sense the woman showed in storing a hot beverage in between her thighs...but lack of common sense doesn't stop many people from doing things. [/B]

Exactly!!! Some of these lawsuits are because people don't use common sense and they expect the company they are suing to have known there are really stupid people out there who may use their product against all common sense.

Make something idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot. (Guess this truism really does hold true)

Originally posted by AceWeb
Sue the court system.

The way the laws are setup, its impossibly difficult to sue the courts, its officers, and numerous other gov't extentions.

Originally posted by ZBoca
I think the McDonalds thing was ridiculous, but I'm glad Philip Morris was sued. It is her fault too, but I'd like to see tobacco companies hurting, becuase the fact is, they capitalize off of killing people.

Thats what people said about guns. So they started suing gun mau's.

Than they said the same about car companies, beucase people were getting killed by SUVs. They started suing them as well, but realized that it wasnt the car makers fault that people were getting run over, it was drivers.

If you want, you can start going after fork manufacturers for every person that gets stabbed to death with a fork.

Reguardless what happens, the companies that make a product are not to be held accountable for what people do with the product they sell unless the company did not comply with laws reguarding the advertizement and/or sale of said product at the time or they are decietful in the sale (ie: No, these are clinally proven not to kill you).

There is no substitue for personal responsiblity. Why would anyone want to smoke anything? Inhaling smoke is not a good thing. Why do you think people cough as they run out of a burning building? Somewhere along the way people thought it must be great to do on a smaller scale as that woudln't bother them.

Originally posted by Acronym BOY


Thats what people said about guns. So they started suing gun mau's.

Than they said the same about car companies, beucase people were getting killed by SUVs. They started suing them as well, but realized that it wasnt the car makers fault that people were getting run over, it was drivers.

If you want, you can start going after fork manufacturers for every person that gets stabbed to death with a fork.

Reguardless what happens, the companies that make a product are not to be held accountable for what people do with the product they sell unless the company did not comply with laws reguarding the advertizement and/or sale of said product at the time or they are decietful in the sale (ie: No, these are clinally proven not to kill you).

There is no substitue for personal responsiblity. Why would anyone want to smoke anything? Inhaling smoke is not a good thing. Why do you think people cough as they run out of a burning building? Somewhere along the way people thought it must be great to do on a smaller scale as that woudln't bother them.

Fork makers, gun makers, and Philip Morris are 2 completely different stories.
Guns can be used for protection, hunting/providing, sitting there looking pretty, and killing. Correct? We have different uses here, so gun makers obviously have the majority of their customers using them for protection, hunting, and just sitting there. If the 80% of guns were used to kill someone, I assure you they would not be legal.

You can't claim cigarettes have any positive use. It you cut through the bull**** and look at it, companies make money by making something that kills you, but worse--- they put chemicals to get you physically addicted.

The reason why they aren't banned is money-- thats it.

geez, coffee is hot, you buy it you expect it to be hot, like very close to 100 deg c hot. it couldnt have been hotter then 100 unless it was microwaved in which case small area of water can super boil to 105 dec g. as for sueing tobbacco companies, geez, get a brain.
people screw up because theyre too lazy to think and then expect to be rewarded. these people should not be allowed to breed. darwin must be turning in his grave :(

I would sue the people who makes pantyhose that won't stay up even if you get the right size. Think about it... you're walking down the street and feel your pantyhose slowly slide down over your buttocs and lower. Major uncomfort!
Oh yeah?
I would sue the people who makes pantyhose that won't come of fast enough even if you get the right size. Think about it... what if you are married with children, and very little time to be alone with your spouse and . . . you can't get the darn things off?
Finally, you get them off and the phone rings. You trip on your way to answer it, breaking your big toe, only to find it is a telemarketer.
While waiting at the hospital, you watch Oprah, and learn that your spouse doesn't love you because he / she failed her 4 question test on faithful spouses, so you know you have to get a divorce now. You see all those 1800-sue-them commercials from the lawyers on the TV. So you call and ask to sue the pantyhose makers for "ruining your love life" as well as the telemarketer for both the broken toe, and the lack of nookie, and finally after your lives are ruined because of the divorce, you sue Oprah, for her stupid show, and the TV Company that aired the show, and the lawyers, that advertised on it, plus the hostpital for making her stupid show the only thing to watch out of the available choices, which caused your divorce.

Originally posted by ZBoca
Fork makers, gun makers, and Philip Morris are 2 completely different stories.
Guns can be used for protection, hunting/providing, sitting there looking pretty, and killing. Correct? We have different uses here, so gun makers obviously have the majority of their customers using them for protection, hunting, and just sitting there. If the 80% of guns were used to kill someone, I assure you they would not be legal.

You can't claim cigarettes have any positive use. It you cut through the bull**** and look at it, companies make money by making something that kills you, but worse--- they put chemicals to get you physically addicted.

The reason why they aren't banned is money-- thats it.

So its illegal to sell something which can do absolutly no good?

Since when? :rolleyes:

Since 1964 the Surgeon general has been warning people about cigarettes, if not ealier (thats the earliest date I can find on their website).

Not to mention that fact that commons sense should come into play. People don't like sitting in a buring building becuase of the smoke, so why would they want to burn some tabacco and inhale it directly?

If you are that stupid to think smoking is good for you, you deserve every cancer you can get from it. You do not need a doctor to tell you that inhaling smoke on a continual basis is not a good thing.

People should be held accountable for their own actions. Not the companies that sell the products. Philip Morris will not say that their products are 100% healthy, in fact they really say on each and every single one of their packages:

SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING:Quitting smoking now greatly reduces serious risks to your health.

SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING:Smoking Causes Lung Cancer, Heart Disease, Emphysema, and May Complicate Pregnancy.

SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING:Cigarette Smoke Contains Carbon Monoxide.

SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING:Smoking by Pregnant Women May Result in Fetal Injury, Premature Birth and Low Birth Weight.

As well as many other possible phrases (see US code TITLE 15 CHAPTER 36 SECTION 1333).

Just because a company makes a deadly product doen't mean that they should be sued for it. Personal responsibility. Not stupidity.

Just because a company makes a deadly product doen't mean that they should be sued for it. Personal responsibility. Not stupidity.

Are you kidding me? :rolleyes:

Of course they should, and they will. Its one thing to sell a product thats going to kill you, but its another to advertise in such a way that kids think its a "cool" thing, and on top of that, place chemicals in them that addicts them to it.

In my personal opinion, your reasoning is way out there. Sure-- people should be held accountable for their own actions; however, companies should be held for theirs as well.

Making things that suck look cool has gone on since the first marketing department.

Lets look at alcohol. People who drink look cool, right? Captain Morgan, Red Dog, Bud, etc. But alcohol kills. And people become alcoholics, so yes, alcohol is addictive.

Look at AOL, their commercials make it look like its the best thing ever. But it sucks. And yes, you can get addicted to the internet as well.

You might want to start sueing the makers of RAID (SC Johnson probably) as that is some deadly stuff as well.

Originally posted by Acronym BOY
Making things that suck look cool has gone on since the first marketing department.

Lets look at alcohol. People who drink look cool, right? Captain Morgan, Red Dog, Bud, etc. But alcohol kills. And people become alcoholics, so yes, alcohol is addictive.

Look at AOL, their commercials make it look like its the best thing ever. But it sucks. And yes, you can get addicted to the internet as well.

You might want to start sueing the makers of RAID (SC Johnson probably) as that is some deadly stuff as well.

And again, AOL doesn't kill 200,000 people a year, nor does SC Johnson? :rolleyes:

People drink alcohol, drive, kill themselves/others, and the alcohol companies get sued for it. Totally different thread, but in that case, alcoholism doesn't directly (keyword) kill close to 200,000 a year. Before you look up the statistics, I'll go ahead and tell you. Roughly 100,000 people in the US die every year from alcohol-related. Now if cigarettes primary use was to make apple cobbler, the story would be a bit different.

Your examples of AOL, SC Johnson, forks :rolleyes: , are not what I'm defending. I'm simply saying that if you make a product that kills, and has chemicals placed for the sole purpose of physical addiction, then you will get sued, and in my opinion, you should be sued.

And it sucks, but you can get addicted to the internet as well
Your not taking the package together. I'm not saying that everything addicting should be illegal, and I'm not saying cigarettes should be illegal. I could say McDonalds hamburgers were so good they made me addicted. In that case, its a mental addiction because McDonalds doesn't put chemicals to addict me to their nasty hamburgers. On that note, AOL does not place chemicals in their software to physically addict you.

If you want to debate, take the whole package.
Cigarettes= target young age group, get them addicted, and they now have 18 year olds that will be giving them money for a long time-- untilt the smokes kill them. I'm not saying the fault shouldn't be placed on the person that smokes, but it seems you are saying the companies are completely innocent.

Thats my point. None of this AOL, forks, SC Johnson stuff, thats my point above-- debate that, don't split it up.

Originally posted by ATST

Oh yeah?
I would sue the people who makes pantyhose that won't come of fast enough even if you get the right size. Think about it... what if you are married with children, and very little time to be alone with your spouse and . . . you can't get the darn things off?
Finally, you get them off and the phone rings. You trip on your way to answer it, breaking your big toe, only to find it is a telemarketer.
While waiting at the hospital, you watch Oprah, and learn that your spouse doesn't love you because he / she failed her 4 question test on faithful spouses, so you know you have to get a divorce now. You see all those 1800-sue-them commercials from the lawyers on the TV. So you call and ask to sue the pantyhose makers for "ruining your love life" as well as the telemarketer for both the broken toe, and the lack of nookie, and finally after your lives are ruined because of the divorce, you sue Oprah, for her stupid show, and the TV Company that aired the show, and the lawyers, that advertised on it, plus the hostpital for making her stupid show the only thing to watch out of the available choices, which caused your divorce.

You've got a point! :D We could also start to sue the weather channel if it rains when they said the sun would shine and we went on a trip... Ruined love life because the grass was wet and we slipped or something... ;)

Originally posted by ZBoca


People drink alcohol, drive, kill themselves/others, and the alcohol companies get sued for it. Totally different thread, but in that case, alcoholism doesn't directly (keyword) kill close to 200,000 a year. Before you look up the statistics, I'll go ahead and tell you. Roughly 100,000 people in the US die every year from alcohol-related. Now if cigarettes primary use was to make apple cobbler, the story would be a bit different.


Do you have any idea how many people die from car accidents every year? I'm not going to bother looking it up, but last I heard it was in the millions. Furthermore are you trying to say Alcohol provides a needed benefit to society, such as, your apple cobbler recipe?

Nope you're right alcohol doesn't kill people directly. However, I'm sure the statistics would show it causes more divorces, spousal abuse and murder then cigarettes do. Cigarettes kill people that use them, alcohol kills thousands of innocent people.


Your examples of AOL, SC Johnson, forks :rolleyes: , are not what I'm defending. I'm simply saying that if you make a product that kills, and has chemicals placed for the sole purpose of physical addiction, then you will get sued, and in my opinion, you should be sued.


And Phillip Morris keeps getting richer. Do you realize that everytime they get sued they just up the price of a pack of cigarettes ten cents and have their lawsuit payed off in less then a week? Have you noticed that they never happen to lower the price again after the price hike? Your lawsuits don't bother Phillip Morris/Camel etc... they make them more wealthy.



Your not taking the package together. I'm not saying that everything addicting should be illegal, and I'm not saying cigarettes should be illegal. I could say McDonalds hamburgers were so good they made me addicted. In that case, its a mental addiction because McDonalds doesn't put chemicals to addict me to their nasty hamburgers. On that note, AOL does not place chemicals in their software to physically addict you.


Once again, I personally know a person who lost their family due to a mental addiction. But then, cigarettes KILL PEOPLE, which is much worse then not seeing your loved ones ever again (oh wait... that's the same thing isn't it?).


If you want to debate, take the whole package.
Cigarettes= target young age group, get them addicted, and they now have 18 year olds that will be giving them money for a long time-- untilt the smokes kill them. I'm not saying the fault shouldn't be placed on the person that smokes, but it seems you are saying the companies are completely innocent.


THEY ARE INNOCENT! It's called FREE ENTERPRISE. They are making a product that is known EVERY WHERE in the world that it kills you, yet guess what WE STILL BUY IT! So basically your boiling it down to America is so naive and stupid that at the age of 18 I couldn't make my own decision? That I "didn't know" it would kill me? Sorry buddy, but your argument is about 50 years too late.


Thats my point. None of this AOL, forks, SC Johnson stuff, thats my point above-- debate that, don't split it up.

Yep Tobacco kills... but only when you use it, and to date not a single tobacco company has held a gun to my head.

I just saw this.....great article. :D

Originally posted by comphosting


You made 0 points in that whole argument. I really couldn't find any "points" worth debating.


The car thing, read over my earlier posts.


Sorry buddy, but my argument is obviously not too late, because as we speak, Philip Morris is being sued, and will lose money.

On a side note, you clearly know nothing about large companies. For one, investors lose confidence, and get scared-- pull out. Didn't think of that eh?

Two-- prices go up, people switch to cheaper smokes, or completely quit.

Again, and for the 321321312th time, I'm not saying these people are innocent, and deserve this much money--- not by any means. I'm simply saying that tobacco companies have gone beyond simply supplying rolled up tobacco. Its now turned into a game of brain washing that leads to addiction by nicotine. Thats wrong-- free enterprise bull**** or not-- so they are getting sued, and I'm happy to see them being sued. I hope to see them get sued the hell out of business.


Zak

to many people want easy money, and don't realize the conquences it has on people who only wish to live a good life with some fun. Yes I agree sometimes sueing is needed but for christ sake hot coffee? Lung cancer due to smoking?(I smoke and have tried to quit, its not easy but hell its my choice to start and my choice to continiue) And with the infamous FireStone tires, alot of it was due to people driving thier SUVs like they were normal cars, the center of gravity is higher, thus it rolls easier, as well as its not meant to go fast its meant to go off road! and when you off road you go slow!

****Edit to include a remark more into smoking****

Yes smoking is addictive, but at the same time now days there is a Warning on the label that says either that or that this could cause medical problems. I agree the Tabbacco companies do deserve to be sued to an extent, but at the same time they run a company and even now that it is public knowledge, warnings on the packs, people still choose to start smoking.

Your right all 100% right except, ummm Philip Morris isn't loosing money.

I think this would be called Liability Insurance. So while you sit there and say sue sue sue, Business insurance rates go up up up. Thank you I hope they sue sue sue more more more maybe insurance rates will go so high that no one will go into business anymore.

The other point you seem to miss is that Philip Morris also makes food items. So I guess this is why the price of food increases, along with the oops I fell in the store lawsuit, the oops the jar broke and cut me lawsuit. The oh that knife was too sharp lawsuit.

Sue sue sue it's the people with insurance, small businesses, and purchasers that suffer with rate increases.

quote me and I'll sue for copyright violation :eek:

While your sitting there awake bitching about smoking I guess you better sue the pop/soda companies for putting drugs in their drinks that cause addiction without proper labeling of effects. Not to mention a ph level of 3 which helps causes tooth problems. I see not one warning label.

Studies show that caffeine causes physical dependence

Caffeine is classified as a central nervous system stimulant. In moderate doses, caffeine can:
increase alertness
reduce fine motor coordination
alter sleep patterns (increase the time it takes to fall asleep and reduce total sleep time)
cause headaches, nervousness and dizziness

I think this would be called Liability Insurance. So while you sit there and say sue sue sue, Business insurance rates go up up up. Thank you I hope they sue sue sue more more more maybe insurance rates will go so high that no one will go into business anymore.
I think think you you you are complete wrong. Sure-- Philip Morris has incredible liability insurance, but it surely will not affect my liability insurance, or anyone in here. Besides, surely you don't think that these insurance companies will bear the expense as an act of good faith. Philip Morris will lose money here.

The other point you seem to miss is that Philip Morris also makes food items. So I guess this is why the price of food increases, along with the oops I fell in the store lawsuit, the oops the jar broke and cut me lawsuit. The oh that knife was too sharp lawsuit.
I didn't mention that point because its completely unrelated. Companies like this don't just pile a bunch of money into one account, and not pay attention to what's turning a profit and what's not.

Sue sue sue it's the people with insurance, small businesses, and purchasers that suffer with rate increases.
Unless you are running a tobacco company, or a multi-billion company, you shouldn't at all be affected by a law suit Philip Morris is having.

quote me and I'll sue for copyright violation :eek: [/B]
You've been quoted.

While your sitting there awake bitching about smoking I guess you better sue the pop/soda companies for putting drugs in their drinks that cause addiction without proper labeling of effects. Not to mention a ph level of 3 which helps causes tooth problems. I see not one warning label.
Again-- take the whole package. If you don't understand this, it means if you want to debate something, don't break it apart into segments. The reason I believe Philip Morris should be sewed is not because smoking causes bad dental hygen, but because smokes kill. If you can provide evidence that caffeine kills 200,000+ a year, I'll agree with anyone that sues Pepsi.


Studies show that caffeine causes physical dependence

Caffeine is classified as a central nervous system stimulant. In moderate doses, caffeine can:
increase alertness
reduce fine motor coordination
alter sleep patterns (increase the time it takes to fall asleep and reduce total sleep time)
cause headaches, nervousness and dizziness
Increase alertness?! cause headaches?! How do the executives at Pepsi sleep at night?!
Again- it doesn't directly kill.

The world only spins the way you want it to.

I enjoy smoking my Cig. You want to try to take it away. You'll enjoy the the feeling of a 444 Marlin 240 grain soft point.

Sue me afterwards :stickout:

Originally posted by Newbie
The world only spins the way you want it to.

I enjoy smoking my Cig. You want to try to take it away. You'll enjoy the the feeling of a 444 Marlin 240 grain soft point.

Sue me afterwards :stickout:

What the hell?

Grow up kid..

The thing about being a disabled vet. is the fact that we defend the rights of the people like you Zachary.

Originally posted by Newbie
The thing about being a disabled vet. is the fact that we defend the rights of the people like you Zachary.

Defend the right of what?

Freedom of speech? Perhaps freedom to sue whomever the hell you want?

First point out what you so righteously defended of mine, and then you can tell me how the hell that relates to this thread.

LOL freedom of speach does not imply here this is a private board and most this prolly going to be deleted anyways. Though I do not think Blahh will be happy with what your doing on here. I almost feel as though I should contact your mom and dad Blahh and blahh and ask them why their kid is up so late.

Much like I said earlier. Your world spins the way you want it too. The thread is sue not just your insane version of it.

::edited names to protect the Guilty:::

I don't mean to sound older than I am but it appears people need to learn the defintion of a freindly debate. In a friendly debate you attack people's ideas, not them, no matter how stupid you think they may be.

I have to admit-- this is certainly the first. Shall I call your mom and dad?

Originally posted by Lippy
I don't mean to sound older than I am but it appears people need to learn the defintion of a freindly debate. In a friendly debate you attack people's ideas, not them, no matter how stupid you think they may be.

He said he would shoot me. Thats a little over the line.

Zak

If you have been threatened(and I have seen the post you are reffering to) then you need to report it to an admin/mod as to correct this, because you feel threatened doesn't mean you should attack them in anyway. two wrongs don't make a right, but 3 lefts do!

Yea first time I been called a kid, I guess someone finally needed to point out who the kid is. Anyways this is about law suits not damn name calling. Like I said earlier you think this does not effect everyone else you better think again and long and hard about it. I think you have better things wo be worried about then me. Unlesss you want to come here and try to take my cigs away like mentioned earlier.:cartman:

Originally posted by Lippy
If you have been threatened(and I have seen the post you are reffering to) then you need to report it to an admin/mod as to correct this, because you feel threatened doesn't mean you should attack them in anyway. two wrongs don't make a right, but 3 lefts do!

Agreed.. the thread went over board a bit.

Zak

Originally posted by Newbie
Yea first time I been called a kid, I guess someone finally needed to point out who the kid is. Anyways this is about law suits not damn name calling. Like I said earlier you think this does not effect everyone else you better think again and long and hard about it. I think you have better things wo be worried about then me. Unlesss you want to come here and try to take my cigs away like mentioned earlier.:cartman:

I think you'll need to go back and read. Never mentioned I'm trying to take your smokes away, especially from someone that is willing to kill for them. :rolleyes:

All I said is that after what cigarette companies do, I think they will always be in the down end of law suits. I think for what they sell, they should constantly be getting sued. My opinion.

Are you saying I'm a kid because I have parents? :rolleyes: If thats the case, I'm guilty. Everyone-- I have parents. As for pointing out the kid, I'm not sure who this would be. I'm going on 20, so hardly a child, but not quite 32.

Your post on shooting someone is completely uncalled for, and in my opinion (I'm allowed to have these), its something a kid would say. Thats my reasoning for calling you a kid. Take it how you like, but its what I would say to anyone that replied with a similar statement.

Zak

You have this hang up with Cigs, no one disagrees with you about how bad they are, however they disagree with you because of the reasoning behind it. You think it is ok to sue for something people have free choice to hand over money and pay to inhale and exhale smoke.

What the hell is any different then the Doctor saying your going to die in 6 months unless you have this surgery or you could die from the surgery.You have the surgery Die and now your relatives can sue the doctor for it, I mean come on this is your reasoning behind it all.

Newbie, I think its important to note a few things.

1: Cigs are addictive, they orginally did not have warnings of this or health hazard.

2: Because of this addictiveness this doesn't mean that you have as much of a choice once addicted.

3: It is well known that cig companies preformed unmorale advertising and other business practices.

All 3 of these reasons are good reason for sueing. And remember I am a smoker and I know how hard it can be for some people to quit.

I don't necessarily think that anyone should be entitled to the money, and that includes Philip Morris. I don't think this lady should be entitled to any money, because it certainly was her decision to smoke. I just like to see Philip Morris lose money, because they make a product that addicts people, and kills them. Thats how I look at it.

I've been smoking cigarettes for 3-4 years, so I'm not putting down anyone for smoking. I just think its sick how the whole circle works. Cigarette companies and the government make so much money off of cigarettes, people smoking get cancer and pay a ****load out for medical care, they die. It’s a never-ending chain that makes too much money in the right places. I'm not saying that the government or anyone else making money is bad, but I think the amount of addictive chemicals will only increase, because with so much money involved, cigarette companies have leverage.

1. Caffeine is addictive, 0 warnings as I said earlier.

2. say as above.

3. Wow I see more ads for this addictive drug then I see for cigs and guess what your kids can drink, buy this product it's perfectly safe for them.

Don't remember the last time I seen a TV Ad for cigs. That's some high dollar ads there. Have a coke and a smile. Yep I remember what COKE used to have in it. Another addictive DRUG.

Originally posted by Newbie
1. Caffeine is addictive, 0 warnings as I said earlier.

2. say as above.

3. Wow I see more ads for this addictive drug then I see for cigs and guess what your kids can drink, buy this product it's perfectly safe for them.

Don't remember the last time I seen a TV Ad for cigs. That's some high dollar ads there. Have a coke and a smile. Yep I remember what COKE used to have in it. Another addictive DRUG.

How many people does Coke kill a year?

Zak

Grr I cannot say what I want too because some people will take this the wrong way.

Zak who pays for your smokes? who forces you to light one up? who forces it in your mouth?

Go look in the mirror and ask who is to blame.

Don't like it then STOP. Keep smoking then I guess you enjoy it.

I'm sick of peoples whinning because they can't stop doing something and blame it on something else. EXCUSES

If you lack the mental capacity to stop then you shouldn't start, I'm sure you sat there and read the label of the cigs you bought. I'm sure people drink beer and read the labels on it. Blame all their problems on the beer and Sue the beer companies.

Originally posted by Newbie
Grr I cannot say what I want too because some people will take this the wrong way.

Zak who pays for your smokes? who forces you to light one up? who forces it in your mouth?

Go look in the mirror and ask who is to blame.

Don't like it then STOP. Keep smoking then I guess you enjoy it.

I'm sick of peoples whinning because they can't stop doing something and blame it on something else. EXCUSES

If you lack the mental capacity to stop then you shouldn't start, I'm sure you sat there and read the label of the cigs you bought. I'm sure people drink beer and read the labels on it. Blame all their problems on the beer and Sue the beer companies.

My point isn't that I'm trying to stop smoking, and can/cannot. My point is if cigarette companies are going to put chemicals that make it hard to stop, and are already selling a deadly product, they should expect to be sued--- and they do.

Listen-- I'm ready to be done here, and I'm sure you are too. We all have our opinions, and they won't change. I have a test in 5 hours, and unfortionately its not over cigarettes or Philip Morris.

Do a search on the Net deaths from caffeine.

Yep I know you blame the product and I'll blame the drug which is the true problem and we can fight back over the other affects of cigs besides the drug that's in there.

Originally posted by Newbie
Do a search on the Net deaths from caffeine.

Yep I know you blame the product and I'll blame the drug which is the true problem and we can fight back over the other affects of cigs besides the drug that's in there.

I blame the whole system, the drug, everything. The government will never think of banning cigarettes, because they account for too much money. Not only from taxes, but from the medical care people need after smoking. Another fact, cigarettes are just about as close to natural selection as we have.

Take care-- I'm going to have a smoke.

Zak

My point isn't that I'm trying to stop smoking, and can/cannot. My point is if cigarette companies are going to put chemicals that make it hard to stop, and are already selling a deadly product, they should expect to be sued--- and they do.

Then a doctor telling a patient he can die in 6 months or can have surgery tomorrow and may die opens the door for the relatives to sue the doctor for doing the surgery anyways reguardless of what happens Doctors fault or not.

Wish you would make up your mind on the topic.

Cigs or addiction or effects or chemicals

Edit:: okies puff away :: Sue them tomorrow

Originally posted by Newbie
My point isn't that I'm trying to stop smoking, and can/cannot. My point is if cigarette companies are going to put chemicals that make it hard to stop, and are already selling a deadly product, they should expect to be sued--- and they do.

Then a doctor telling a patient he can die in 6 months or can have surgery tomorrow and may die opens the door for the relatives to sue the doctor for doing the surgery anyways reguardless of what happens Doctors fault or not.

Wish you would make up your mind on the topic.

Cigs or addiction or effects or chemicals

If you read my earlier posts you would see. "the whole package" I mentioned the advertising, the nicotine (chemicals), and effects.

Seems easy enough to understand.

Zak

If you want it in a package okies.

STOP SMOKING

btw answered your pm, and I think we have beat this subject into a pulp already and ran around it once.

uhmm... we make choises, some good, some bad... sometimes we don't like what we have done, and tries to fix it. If it's hard we want to blame someone. That is a very human thing to do. If there is money involved, we try to get some. That is very human too. Some people need help to do things, like stop smoking, others don't. That's just the way we are. If someone (big company) makes it harder for us, then we want to blame them very much. Sometimes this blame is proper, other times it's not. When companies lie about content, poisons, or other things, it's bad, and they have done something wrong. There for the blame is OK. If they didn't know about a problem, and then tries to fix it, the blame is wrong. If people are stupid, we all know who to blame.

Ever heard about the children who were born without arms and legs because their mothers took some pills, the company said was OK? I think the drug is still around, but with proper warninglables. The children had a right to sue, and I think they did, and won.

Though not the best use of english I have seen to make the point, a good point none the less.

. . . and my panty hose are still too tight!

* lighten up people *

Lippy, if you're referring to my post, then it's because I'm from Sweden, and when I get upset, my use of the English language sometimes flies out through the window:)

I don't think he was refering to you Reptilian, I understood. Maybe it was the post above it?

Maybe... we posted at the same time ATST :)

It's so easy to think your post ends up below the one you refer to, that's why I asked.

. . . changed panty hose. . . :)

No I was reffering to Reptilian, and I meant no offense by it. Also I'd like to say I have great respect for those who are using a different language than what they were brought up speaking.

None taken, Lippy :) There have been times when people didn't believe me, when I said I wasn't English, and that was when I was spending time in and around London. Someone actually thought I was Irish :D

Originally posted by ZBoca

You made 0 points in that whole argument. I really couldn't find any "points" worth debating.

Of course not, because there was nothing to debate, I posted facts, you going to argue about facts?

The car thing, read over my earlier posts.

Right because we're just talking about cigs and nothing else will fit into your argument

Sorry buddy, but my argument is obviously not too late, because as we speak, Philip Morris is being sued, and will lose money.

Oh yes, those 3 million dollar law suits are really going to hurt a company that does 40 billion in annual sales. Yep, I can immagine they are filling for bankruptcy at any moment.

On a side note, you clearly know nothing about large companies. For one, investors lose confidence, and get scared-- pull out. Didn't think of that eh?

Did you actually look up the share value of Phillip Morris before you posted that? Or stock trends over the past decade for tobacco companies? Obviously not, because then you'd realize that investors aren't going to pull out because people STILL SMOKE! It's amazing huh! Obviously you're the one that doesn't have a clue, you just posted some nonsense that YOU obviously know nothing about.

Two-- prices go up, people switch to cheaper smokes, or completely quit.

Ummm... how about prices go up, people pay more, and a select few quit. That would be more likely, and is in fact, the trend right now. And sure you can switch to cheaper cigs... of which Phillip Morris happens to own at least 15-20 budget brands.

Again, and for the 321321312th time, I'm not saying these people are innocent, and deserve this much money--- not by any means. I'm simply saying that tobacco companies have gone beyond simply supplying rolled up tobacco. Its now turned into a game of brain washing that leads to addiction by nicotine. Thats wrong-- free enterprise bull**** or not-- so they are getting sued, and I'm happy to see them being sued. I hope to see them get sued the hell out of business.

Then you should be happy that they are making more money then ever (one of those "0" points I made in my previous post). Because the more they get sued, the more they raise prices, the more money they make. Sounds to me like you're one of those people that just wants a quick buck, and supports people like that as well. Personally, I can't think of anything that makes me more sick then some lazyass people that sue big companies for huge amounts of money, just so they can sit on their butts all day and watch the cartoon network. To anyone who has/is considering/will sue any company for such a stupid reason: lose some weight and get a job.

Originally posted by comphosting


20 million dollar law suits compared to a 40 billion dollar yearly revenue?
First off, she is suing for 28 billion, so if your 40 billion/year (doubt it) is right, they made a mere 12 billion this year.

Learn your facts-- the rest is hardly worth commenting on.

Zak

Yep I was wrong, their revenue for 2001 was $89,924,000,000 and their operating income was a lowly $15,702,000,000. So learn YOUR facts.

Furthermore, the insurance company that PMI pays, if she wins 28 billion (which she won't even come close to that, I'd guess that it'll settle out of court for less then 28 million) would be paying for it (since that is what PMI pays such outrageous insurance for). Assuming the women does get 28 million dollars (highly unlikely) that would make PMI's operating income a barely acceptable $15.6 billion dollars.

Funny how everytime I counter one of your uneducated posts you say they aren't worth commenting on. Seems a little convienient.

20 million dollar law suits compared to a 40 billion dollar yearly revenue?
First off, she is suing for 28 billion, so if your 40 billion/year (doubt it) is right, they made a mere 12 billion this year.

You are the one that made the $40 billion claim so hush up.

This topic has been exhausted. You have your opinion, I have mine. Lets end it there.

Zak

Originally posted by ZBoca


You are the one that made the $40 billion claim so hush up.

This topic has been exhausted. You have your opinion, I have mine. Lets end it there.

Zak

:rolleyes: My point was they make a lot of money, and apparently a lot more then I thought, and a LOT more then you thought. But I think I've sufficiently made my opinion apparent, and actually backed it up with facts so leaving it at that is just fine with me.

In Canada we get Medicare free, just means we gotta pay high taxes. Guess where a good chunk of these funds are going to?? People who have medical problems because they smoke. It pisses me off that people think they can sue because of their own stupidity. Do you think this lady suing Phillip Morris quit yet?? Hell no or she wouldn't be suing. Back to the original topic: Andy Rooney - yes suing has become an American past time, its sickening. If you can find a high priced lawyer you can sue for anything even your own stupidity. The American justice system needs some revamping because of dumb people doing Darwin Awardian acts of sheer incompetance - so stupid are they that these people actually go out of their way to make extreme accusations hoping that they win the 'court lottery' and cash in on their unearned money for showing a complete lack of intellectual capacity better known as "This Space For Rent".

LOL good idea.. sue the court system :D

sue the judge that said your guilty for the money you lost.. :p

As mentioned before, the court system can't be sued.

Hello,
Tonight, Andy Roony commented on some letters he got for making comments, here is what he said:


"I never dare skip a letter from a lawyer.

I made some remarks about the idiocy of the awards in some personal injury lawsuits like the woman who was awarded $28 billion.

Jan Peterson says "Hogwash! The right to settle our disputes by jury trail is the American way..."

C. Jay Vreeland a lawyer from Del Mar, Calif., wrote "Love your show, hated you Sunday night..."

I mentioned the woman who sued McDonalds because she spilled hot coffee in her lap.

John Gallagher of Gallagher, Schoenfeld, Surkin and Chupein writes: "I always knew you were a bilious old crank..." That's not nice, John.

Here's one about that case from Philip Corboy of Corboy and Demetrio in Chicago. "Mr Rooney, I genuinely hope that your wife, daughter or granddaughter is never burned in the genital area by a hot cup of coffee..."

There's a huge fight now between the Trial Lawyers Association, who do the suing and big corporations which get sued. Both these groups are objectionable.

This is from Joanne Doroshow at The Center for Justice and Democracy, whatever that is. She complains, but it's a good letter though. "Your commentary did a disservice to the debates over the importance of the civil justice system."

Well, maybe it did and maybe it didn't, but next time that woman buys takeout coffee at McDonalds, I'll bet she'll have it with milk. "

I wish I could remember the name of the Judge who said "Law is over-rated".

Originally posted by Lamont
I wish I could remember the name of the Judge who said "Law is over-rated".

John Ashcroft?

Originally posted by mind21_98


John Ashcroft?
:)
No. He was referring to the idea that some people think that every aspect of our lives needs to be micro-managed by some law. In a civilized society the people don't need an abundance of laws because they just know what the right thing to do is.

When I was in school I remember a teacher saying that we could tell how advanced a civilization was be the kind of laws it passed. I remember thinking that the need for laws are more indicative of the failures of that society.

I guess what is true for govenment is true for law - we have the laws we deserve.

Well, sue the judges, they should have declared such cases as nonsense in the first place. I've read somewhere that Pres. G. Bush is doing a revamp in the U.S. court system. Installing new no nonsense judges, justices etc..

Originally posted by Jeffreyw
Well, sue the judges, they should have declared such cases as nonsense in the first place. I've read somewhere that Pres. G. Bush is doing a revamp in the U.S. court system. Installing new no nonsense judges, justices etc..

Oh good. He seems like the perfect candidate to proposing new laws, or revamping anything. :eek:
Scary

I think I'm going to sue WHT for forcing me to read material that some people may find offensive because the moderators didn't censor the words *BLEEP* *CENSORED* and *EDITED*. I am highly offended by these words for religious, spiritual, and nuisance lawsuit reasons.

Then I'm going to take on WWE, whose strangely addictive programs have caused my IQ to...umm...lose...20...thingies...that...tell...how...smart...I...am.

And just look out, White Westinghouse. You should have told me to take the soup out of the can before I decided to heat it on the stove burner. Someone could have gotten hurt. Or is my issue with Campbell's? To heck with it, I'll sue 'em both and make twice as much.

Is anyone else reminded of that episode of South Park where the kids all start suing everyone and the town becomes a great big mess and the only people that end up rich are a bunch of shifty-eyed lawyers you wouldn't buy a $5 suit from? This is what's going on with stuff like this. And no amount of legislation will ever cure it, unless they remove the concept of "tort" in civil litigation. (For those who don't know what tort is, it's a term used in civil litigation to describe damage and injury determined to have been suffered by the plaintiff caused directly or indirectly by the actions of the defendant. At least that's how Judge Judy would describe it. That woman kicks so much ass.)

The only thing that will cure it will be for people to take responsiblility for their own actions. If you mess something up, stand up and admit to messing it up. Don't blame ten other people for your mistake.