The DOJ asks a federal appeals court to rehear a case over a FDA requirement that would force...


The DOJ asks a federal appeals court to rehear a case over a FDA requirement that would force tobacco companies to place large graphic health warnings on cigarette packages. Previously, a three-judge panel in Washington backed the ruling of a lower court by finding the mandate infringed on First Amendment free speech protection. The bigger issue: At last count, 46M Americans still smoked despite stepped-up efforts by health organizations to cut into the number and reduced marketing spending by tobacco companies. Has the anti-smoking crusade now cut to the bone?

From other sites
Comments (17)
  • Swass
    , contributor
    Comments (419) | Send Message
     
    Nanny state run amuck.
    9 Oct 2012, 03:24 PM Reply Like
  • whidbey
    , contributor
    Comments (3552) | Send Message
     
    More to the point, there is no governmental interest in how one chooses to die. In a few states sucide is illegal but seldom punished, unless one assists another in doing so. It is nonsense. Death by cigarette is a constitutional right as long as you do not require help in the process of smoking.
    9 Oct 2012, 03:32 PM Reply Like
  • Boff
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    If people would only smoke in a bell jar, I'd agree. But they poison the rest of us at the same time with second hand smoke.
    9 Oct 2012, 05:23 PM Reply Like
  • WmHilger1
    , contributor
    Comments (1757) | Send Message
     
    I, personally, don't smoke and never have, but I don't think it is the government's business what anyone does with their personal life! We have too much government and not enough common sense in Washington D.C.! If the Democraps could have their way, everything that anyone does would be subject to the whims of the state, i.e., socialism of the worst and most invasive kind!
    9 Oct 2012, 03:33 PM Reply Like
  • bonsaibean
    , contributor
    Comments (66) | Send Message
     
    You think the Republicans (see, I can still be civil and use the proper terms) don't want to regulate all kinds of personal behavior? They want to push opinions on marriage, sex, religion, abortion, etc. No one party has the market cornered on wanting to run our lives - they're both out of control!
    9 Oct 2012, 03:54 PM Reply Like
  • hwood007
    , contributor
    Comments (1195) | Send Message
     
    How would you feel about it if you were the one aborted or if your son was? Abortion for a medical reason is one thing, but because you do not want a child or do not want a male/female child is another. If your wife was carring a child and I hit her car and killed the child inside her, what would you call my crime? The other stuff you wrote was petty and I agree, but a life is not petty. As for marriage, we have a civil government, not a religious one, so let that civil government pass a civil union law for any who want to use it and stay out of religion.
    9 Oct 2012, 04:07 PM Reply Like
  • davidingeorgia
    , contributor
    Comments (2661) | Send Message
     
    I wonder if any of these smiley-face fascists have stopped to think about whether putting gruesome pics on the outside of cigarette packages in a society in which shows like The Walking Dead are immensely popular will actually do anything whatsoever to stop people from smoking, especially teenagers? I'd be willing to bet that teens will be attracted to the "gross" pictures more often than they're repelled by them. Does the FDA have any "experts" whose field is "common sense"? I'm guessing the answer is "no" on that. Common sense seems to be a field completely unrelated to government work.
    9 Oct 2012, 03:37 PM Reply Like
  • bonsaibean
    , contributor
    Comments (66) | Send Message
     
    It would probably lead to some kind of "Collect all 6!" kind of situation, and completely backfire.
    9 Oct 2012, 03:55 PM Reply Like
  • hwood007
    , contributor
    Comments (1195) | Send Message
     
    I agree, the packs would start having a different pic each month and you would have teens collecting them all.
    9 Oct 2012, 04:09 PM Reply Like
  • labas112
    , contributor
    Comments (531) | Send Message
     
    Hahaha Zing.
    9 Oct 2012, 07:44 PM Reply Like
  • aukinet
    , contributor
    Comments (23) | Send Message
     
    DOJ doesn't have anything better to do? I'll bet there will be a tax attached!
    9 Oct 2012, 04:05 PM Reply Like
  • JLesinski
    , contributor
    Comments (229) | Send Message
     
    I love the "but you didn't side with us, you must have made a mistake" approach.
    9 Oct 2012, 05:07 PM Reply Like
  • rogergcam
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Having been a wholesale tobacco distributor, ( a direct account with all the major tobacco companies). I can tell you these people would not tell the truth if it sounded better that a lie! Unfortunately tobacco consumption is not completely a personal matter. Second hand smoke kills, and just walk along any beach and look at the butts in the sand. We all pay for this habit, not just the smoker. The DOJ can shut them down, but please wait till I sell all my MO stock!
    9 Oct 2012, 05:23 PM Reply Like
  • labas112
    , contributor
    Comments (531) | Send Message
     
    It is more of choice. People choose to smoke, you also have a choice to hang around them. Just like businesses should choose they want that kind of crowd in their place, as it is your choice to go there in the first place. What is crazy, is to tell someone they have to leave property in order to smoke, as if standing outside was not good enough in the first place.

     

    The government needs tobacco because of all the tax revenue it generates, if they get rid of it where are they going to make up that money.
    9 Oct 2012, 07:49 PM Reply Like
  • njja
    , contributor
    Comments (366) | Send Message
     
    What a load of crap! First of all are cigarettes legal or not? If they are post normal warning labels and let adults decide for themselves. California and a few other states are considering legalizing Pot for goodness sake. So is only some smoking ok?

     

    Secondly the Government is grabbing all the Tax dollars it possibly can from the Publics use of tobacco. It's time we throw all these "Liberal Idiots" out of Washington, and get back to a world where adults make decisions for themselves on how to live their lives.

     

    Who wants to listen to a government that sends our young people out to be maimed or killed in idiotic wars in the far corners of the world. Then when they come home "The Wounded Warrior Project" has to ask the public to provide for these wounded soldiers. Why can't the government use some of the "Tobacco Tax dollars" or a little of the 6 Trillion Obama has spent to take care of our veterans.

     

    Our country needs to wake up!
    9 Oct 2012, 08:56 PM Reply Like
  • smokster
    , contributor
    Comments (29) | Send Message
     
    Amen njja!
    10 Oct 2012, 12:33 AM Reply Like
  • taemwar
    , contributor
    Comments (185) | Send Message
     
    Placing warnings on packages would have no effect. Any smoker with a brain knows it is hazardous to your health.
    I used to smoke three or four packs a day. I stopped because I could only work with one hand because the other hand had to hold a cigarette. Also people no longer tolerated it. Once I went into a county official's office once smoking. He had no ash tray so I held the cigarette until it burned down to the filter. Obviously he did not want to make it convenient for smokers. After I quit, I did the same--no ash tray in my office.
    10 Oct 2012, 02:11 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Hub
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs