how many more people have to die before its considered a slow homocide
2007-10-17 23:39:04 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
No. They sell a product that MIGHT kill you sooner or later, depending on other factors in your life.
Should cigs be outlawed? Oh yeah, but the Liberals, for all their howling about the deadly effects of tobacco, can not live without that wonderful tax money. Hmmm, maybe we should charge the politicians with murder.
2007-10-17 23:47:50 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋
Smoking used to be a status symbol to the rich and elite. Most women who smoked were frowned upon. Human life expectancy was low enough that smoking was not considered a factor. Smoking has been a choice and continues to be that way today.
Should cigarette companies be charged with murder?
Should automobile companies be charged with murder? How many motorists die every year? How many people die by being struck by a motorist? Maimed, injured, incapacitated? Many would agree that they shouldn't.
Should cigarette companies be charged with murder?
Should abortion clinics be charged with murder? How many pregnant women have had their unborn destroyed at their hands? How many will no longer be able to bring a life into this world because of their procedure?
Should cigarette companies be charged with murder?
Should Congress be charged with murder? Congress is the legislative branch of our government that has allowed smoking to be legal. Were smoking illegal, there would be no cigarettes sold in the United States legally- although that would allow the rest of the world markets to continue making, selling, and distributing cigarettes and cigars.
Should cigarette companies be charged with murder?
Should China be charged with murder? They sold products to us that were lined with lead. Granted it would take more exposure than what most of those children would likely get, and our parents had been exposed to it for decades before they began limiting its use, but it's deadly.
Should cigarette companies be charged with murder?
What you propose by that question is called intimidation. By intimidating cigarette companies, you would like to control the actions of others who choose to smoke. Who are you to say? For all the knowledge of the medical world, they still only claim to be "practicing medicine."
Should cigarette companies be charged with murder?
I don't believe so, but then the other companies and organizations mentioned above should also be considered if you do believe that they should.
You believe in freedom, so why don't you allow others the same freedoms?
Don't like the smell- go away. If a person with bad body odor were standing there instead, you have the same options.
Don't like the cost of health care- they overcharge you anyway.
Want a longer life- longevity of life does not equate to a better quality of life.
You have a choice and so do people who smoke.
2007-10-18 00:31:19 · answer #2 · answered by paradigm_thinker 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
everything is slow homicide. the cigarette companies have had the warning label on their packs of cigs for 42 years. anyone who is younger than 42 and still smoking, what can you say. it's a free country. If I consumed 20 bottles of beer a day for40 years I would be dead, too.
If I ate nothing but beef every day for 40 years, I would be dead.
The individual should be held accountable for his actions.
2007-10-17 23:47:09 · answer #3 · answered by Wayne G 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i hate the way you assume all young people are all binge drinking twice a week, people have free will, you dont need to do this so why moan about others doing something that isnt affecting you, they cant just ban fags suddenly and doubt they ever will, and its true they dont force us too smoke and tell everyone the risks of smoking but people still do it, its probably true that the government dont ban it because of all the money they make, but other things like junk food and take aways damage your body but no one goes on about that as much as smoking, i suppose smoking can cause problems for non smokers but when the law comes in when you can only smoke in your home people wont have much to maon about.
2016-05-23 07:36:03 · answer #4 · answered by ute 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. If someone beats you over the head and you die do they charge the company that made the brick? When did people stop being responsible for their own actions?
2007-10-17 23:47:18 · answer #5 · answered by Squeaks 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I'm an exsmoker (smoked for 21 years) and no one forces someone to buy a pack, open it, light the contents, inhale the smoke, or continue to do so, over and over for years.
There are warnings on the package, they aren't allowed to advertise, Joe Camel's gone and the studies about second hand smoke have permeated the globe. People who smoke have to take responsibility for their own judgement (or lack thereof).
Alcohol manufacturers and salesmen are not responsible when someone ELSE misuses their product, i.e., gets drunk and runs someone down in the street. Tobacco marketers' have a similar lack of liability.
You know it's bad, if you smoke ANYWAY, why aren't YOU responsible for your own behavior?
2007-10-17 23:45:48 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
I had an uncle die of cancer, and he never once had a cigarette forced on him by the american tobacco industry. People need to accept responsibility for their own actions.
2007-10-17 23:44:24 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
No. Murder requires intent. The intent is to make a profit, not kill the consumer. No consumer - no market - no profit.
2007-10-17 23:43:35 · answer #8 · answered by pepper 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Don't buy the cigarettes. They're not forcing you. It's up to you to make choices.
2007-10-17 23:41:58 · answer #9 · answered by the Boss 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋