Caltrops - Motherfucking News





	[quote name="I need clarification"][quote name="Lizard_King"][quote name="I need clarification"] I think Larry King was referring to the judgements against Big Tobacco and their effect on trial lawyers who are now targetting the gun industry, the fast food industry, and sooner or later the liquor industry.[/quote] I was. Larry? [quote]But I don't think the tobacco industry is being legislated out of anything. They were sued because they lied to consumers. And then they lost the lawsuit. The fact their lies led to huge healthcare costs that are borne largely by the states means the states were entitled to demand recompense. [/quote] True, to a point. But I think the biggest issue is that people have a real problem with taking responsibility for their own actions, in this case something that could not more obviously be bad for your health. Tobacco companies are scum, and they deserve to pay for their false advertising; on the other hand smokers are fools, and have been aware of dangers to their health proportionate to non-smokers for some time, so the blame is at least 50/50.[/quote] Eh, half a dozen of one, etc. It's not like the consumers who smoked tobacco and got cancer and died didn't pay for their share of the blame, if there is any. Anyway, it's still not legislation. Nobody's put any restrictions on the sale of tobacco that aren't similar to restrictions on other industries (pornography, alcohol, car sales, etc.). [quote name = "Lizard_King"]Your second point has much more to do with the inherent problem of socialized medicine than with anything unique about the tobacco industry. Thus, leftists and allegedly rightwing puritan shitheads feel free to build a case against virtually any activity they dislike as if the wholly subjectively acceptable premise of socialist medical programs was a given rather than just another variable. [/quote] A careful reading of my post will reveal that I did not endorse lawsuits against gun manufacturers, liquor distributors, etc. Each case has to be tried on its own merits. That's the way it should be. If it's revealed, for example, that Seagram's is adding ingredients to their gin that hastens liver disease and not informing the public of it, then they may be culpable. As far as I know, they're not doing that. [quote name = "Lizard King"]In any case, there is just as much evidence that most of the costs of lung cancer and such are evened out by the fact that smokers die much younger. It's those healthy fuckers that toddle on into their 90's that are a massive burden.[/quote] Edgy = yuo!! [quote name = "Lizard_Knig"][quote]Besides, the current alternative to legislation via lawsuits is equally distasteful. I don't know that I trust twelve people with too much time on their hands to decide what's best for me, but I'm also not sure anyone in Congress can see past the Loop-full of lobbyists to make a clear-headed decision. I'm pretty sure when the NRA announces they've got an office at the White House now that Bush is in, any gun control measure that comes up at all may not be given the full attention it deserves.[/quote] Let me see, bla bla congress sucks, usual bullshit about the NRA, I think I'm done with this post.[/quote] This post is done with you! Seriously, though, my point isn't that congress sucks. My point is that it's hard to damn "trial lawyers" and not big money lobbyists. I'm not sure legislation by either is in the best interests of the country. [quote name = "Lazird Nkig"][quote]Anyway, everyone hates trial lawyers until they need one.[/quote] Mindless platitude designed to annoy rather than provide any useful perspective on matter at hand. Yeah, I'm definitely done with this post. [/quote] Yeah, it's not as succinct and meaningful as "I hate trial lawyers." Do you also hate pineapples?[/quote]