Companies have a responsibility to make information about their products available to the public.

However, consumers also need to take personal responsibility for their actions.

On Monday, the Supreme Court refused to allow the Bush administration to go after a $280 billion penalty for tobacco companies that supposedly mislead consumers about the harms of smoking. The actions taken by the tobacco industry are allegedly in violation of a federal anti-racketeering law.

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, is mainly used to prosecute mobsters, but has civil provisions in addition to its traditionally criminal role.

The federal judge presiding over the nine-month trial hasn't made a decision in the matter.

Did the companies accurately present the now-known dangers of smoking? Or does personal choice have to be taken into account?

It's a valid concern. Although the surgeon general's warning exists now on cigarette boxes, the dangers were not always presented by the companies. This could be portrayed as false advertising and might have misled consumers, but only prior to the placement of the warnings on packages — a practice which began in 1966.

It's up to smokers to take personal responsibility now that the detrimental effects of cigarettes have been shown in studies done on smoking. However negative these effects are, consumers do make a choice to smoke in the first place.

People make a lot of personal choices to do things that are not in the best interest of their health. However, our government doesn't take action against all companies that might cause health risks.

Alcoholics shouldn't sue beer companies for causing their ailment. People who have been shot shouldn't sue gunmakers. Smokers shouldn't sue the tobacco companies either.

Cigarette smokers should be allowed to make a choice, but they need to acknowledge their decision rather than blame the company producing their cigarettes. The addictive effects of nicotine don't cause anyone to light up the first time.

The industry does attempt to make its products attractive to perspective buyers, but the companies don't force anyone to buy the product.

It isn't that cigarette companies are in the clear because the industry has allegedly performed several questionable moves in the past to promote their product.

Information that the company presents needs to be clear and accurate regarding its products, but some common sense should be expected from the consumer.

Tar and pesticides are never good things for people to inhale.

Nevertheless, information for an informed decision needs to be attainable. In the past, this was difficult to come by, and tobacco companies should be held accountable for their past practices, if they were indeed wrongful. But this doesn't excuse smokers from their original decision to smoke.

It's just common sense.