EDITORIAL Guns, tobacco bad for nations health
Patricia Henley, who has inoperable
cancer, sued cigarette manufacturer Philip Morris and was awarded $51.5 million
by a jury Feb. 10. This is the third big judgment in favor of smokers in three
years. And last November a coalition of 46 states reached a $206 billion -- the
computations vary -- settlement with the big tobacco companies in compensation
for damage done by smoking not only to individuals but to the society.
For years, even decades, suits brought against Big Tobacco were
pulverized by a legal juggernaut that added insult to injury by boasting about
its invincibility. Now, we the people are thinking otherwise. Jurors are
falling over each other to punish the tobacco companies that, it now
transpires, were lying to us all along while making unimaginable profits. The
Henley suit is but one example: Her lawyers had asked for $15 million in
punitive damages but the jury awarded $50 million.
Cities and states across the nation, meanwhile, realizing that
guns are as damaging to the commonweal as tobacco, have brought suit against
gun manufacturers for -- guess what -- making guns dangerous to peoples
health. This showdown is still in its early stages. The National Rifle
Association has leaped, guns blazing, into the fray. The NRA notched a quick
victory in Georgia, pressuring the state legislature to pass a bill that would
block anti-gun suits. The gun people were able to do that and will probably do
it again, for the usual reason -- it pays out big money to get sympathetic
state politicians elected.
Sounds like business as usual. But theres something new in
the air. Its just that politicians are often the last to get it.
Big Tobacco is reeling from recent defeats, not because their
lawyers are less sharp than a decade ago but because the population woke up to
the stupidity of so many being killed by cigarettes; woke up to the deception
about cigarettes not being addictive or even dangerous; woke to the greed that
motivated very rich moguls to tamper further with addictive substances so we
would be too weak to resist, until we died.
Henley admitted her illness was in part her own fault, because she
smoked three packs a day, but that rationale no longer excuses the big
companies. Logic and legal niceties aside, we instinctively know theres
something wrong and were tired of it.
The gun lobby is confronting its most recent challenge with
typical in-your-face defiance. One wonders will people look back in a thousand
years and wonder at the arrogance with which this small, fanatical group
confounded the will of the people. Their rigidity in not giving an inch, not
letting go even of battle grade guns, not accepting the most modest checks on
weapons so recklessly used to kill citizens night after night, defies
imagination.
The NRA would do well to be more circumspect. There is a growing
sense in the community that something is rotten about this plague of guns. We
sense it so acutely, were beginning to act on it. Were undergoing
one of our occasional societal transformations.
Neither battle is yet won. The last two major awards against Big
Tobacco were reversed on appeal, and the plaintiffs got nothing. Henley runs a
risk of the same fate. Indeed, Henleys first big breakthrough was to be
able to sue at all: Until a 1987 reform, the law said killing yourself with
cigarettes was your own problem; but that in turn was part of wider legislation
to protect the interests of major corporations.
These reversals on appeal, though, are rejections of the will of
the jury, and therefore of the peoples will.
This is an overly litigious society. But for once people may be
suing for the right reasons. Individuals and cities, whether suing tobacco or
gun interests, are making their cases in terms of the wider good. If they begin
to succeed, other enemies of the common good would, in turn, do well to take
notice.
National Catholic Reporter, February 26,
1999
|