The Lawsuit Matrixby Lady Camelot ... to an article written by Michael ... A New York Jury awarded $20 Million in punitive damages to a smoker's widow last week (after a jury deliber
The Lawsuit Matrix by Lady Camelot
According to an article written by Michael Weissentstein, A New York Jury awarded $20 Million in punitive damages to a smoker's widow last week (after a jury deliberation of over two days).
Per Mr. Weissenstein's report, Ms. Gladys Frankson sued Brown & Williamson (Lucky Strike Manufacturers) when her husband passed away in 1999. Ms. Frankson's husband had begun smoking around 1954 at the age of 13.
Let's take a long and very deep perspective of the grand effects this ruling may have on corporate America:
To any other, this may simply be an everyday case in the National court system, but contrary to what one's opinion may be of cigarettes and cigarette smoking, the phenomenal repercussion of this landmark decision may create extreme, adverse effects. Not to be misconstrued that we do not sympathize with Ms. Frankson's loss, as any loss of human life is a sorrowful hardship.
Why does this particular ruling have such profound consequences? Think about it. Since Ms. Frankson was awarded a sum for her husband's loss, would it not only be right and justifiable that ALL persons who have died from lung cancer due to smoking should be awarded equal amounts as well? Should this not mean that government should become the main source of intervention and stop all production of tobacco products? What about the people who have suffered from certain types of oral cancer, should not chewing tobacco manufacturers be called upon to halt ALL production of their chew products as well?
Furthermore, what about the recent McDonald's case? Why not hold ALL fast-food restaurants and restaurants in general liable for persons suffering from type II Diabetes, for persons suffering unimaginable weight-gain related, health problems associated with their eating at these restaurants?
In addition to tobacco companies and local & National Food chains, I naturally would assume that we should also hold alcohol manufacturers, and distributors liable for liver disease, the thousands of D.U.I.-related deaths, and even kidney dialysis. But we can't just stop there. Eventually, this ruling may even lead to the auto and small engine manufacturing industries as well. After all, aren't automobiles, motorcycles, and lawnmowers leading culprits for smog and oxygen depletion; thus an indirect cause of ozone layer reduction?
We mustn't forget the beef & cattle industry. God forbid one should get botchulism or salmonella poisoning for digesting undercooked beef -- or worse yet -- mad cow disease? Greater concerns are for the cattle themselves, as they emit methane gases. Perhaps we should eradicate cattle too, because there are definitely some major counter-effects of even raising and herding these gentle giants for human consumption.
We must not forget to include certain food manufacturers that produce potato chips, candies, chocolates, and other "junk foods," categorized as "high fat" content products. Apparently, these items, too have and are wreaking havoc on human bodies everywhere. Plaque from fatty acids is continually building up in our heart arteries and capillaries as we munch away on these delectable treats. Eventually, we end up with Heart disease, and myocardial infarctions -- the cause -- your friendly "junk food" industry. Perhaps these unsuspecting businesses must too bare responsibility for the products that we (as individuals) CHOOSE to consume or ingest.
Another probability in the lawsuit assembly lines, is the produce industry. Chemical solutions that are used to repel fungi, disease and other parasites are traditionally utilized on many of our fruits, vegetables and beans. So, you forgot to wash that apple and decided to eat it anyway -- now you've been placed in a complex situation. You may just have ingested chemical compounds that will eventually cause and lead to some form of cancer -- and ultimately -- your own demise. Do we now bring a case against the apple grower or the chemical producer? Hmmm... tough decision. Why not sue both?
Less we not forget the notorious cocaine manufacturers and distributors. Countless persons die of cocaine, crack and other substance abuse on a daily basis. But ah -- we don't have the information to sue them. We can only prevent the use of it. In essence -- prevention is key.
The fact is, we live in a society where numerous unhealthy products are created, manufactured, distributed and sold to consumers. The point being that we CANNOT hold every company responsible for OUR OWN ACTIONS. The nice thing about America, is that we have a distinct CHOICE whether or not to use certain products. When our overuse, misuse or general use of a product comes with repercussions, we must choose to accept our own fate and learn from it.
Regretfully, not all persons learn from their addictions, or effects of product usage. To those who are left behind, or to the survivors, I leave you with one piece of advice: Live. Learn. Prevent. Suing industries for our own choices, is a travesty to America and will ultimately lead to irrevocable circumstances. A good film to watch that will enlighten one's perspective on "too many laws," is "Demolition Man," starring Sylvester Stallone.
LadyCamelot currently serves as the Public Relations' Director for www.holisticjunction.com - Your Pathway to Discovery - A community of people interested in all things holistic. Here, you will find what you need; share what you know; discuss what you're not sure about. Create your own web site, participate in online forums (over 80 categories), peruse the Business Directory, publish your original articles, opinions, artwork, and so much more.