[Red in Blue PA]

Without government protection, the tobacco industry would have been sued out of existence, long ago. We would all be better off if it had been. But, instead, they continue under the Governments protection, and people continue to be injured and killed.

Using that "logic" for lack of a better word, ammo manufacturers should be sued for shootings in Chicago. Rope makers should be sued for people who hand themselves.

We are supposed to be a free country; your post is the ANTITHESIS of that.

[Haiku Guy]

The difference between tobacco and ammo or rope is that tobacco kills when it is used as intended. With ammo or rope, the user is making a decision in how to use the product which is the proximate cause of the injury. Cigarettes start killing as soon as the user lights one up.

A better analogy would be Thalidomide, which caused injury when people took it as directed. The manufacturer was sued, and it was taken off the market.

[Haiku Guy]

To put it another way, is somebody made ammo that routinely exploded in people’s hands, he would bear liability for that product. If somebody built a car that frequently crashed itself and killed people, he would be sued out of business.

There are product liability lawsuits about this sort of thing every day. Why should tobacco be the exception? The answer, of course, is that tobacco is excepted because it buys special protection from the government with tax money.