Sociology

There are several illnesses that are related to smoking and several measures have been taken over time by various organizations and governments all over the world in order to reduce the number of smokers and hence cut down on the cases of sicknesses arising from smoking tobacco. There has always been a heated debate as to who should actually be blamed or held responsible for the diseases that are caused by smoking. Some people argue that it is the tobacco companies that should be held responsible since they are the ones that are involved in the manufacturing and advertising of the tobacco products. However, others feel that the individuals who smoke are the ones to blame for the illnesses they suffer from as a result of smoking tobacco. The governments also do not escape the blame since they have the machinery and the powers to control and regulate the tobacco industry in their respective nations. But looking at the issue at hand critically, it is clear that the individuals are the ones who should be held responsible for the diseases they suffer from as a result of smoking tobacco and the tobacco companies should never be held accountable for such illnesses (Banerjee, 2007).

Tobacco companies should not be blamed for the deaths and illnesses resulting from smoking of tobacco.

Argument against the tobacco companies being held responsible
The tobacco companies are never involved in acts that force individuals to smoke their products. It is the people themselves out of free will who choose to either smoke or not. Holding these companies responsible  for the diseases caused by their products would therefore amount to missing the point as it is evident that the people to blame are the smokers themselves who with full knowledge of the consequences involved usually go ahead with the habit of smoking. If the tobacco companies were engaged in some form of coercion or undue influence, where the free choice of individuals is interfered with, it would be right to blame these companies for the diseases that are caused as a result of smoking tobacco. In fact, the general public is usually informed and educated about all the dangers of smoking tobacco. They therefore do not expose themselves due to lack of the necessary information but they are driven by other factors which can definitely not be blamed on the tobacco companies (World Health Organization, 2007).

The will to quit smoking is entirely in the hands of the smokers themselves and the tobacco companies are not involved at all in influencing people to either start or quit the habit. The tobacco smokers who are addicted to it have other alternatives at their disposal which can greatly assist them in quitting the habit but they choose not to use them and instead go on with this habit which makes them highly vulnerable to various illnesses that are related to smoking tobacco. Smokers can use resources such as replacement therapies of nicotine which are very effective in assisting smoking people to quit this dangerous habit which eventually results to a lot of suffering. However, the citizens use their freedom by making decisions that are highly informed to go on with smoking. It is therefore irrational to hold the tobacco companies responsible for the illnesses that are caused as a result of smoking the stuff while the bulk of this blame is entirely carried by the smokers themselves (Diehl, 1969).

On each and every packet of tobacco, virtually all the tobacco companies across the world indicate that smoking is a harmful habit which eventually puts the life of the smoker at risk. Smoking does not in any way jeopardize the perpetual life of the tobacco companies, but the health and life of the individuals who smoke. Furthermore, the individuals whose health and life are put at risk as a result of smoking are further informed of that fact. This therefore implies that it would not be in order to blame the tobacco companies for the diseases that result from the dangerous habit. They could probably have been held responsible if they do not usually make any effort in increasing the knowledge of the public concerning the dangers involved in smoking tobacco. But they have put a lot of effort towards this end whereby they even hold workshops in conjunction with other stakeholders such as non governmental organizations and ministries of health in order to ensure that the public are fully aware about the dangers that are involved in smoking tobacco (Banerjee, 2007).  

In the tobacco trade in any country, the government usually acts as a middleman who is very hypocritical between the consumers of tobacco and the tobacco companies. This enables them to derive huge profits from this industry which results to the dangerous habit of smoking. Being implicated financially, the governments are therefore to blame for the illnesses and deaths that arise due to smoking. Furthermore, the governments have the powers to control and regulate the tobacco industry in order to ensure that the number of smokers in their respective nations reduces as much as possible and therefore make huge strides towards fighting the tobacco menace. The governments have instead failed in using their powers effectively thus exposing their citizens to the dangers of smoking tobacco. This makes it wrong for anyone to blame the tobacco companies for the illnesses arising from the habit of smoking. It does not make any sense for the governments to expect the tobacco companies to regulate themselves and thus make any meaningful achievements in the fight against tobacco related illnesses (Diehl, 1969).

The tobacco companies usually warn the cigarettes distributors and retailers to ensure that only adults should be allowed to buy cigarettes, the minors should not be allowed to buy these products under any circumstances. But despite the good intentions of the tobacco industries of ensuring that people are not introduced to the habit when they are still young and have no capacity to be well informed of the smoking dangers that lie ahead, minors still access these products and consume them. The tobacco companies cannot be held responsible for people who are initiated into the habit while they are still young because the tobacco companies can only issue warnings, at the same time having no powers to ensure that minors are not introduced to the habit at a tender age. This is the role of the parents to such minors who should take good care of their children and ensure that they are not engaged at all in addictive and dangerous habit that is likely to greatly risk their lives. The governments also have a role to play in preventing the minors from being introduced into this habit. This is because it is the government and not the tobacco companies who have the necessary powers and structures to ensure that these products are only sold to the adults and that they are never available to the minors. Since it is clear that the tobacco companies do not have the right powers and structures to enable them ensure that these products are only sold to the right people, it would thus be wrong to put the blame on the tobacco companies (Banerjee, 2007).

The tobacco companies just like several other organizations are in business to maximize profits. They cannot achieve this objective by ensuring that they sell as few tobacco products as possible, but have to promote their products so that they can enjoy increased revenues. Moreover, the tobacco industries are involved in a business that is legal and the governments have their own reasons for ensuring that this business has remained legal. They therefore promote products that are legally accepted by the government and through extension by the society. The acceptability of tobacco products cannot be blamed by the governments and the societies on the tobacco companies but on the societies themselves. The tobacco companies should thus not be blamed for the illnesses resulting from smoking tobacco since they are engaged in a business that is accepted by both the government and the society. In this case, it is the norms of the societies that should be held responsible for the menace arising from smoking tobacco (Diehl, 1969).

Arguments for holding tobacco companies responsible
The tobacco industries should be held responsible for the illnesses resulting from smoking tobacco since these companies usually engage themselves in evil techniques for marketing and promoting their products in the market. They do this despite the fact that they are fully aware of the lethal and addictive properties of tobacco. They use techniques that are aimed at increasing a smokers rate of becoming addicted to their products and thus remain their loyal customer for an extended period of time. This practice is very unethical on the part of the companies since they make such decisions in order to increase their market share without considering the effects of such decisions and actions to the consumers of these products (Rabin  Sugarman, 2001).

Even though the supporters of the tobacco industry should not be held responsible for illnesses that are caused by smoking tobacco, argue that it is the individual smokers who choose to either smoke or not, the tobacco industries indirectly influence the decisions that are usually made by the smokers. In their advertisements, they usually portray these products as ones that are very essential in enhancing ones strength and power and thus become more superior to those people who do not smoke. These are attributes that are very attractive to the teenagers who are likely to use any means to get a puff of tobacco in order to achieve the great benefits that are allegedly contained in the tobacco products. The tobacco companies are aware that such people are less interested in the risks of smoking and will pay no attention at all to the warnings that are usually written on the packets of cigarettes. Due to the highly addictive nature of tobacco, the tobacco companies are aware that once the teenagers are introduced into the habit by the misleading adverts, they will remain loyal consumers of their products for a long period of time. The tobacco companies are therefore to blame for the illnesses which result from smoking tobacco (Rabinoff, 2007).

The tobacco industries usually pack the tobacco products in relatively small packets making them to be highly affordable to virtually anyone irrespective of ones income. By doing this, they ensure that cost does not act as a measure for making people shy from smoking these products. To make matters worse, the most tobacco industry manufacturers usually introduce certain chemicals in their products which usually have the effect of making these products more addictive and thus when one is hooked by this dangerous habit, chances of quitting are very slim and one has to continue smoking more and more tobacco products due to the resulting addictiveness. These facts make the tobacco companies to be held responsible for the illnesses that arise from the habit of smoking tobacco (Rabin  Sugarman, 2001).

Conclusion
From the above discussion, it is quite clear that the tobacco companies should not be held responsible for the illnesses which result from smoking tobacco. In fact, most of this responsibility is carried by the individual smokers who usually make very informed decisions to engage themselves in a habit that puts their health and thus their life at risk. The irresponsibility of the individual smokers should not be transferred unjustly to the tobacco industries. Furthermore, the governments have all the powers and structures needed to reduce the habit of smoking in their respective countries. They have however failed to put in place effective measures that can be very effective in reducing this harmful habit. Basically, the responsibility of the illnesses that arise as a result of smoking should not be blamed on the tobacco companies but on the smokers themselves, the governments and the norms of the societies which make tobacco one of the accepted products.