Big Tobacco Says Anti-Smoking Ads Violate First Amendment Rights

[Confederate Kahanist]

http://www.care2.com/causes/health-policy/blog/big-tobacco-says-anti-smoking-ads-violate-first-amendment-rights/




It’s not easy to picture the big tobacco companies in the role of victim.

Philip Morris USA, Lorillard Inc., and RJ Reynolds Tobacco are suing New York City for violating their First Amendment rights by mandating anti-smoking advertisements, alleging that the city law restricts their ability to communicate about lawful products.

Reuters reported that the lawsuit reads, “The government may not force private parties to carry messages beyond purely uncontroversial factual statements that are designed to prevent consumer deception."

The suit, filed Thursday, claims the regulation goes against U.S. Supreme Court rulings in other tobacco cases that federal labeling regulations prevent local governments, as in this case, from interfering with cigarette advertising.

The companies, along with state retail associations, want a court order to stop New York from enforcing the law.

The New York City Health Department developed the somewhat graphic anti-smoking signs and requires anyone selling cigarettes to consumers to display at least one poster near the cash register or the cigarettes or face a $2,000 fine.

The signs point to the harmful effects of smoking and include a helpline for people who want to quit.

New York City has already banned smoking in bars and restaurants. The Health Department is working hard to get its message out, and the graphic displays at point-of-purchase are just the latest weapon in the battle.

Warnings do serve to remind people of the dangers of smoking. Is NYC wrong to mandate that tobacco sellers warn customers of these health risks?

Is the tobacco industry trying to suppress important health information from potential customers, or is big tobacco the victim of unfair local practices?

[MassuhDGoodName]

I agree totally with the tobacco industry.

Tobacco has been a legal product on this continent for thousands of years.

The government is totally out of control -- either make it completely illegal, or they should butt out of other peoples' business.

Most any doctor will tell you that if aspirin was sent for approval today by the DEA and FDA, it would be banned as one of the most dangerous drugs known, and the same goes for alcohol.  The alcohol in a glass of wine or a bottle of beer is no different that the alcohol found in whiskey or vodka, and has done incalculably more damage to lives than tobacco use.

It's about time the government start banning Mohammedan murderers, illegal aliens, criminal schwartzes, and Democrat Party traitors and leave we, the people, free with the liberty to make up our own minds about our choices of food or mild stimulants.

What is it exactly, about the 1st Amendment that the current generation of Americans is incapable of accepting?

Freedom of speech means exactly what it says:

Freedom to speak freely with the written and spoken word.

That means the freedom to criticize schwartzes, the freedom to insult Hussein O., and the freedom to market a legal product any way you choose.

At the present time, the only freedom of speech Americans have left, is the freedom to libel, slander, and threaten genocide against Jews.

But just you say N_G_G_e_R to some jig, and watch how fast you end up in court.
 

[arksis]

Soon, it will be ILLEGAL to smoke cigarettes, but LEGAL to smoke all the pot you want. What an upsidedown country this is!