But Joe, if they take personal responsibility in this matter, then they would have to take it in all matters, and that would defeat the purpose of the nanny state.
The poor whiney wimps who choose not to quit, have no right to go after a company that does not force them to smoke in the first place.
This society has become lawsuit and "it's not my fault" happy. With the prevailing winds allowing anyone and everyone to sue anything and everything on the flimsiest of reasons with the smallest amount of evidence... just because you prefer the "victim" mentality, doesn't mean the rest of us do.
Stand up, tell people.. "Yeah, I smoke, no one held a gun to my head to make me". Oh wait, there's that personal responsibility thing again.
They tell me that everyone is concerned about their rights, but don't believe they have any responsibility. In other words, you have a right to have a company provide you with a 100% safe product, but no responsibility to exercise commonsense in the use of that product (eg. you aren't entitled to damages if you buy hot, black coffee at the McDonalds drive-thru, put it between your legs, then squeeze hard when you slam on the brakes at the traffic lights because you were eating your Big Mac, rather than watching the road...well, you wouldn't be in a sane society [this case caused disbelief when the lady succeeded]).
When I was in law school 10 years ago, one of the principles of the law of negligence they taught us was contributory negligence. In summary, if the provider of a product with a defect in it should reasonably have forseen the possibility of that product doing harm, they are negligent and liable for damages. However, if the person who has been injured contributed to their injuries by doing something unreasonable (ie. something stupid, or knowingly assumed the risks), any damages claim was reduced in proportion to the share of the blame borne by the injured party.
It seems the courts and society have focused solely on negligence and forgotten the principle of contributory negligence.
This also seems to be a mindset introduced by the babyboomer generation. I admit that it is arguable that in previous generations, the balance was too far the other way, but when I was a child, if I fell off the monkey bars and broke my wrist, it was just and accident that happened, not an actionable wrong. Is there a member of that generation out there who can shed some light on why this might be the case?