Tobacco companies file lawsuit over warning labels

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
May 9, 2002
37,066
16,282
113
#1
I actually agree with the tobacco companies. While smoking can kill you, it is LEGAL and is a CHOICE. This is how it SHOULD be for ALL drugs IMHO. We are supposed to be a free country....no?



by Associated Press

Posted on August 17, 2011 at 6:11 PM

COLUMBIA, S.C. - Tobacco companies want a judge to put a stop to new graphic cigarette labels that include the sewn-up corpse of a smoker and pictures of diseased lungs, saying they unfairly urge adults to shun their legal products and will cost millions to produce.

Four of the five largest U.S. tobacco companies sued the federal government Tuesday, saying the warnings violate their free speech rights.

"Never before in the United States have producers of a lawful product been required to use their own packaging and advertising to convey an emotionally-charged government message urging adult consumers to shun their products," the companies wrote in the lawsuit filed in federal court in Washington.

The companies, led by R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., Lorillard Tobacco Co., said the warnings no longer simply convey facts to allow people to make a decision on whether to smoke. They instead force them to put government anti-smoking advocacy more prominently on their packs than their own brands, the companies say. They want a judge to stop the labels.

The FDA refused to comment, saying the agency does not discuss pending litigation. But when she announced the new labels in June, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius called them frank and honest warnings about the dangers of smoking.

The FDA approved nine new warnings to rotate on cigarette packs. They will be printed on the entire top half, front and back, of the packaging. The new warnings also must constitute 20 percent of any cigarette advertising. They also all include a number for a stop-smoking hotline.

One warning label is a picture of a corpse with its chest sewed up and the words: "Smoking can kill you." Another label has a picture of a healthy pair of lungs beside a yellow and black pair with a warning that smoking causes fatal lung disease.

The lawsuit said the images were manipulated to be especially emotional. The tobacco companies said the corpse photo is actually an actor with a fake scar, while the healthy lungs were sanitized to make the diseased organ look worse.

The companies also said the new labels will cost them millions of dollars for new equipment so they can frequently change from warning to warning and designers to make sure the labels meet federal requirements while maintaining some distinction among brands.

Joining R.J. Reynolds and Lorillard in the suit are Commonwealth Brands Inc., Liggett Group LLC and Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Company Inc. Altria Group Inc., parent company of the nation's largest cigarette maker, Philip Morris USA, is not a part of the lawsuit.

The free speech lawsuit is a different action than a suit by several of the same companies over the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. The law, which took affect two years ago, cleared the way for the more graphic warning labels, but also allowed the FDA to limit nicotine. The law also banned tobacco companies from sponsoring athletic or social events and prevented them from giving away free samples or branded merchandise.

A federal judge upheld many parts of the law, but the companies are appealing.

http://www.king5.com/health/Tobacco-companies-file-lawsuit-over-warning-labels-127978768.html
 
Jan 7, 2004
903
4
0
41
#3
what's next, violent car crash scenes with dead bodies on beer cans?

I've never met a smoker who doesn't know smoking is bad for them. Smokers have been told the negative effects their whole lives.
Exactly, I mean who is a smoker out there that you could tell "hey cigs are bad for you" and their response would be "oh really I had no idea". I mean come on.
 

MysticOracle

si vis pacem para bellum
May 4, 2006
7,158
4,697
0
42
707- VALLEJO
#4
smokers know the risks...yet they still smoke...when i was a cigarette smoker a friend of mine brought some cigarettes back from Iran and they had a picture of some black lungs on them...i didnt care, i still smoked them

it wont stop smokers regardless....but it might stop kids...either way where do you draw the line? alcoholic drinks come with a pic of a rotted liver or a free download of "red asphalt" ?
 
May 19, 2005
2,341
112
63
41
#7
the warning labels are for children.the government doesnt give a shit about adult smokers,to them there already lost causes.tobacco companies target teens 14 years old and up.that is not right
 
Feb 28, 2008
2,202
633
0
37
#9
Good, put the labels on.....It wil stop the kids....or at least an amount. .Cigs are fucking retarted anyways. Once you see a loved one die of lung cancer you wanna smack every single cig outta someones mouth.

And to the people who say "OH it's my life I can do what the fuck I want" Well then dont have kids because I'm sure your kids will enjoy watching you rot away all for your retarded ass nicotine addiction.
 

Legman

پراید آش
Nov 5, 2002
7,458
1,948
0
37
#11
as if a bigger skull and bones sign would stop the idiots 90s and on babies that are already doing way worse shit lol
 
Mar 21, 2009
2,827
6,528
0
40
#14
i heard they are planning on putting pictures of lip cancer victims on cans of chew now. it won't stop me because i am hopelessly addicted but i could live without seeing that.
 

Roz

Sicc OG
Jul 22, 2009
2,874
116
0
39
www.facebook.com
#17
Bro if you went back to when you where 13 years old and someone handed you a box with a real dead body on it and said "here take one". I'm hoping to God most kids would decline.

Kids have seen dead bodies, and gruesome scenes by that age. They're on tv, the internet, and on video games. I don't think it's really going to do anything to stop kids from smoking.

I just think this is another way for the government to enforce more regulation on companies, and injecting it's own moral restrictions based on assumptions.
 
May 9, 2002
37,066
16,282
113
#18
Kids have seen dead bodies, and gruesome scenes by that age. They're on tv, the internet, and on video games. I don't think it's really going to do anything to stop kids from smoking.

I just think this is another way for the government to enforce more regulation on companies, and injecting it's own moral restrictions based on assumptions.
Bingo.

I think the government fails to realize how desensitized we really are as a country. Its pretty fuckin sad actually.