Why are the lawyers not going after the liquor companies like they did the cigarette companies?

Answer 1

Good question! Could it have something to do with gambling (it's coming into Canada faster than a locomotive) and without booze people don't stay to gamble. It's all about revenue and our governments made plenty off smokers for years knowing full well that smoking is now not considered good for you. What do they do? They give lame ads on TV, but don't give out patches free of charge to help smokers that are hooked a chance to quit. Some smokers have smoked for years and years and it's said for some, giving up smoking is as bad as heroine. Oh, but that's not the end of it. Vancouver, Canada is PAYING PEOPLE HOOKED ON HEROINE FREE HEROINE AND SAFE INJECTION SITES, yet smokers (I am one of them) pay high costs for cigarettes (costs change from store-to-store $68/carton to almost $80/carton which includes all those lousy taxes.) New Zealand pays for all patches to help smokers quit with a fairly good % quitting, then I heard New York tried it with high results; so, why doesn't government (who, by the way is so considerate of our health) knew full well that the tobacco companies had changed the ingredients in their tobacco to hook more young people into smoking, yet they sat back and let it happen! Now they are blaming the smokers for diseases and secondhand smoke and still don't put a full ban on smoking. They'll just raise prices up a carton. Before anyone gets on their podium against smokers here, chew on this: Tobacco use to be just fine to smoke years ago until the tobacco companies (and the governments of the U.S. of A and Canada went along with it) put other chemicals (unbeknownst to the smoker) into the tobacco to hook the younger generation coming up. Now the governments come out and blame smokers for others having everything from a carbunckle on their butts to causing diseases in other people because of their smoke. Hey folks, every been to L.A.????? The smog is so thick there you won't even recognize yourself on a good day. Yet both governments do little to clean up the total environment in their own countries. Smokers in Canada paid long and hard for their health care and put thousands of dollars into it so if and when any of us get sick (and I am sure the old standard of being a smoker will fit right in) they can turn you away! Fair? I think not! It's all political and a cop out so governments can have 2nd and 3rd tiered health care (which by the way has been in effect for quite sometime and not known to the general public.) Our own Premier Campbell had a DUI in Hawaii and it was swept under the rug although his picture was in the paper and he has some embarrassing moments and why shouldn't he. Thousands of deaths occur from alcohol related beatings to auto accidents. I decided one day to phone up the B.C. Lung Association and "Mad Mothers Against Drunk Drivers" and get the stats on both. Here is a real shocker and this is quoted info I am giving you: B.C. LUNG ASSOC. "I am interested in the percentage of tobacco related deaths in British Columbia." The woman at the other end got all warm and fuzzy and thinking I was a raving non smoker was only too willing to tell me all (so she thought.) Since she was talking about how terrible smokers were she had forgotten to give me the percentage as I asked, so I asked again and all of a sudden she became very quiet. I demanded those percentages! After all, they were blaming people such as myself for all the terrible things happening to my family, friends and other good people out there. Well folks, this is what I got ... "I'm sorry, there is no correct statistics on any related deaths because of smoking and it's only generalized on a small group!" I then asked this woman how she could be so stupid as to expect kids to either not start smoking or quit smoking if they lied off the cuff and didn't do a complete survey over the situation." No answer! Well, it's an easy question to answer ... there is absolutely no reports or proof that smoking or secondhand smoke causes other people to become ill or die from it. You have a better chance of dying from the very air you breath in your own towns or cities. MAD MOTHERS AGAINST DRUNK DRIVING: "I am interested in the percentage of alcohol related injuries and deaths." The woman was kind and gave me the percentages dead on (they are higher now) and told me these came from Police reports in the lower mainland. I checked, and it was right on. Yet smokers are attacked more, treated poorly and the alcohol related accidents even resulting in someone's death is treated with a slap on the wrist and the person is out the front door of the police station before the ink is dry on the report. I am by no means saying smoking is good for you, because it isn't, but it's not the sole cause of EVERYTHING! I feel, if the government is so passionate about this they should go after the tobacco companies (oh yes, they have, but did they tell you about the kickbacks they get out of that, and if also, why aren't the tobacco companies out of business?) Because the revenue is too good! I think we should be able to sue our very governments for knowing what the tobacco companies were doing, putting the seal of approval on it, and taking our hard earned money, then turning around and blaming us for all the world's ails. There is absolutely nothing done about alcohol. I smoke, don't drink, but I don't go around shouting that all pubs, bars, or any establishment for entertainment shouldn't serve alcohol and I do serve alcohol in my own home for guests that enjoy it. As for smoking, my husband and I very considerate, and if we have non smokers here we will go outside of OUR OWN HOME and have a cigarette on occasion. Every person who has been in our home has told us that they never smell smoke in our home. Doors and windows are open in my home while I'm home and I keep my home neat and tidy. I respect others who don't want you to smoke in their homes or vehicles, but I'll be damned if I'll sit back and be blamed for every blasted disease known to man being blamed on smokers. Alcohol causes some people to become abusive. It causes some people to act strange and to do things they wouldn't normally do. It causes unwanted pregnancies, beatings in families and let us not forget the many drunk drivers out there that have snatched someone's loved one(s) from us by hitting THEIR VEHICLE! Most of our own government officials suck back more booze than most of us could ever hope to swill back! Well, by now you must know this is a most passionate subject to me and here is why: It's not about smoking, it's about the rights in a free country. If they allow people to stop smoking in their vehicles or their own homes then what is next down the line? What other liberty will they take from us? It could be something one of you likes to do. They have managed to take prayer out of schools, we can't say "Merry Christmas" here (I do) but it's now "Season's Greetings." Last time I looked I lived in Canada ... the land of the free as it says in our National Anthem. Marcy

ANSWER

the main reason would be because the cigarette companies claimed cigarettes were not harmful to human health, did not acknowledge they were addictive and even when they knew after years of people saying they had problems they still ignored it until the law stepped in.

because cigarette companies refused for many years to put a health warning on their packets

where as alcohol is not sold as healthy cigaretts actaully were

because menthol and low tar cigarettes were marketed as healthy

when they are just as likely to cause cancer as non menthol and non low tar.

Because it is the tests done on animals by the makers and creaters of cigarettes that got the information wrong

because cancer is possibly viewed as more serious by the law than all the health risks of alcohol

because smoking can harm everyone around the person smoking, ie passive smoking, whereas alcohol makes the person drinking ill not everyone around the person drinking.

peoples choices are taken away because of this, ie the person affected by passive smoking had no choice if they were affected

because alcohol is not addictive in the same way and to the same extent cigarettes are (this is why many more people can quit alcohol than cigarettes)

and due to this again peoples choice has been taken away ie the addictiveness of cigarette addiction impairs the persons free choice to give them up much more than alcohol addiction.

f4