Virginia Smoking Ban includes E-cigs per Dept of Health

**Vocalek** · 10-12-2009, 06:28 PM

Originally Posted by LaceyUnderall

Well... it has been approved so it is final for now.

However, that said, I would certainly follow up with what they mean by "New information indicates the "vapor" is not as clean as they claim."

It needs to be asked exactly what new information they have. From there, the next step could be determined on how to handle this. If an answer is received, we could then provide them with the relevant information as there are no vapor tests that currently prove the "vapor" is not as clean as they claim. My guess, is they are confusing the "vapor" with the liquid which are not one in the same.

Also...

"Until we get good third party verification of the "vapor's" safety"

What do they consider third party verification? Who would they prefer to do such testing? Do they have any labs for which they would accept any findings and if so, who can participate in the funding of such testing?

All very simple questions for which they should have answers and those answers will be very telling. (or lack of answers as well)

For what it's worth, I asked MYTHBUSTERS to compare the air quality of tobacco cigarette smoke to vapor (equal # of puffs).

**Mac** · 10-12-2009, 07:08 PM

Well I can tell you that I do not believe this will hold up in court. But I will know for certain in short order. since if this is true I expect our kiosk will receive a cease and desist order from the health department very soon. If it is a drug delivery device as he fda claims then it is not a tobacco product. You can't just change the law every five minutes to help you persecute the people you don't like. So as soon as we are either shut down or not I will let you guys know what the true status in VA is as opposed to what some Douche at the health department needs to email people in order to feel empowered. Good thing they just extended unemployment eh?

**SheerLuckHolmes** · 10-12-2009, 08:00 PM

Originally Posted by Vocalek

For what it's worth, I asked MYTHBUSTERS to compare the air quality of tobacco cigarette smoke to vapor (equal # of puffs).

This is a GREAT idea. I will post this as its own thread so more might do this.

I think Jamie has never smoked and is very much against it. Adam used to smoke, but has guit a long time ago. So don't know how it will be treated. Hope they do it though.

**Rob Smallenberg** · 10-12-2009, 08:57 PM

The Virginia Code defines "cigarette" in about three different places and these definitions are identical. Interestingly enough, the statutory scheme banning smoking in many indoor places does not define "cigarette" even though § 58.1-1000 which is the definition section of the smoking ban defines "smoke" or "smoking" as "the carrying or holding of any lighted pipe, cigar, or cigarette of any kind, or any other lighted smoking equipment, or the lighting, inhaling, or exhaling of smoke from a pipe, cigar, or cigarette of any kind."

One of those three identical definitions of smoking is § 58.1-1031 which states "'Cigarette' means any product that contains nicotine, is intended to be burned or heated under ordinary conditions of use, and consists of or contains (i) any roll of tobacco wrapped in paper or in any substance not containing tobacco; (ii) tobacco, in any form, that is functional in the product, which, because of its appearance, the type of tobacco used in the filler, or its packaging and labeling, is likely to be offered to, or purchased by, consumers as a cigarette; or (iii) any roll of tobacco wrapped in any substance containing tobacco which, because of its appearance, the type of tobacco used in the filler, or its packaging and labeling, is likely to be offered to, or purchased by, consumers as a cigarette described in clause (i) of this definition. The term "cigarette" includes "roll-your-own" tobacco, which means any tobacco which, because of its appearance, type, packaging, or labeling is suitable for use and likely to be offered to, or purchased by, consumers as tobacco for making cigarettes. For purposes of this definition of 'cigarette,' 0.09 ounces of "roll-your-own" tobacco shall constitute one individual 'cigarette.'"

There is no way this definition is broad enough to include electronic cigarettes.

Robert H. Smallenberg
In-House Counsel
Teamhealthechoice

**Menville** · 10-12-2009, 10:28 PM

Just in case Texas goes this way , I have been perfecting my stealth vaping. I just got back from Starbucks and inside and there was zero vaper emitted, so as far as anyone could tell I was sucking on my pen, I also used my PV with the black LED. here in Arlington you are not allowed to smoke with in 50 ft of the establishment door, I felt like an undercover agent.

**rothenbj** · 10-12-2009, 10:29 PM

Originally Posted by Rob Smallenberg

The Virginia Code defines "cigarette" in about three different places and these definitions are identical. Interestingly enough, the statutory scheme banning smoking in many indoor places does not define "cigarette" even though § 58.1-1000 which is the definition section of the smoking ban defines "smoke" or "smoking" as "the carrying or holding of any lighted pipe, cigar, or cigarette of any kind, or any other lighted smoking equipment, or the lighting, inhaling, or exhaling of smoke from a pipe, cigar, or cigarette of any kind."

One of those three identical definitions of smoking is § 58.1-1031 which states "'Cigarette' means any product that contains nicotine, is intended to be burned or heated under ordinary conditions of use, and consists of or contains (i) any roll of tobacco wrapped in paper or in any substance not containing tobacco; (ii) tobacco, in any form, that is functional in the product, which, because of its appearance, the type of tobacco used in the filler, or its packaging and labeling, is likely to be offered to, or purchased by, consumers as a cigarette; or (iii) any roll of tobacco wrapped in any substance containing tobacco which, because of its appearance, the type of tobacco used in the filler, or its packaging and labeling, is likely to be offered to, or purchased by, consumers as a cigarette described in clause (i) of this definition. The term "cigarette" includes "roll-your-own" tobacco, which means any tobacco which, because of its appearance, type, packaging, or labeling is suitable for use and likely to be offered to, or purchased by, consumers as tobacco for making cigarettes. For purposes of this definition of 'cigarette,' 0.09 ounces of "roll-your-own" tobacco shall constitute one individual 'cigarette.'"

There is no way this definition is broad enough to include electronic cigarettes.

Robert H. Smallenberg
In-House Counsel
Teamhealthechoice

I'd have to agree that there certainly isn't enough definition to include e cigs. They got it close if they would have stuck with "Cigarette' means any product that contains nicotine, is intended to be burned or heated under ordinary conditions of use." Once they added the "and", it pretty much eliminates the E-cig.

However, that being said, now I can still vape as long as I'm using 0 Nicotine E liquid. When I need that nicotine hit, just change carts and out the door if they insist.

You know, I live in PA but bought a home in SW Virginia last year figuring this is one area of the country that would be last to go smoke free. Now it's there too. Fortunately, the PA ban has so many holes that a lot of places I frequent still have smoking. Plus those that don't have no problem with vaping so far.

**KitKit** · 10-13-2009, 11:16 AM

Thanks Rob lets hope the rest of the state understands this!

**Oogie** · 10-13-2009, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by Rob Smallenberg

The Virginia Code defines "cigarette" in about three different places and these definitions are identical. Interestingly enough, the statutory scheme banning smoking in many indoor places does not define "cigarette" even though § 58.1-1000 which is the definition section of the smoking ban defines "smoke" or "smoking" as "the carrying or holding of any lighted pipe, cigar, or cigarette of any kind, or any other lighted smoking equipment, or the lighting, inhaling, or exhaling of smoke from a pipe, cigar, or cigarette of any kind."

One of those three identical definitions of smoking is § 58.1-1031 which states "'Cigarette' means any product that contains nicotine, is intended to be burned or heated under ordinary conditions of use, and consists of or contains (i) any roll of tobacco wrapped in paper or in any substance not containing tobacco; (ii) tobacco, in any form, that is functional in the product, which, because of its appearance, the type of tobacco used in the filler, or its packaging and labeling, is likely to be offered to, or purchased by, consumers as a cigarette; or (iii) any roll of tobacco wrapped in any substance containing tobacco which, because of its appearance, the type of tobacco used in the filler, or its packaging and labeling, is likely to be offered to, or purchased by, consumers as a cigarette described in clause (i) of this definition. The term "cigarette" includes "roll-your-own" tobacco, which means any tobacco which, because of its appearance, type, packaging, or labeling is suitable for use and likely to be offered to, or purchased by, consumers as tobacco for making cigarettes. For purposes of this definition of 'cigarette,' 0.09 ounces of "roll-your-own" tobacco shall constitute one individual 'cigarette.'"

There is no way this definition is broad enough to include electronic cigarettes.

Robert H. Smallenberg
In-House Counsel
Teamhealthechoice

Sir, If you'll pardon my saying so I've rather a question or two. How does the law define lighted? Shouldn't they say ignited if that is what they really mean? Also the law on the pure definition of a cigarette is clear enough that if this ban were to include electronic cigs, personal vaporizer or nicotine inhalers- it would have to be visted and legislated on, correct? But at this time there is nothing "on the books" about this matter directly unless of course I'm utterly wrong. To me this is too ambiguious to really be enforceable.

I know it may seem like splitting frog hairs but it may be the saving grace. Also the specific ban does not mention vapor, it mentions smoke. The definition of a cigarette does not specifically include these devices as mentioned before. Would this be correct?

I may only be one state over, but I visit Virginia a lot when shopping so this kind of affects me too. Sorry if this seems scattered, I've had a lot of interruptions and not enough coffee trying to write this.

**Scottbee** · 10-13-2009, 02:03 PM

A Virginia resident might want to politely and diplomatically suggest to the Dept. of Health that they have their position run past the State Attorney General. Certainly the applicability of the ban to PV's will be tested early, and it is in their best interest to ensure their legal position to avoid or prepare for litigation. I say this because I believe the AG will not support their position based on the wording of the ban.

I have had great luck using this tactic in my home state.