Money in Place of Responsibility

An addiction is defined as an obsession, compulsion, or excessive physical dependence or psychological dependence, such as: drug addiction, video games, crime, alcoholism, compulsive overeating, problem gambling, computer addiction, pornography, etc.

In most cases, we accept responsibility for our own actions regarding our addictions. We seek help to overcome them, or prefer instead to accept whatever consequences are a result of their addiction. Only one addiction leaves us – or more specifically our families – unable to cope with the reality of our actions. Only one addiction finds people instant millionaires after winning a trial.

It never ceases to amaze me how people are able to win court cases against tobacco companies citing their responsibility lies in manufacturing addictive products. Give me a break. Alcohol was responsible for the death of both my maternal grandparents, yet it never crossed my family’s mind to sue the likes of Anheuser-Busch or Samuel Adams or anyone else for producing an addicting product. Gambling addicts don’t sue casino corporations. Drug addicts don’t sue the manufacturers of their killing pursuits. So why, then, do families of smokers feel justified in seeking millions for an addiction? And more importantly, why do juries award them those millions time after time?

Most of the time I think it’s tort lawyers – the true scum of the earth – who seek out these families in the hour of their grief and plant the necessary seeds in the minds of these emotionally vulnerable people. I once read John Grisham’s book King of Torts and it made me sick to know that there are lawyers out there like this.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Money in Place of Responsibility

  1. At first I thought it might do some good, impact the companies, make them improve their product (yeah, I don’t know how either), but SOMETHING! I don’t think its having any effect, so it’s pretty pointless.

    But hey, isn’t that the culture now? Sue someone and get rich quick?

  2. I understand where your thought was going as I initially thought the same thing, but short of stopping their production – which I can’t see happening ever because not everyone who smokes dies of lung cancer – there’s no real point in suing, except to make a quick buck.

    Some of my distant family lives in North Carolina on a farm and one of their main crops is tobacco. I used to be somewhat ashamed of that fact, but after a visit in 1996 (or thereabout) I learned they didn’t actually have anything to do with the tobacco growing. They simply own the land and others come in to plant and tend things.

Comments are closed.