I need your help!!!

[Smo]

Many on this forum are working on just that. They are calling it a personal vaporizer, or PV for short. We had a long thread and poll, etc. to come up with that, so please please pretty please don't make us go down that road again.

And we came up with no change, keep on calling 'em e-cigs.

Personal Vaporizer 67 32.37%
Electronic Vaporizer 28 13.53%
E-Cigarette (no change) 71 34.30%
E-Vaping 13 6.28%
Vaping 47 22.71%
E-Smoking (no change) 16 7.73%
Other (please specify) 19 9.18%

Still, some of us thought they knew better, and from that moment on "we" decided to call 'em PVs. Sorry for being a smartass, but i just had to point this out for anyone that would like to respect the decision that was once made.

Back on topic... I do think that the most important points should be the ones regarding community safety and general improvement of your city (less butts in the park, less fire hazard, less second hand smoke, etcetera) and the fact that it cannot be used for illicit drug use. Even ... oil wouldn't work since the atomizer doesn't get hot enough to vaporize that particular molecule.
Not much more to say, i think that you have plenty of good advices in this thread =)

[Spikey]

No time to read whole thread... don't know if this was mentioned already... prob a good idea to mention NOT FOR USE by MINORS! I know that is kind of a negative... but if they are enforcing.. it is good to keep nicotine away from young ones who might abuse it and OD.

[sherid]

Euphemisms rarely work. Call it what it is. It hides the purpose of the electronic cigarette from no one who matters. Calling it new, euphemistic names only makes it less likely that current smokers will find and use the product.

[jamie]

prob a good idea to mention NOT FOR USE by MINORS! I know that is kind of a negative... but if they are enforcing.. it is good to keep nicotine away from young ones who might abuse it and OD.

I strongly disagree. It is not up to us to suggest that police enforce non-existent laws or imply there is a law where there is not. Further, I would disagree with any suggestion that we should be asking for such laws or encouraging the police to harass anyone or confiscate product from anyone.

If there is such a law already that clearly covers ecigs, then OP can speak to that specifically of course.

[Spikey]

I strongly disagree. It is not up to us to suggest that police enforce non-existent laws or imply there is a law where there is not. Further, I would disagree with any suggestion that we should be asking for such laws or encouraging the police to harass anyone or confiscate product from anyone.

If there is such a law already that clearly covers ecigs, then OP can speak to that specifically of course.

It only takes ONE child to overdose and end up in the hospital.. and these will be banned faster than we can blink.