In Richards v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 14 Cal. 4th 985, the Supreme Court observed that "the import of former section 1714.45 itself is clear. Though the statute states only an exemption from direct 'liability' where specified conditions are met, the express premise which justifies this immunity is of a broader nature. This premise is that suppliers of certain products which are 'inherently unsafe,' but which the public wishes to have available despite awareness of their dangers, should not be responsible in tort for resulting harm to those who voluntarily consumed the products despite such knowledge. With respect to injuries meeting the statute's requirements, that principle precludes the assignment of legal 'fault' to such suppliers in all contexts . . . ." ( Id. at p. 1002.) The Supreme Court also observed that the Legislature "has made" a "policy judgment" that "suppliers have no legal 'fault' or responsibility for providing" cigarettes. (Ibid.) Further, the Supreme Court further observed that "the Legislature has determined the mere manufacture and sale of tobacco products create no tortious responsibility to individuals who voluntarily consumed them with the community's knowledge that they were unsafe." (Ibid.)