Why shouldn't the FDA interfere?

[ninjapuff]

Let me get this straight... people are now voting for what rights they'd like to have the US Government infringe on next?

This is really sad. First that people actually want this. Second that people think the FDA actually protects anybody from anything (it protects corporate monopolies, NOT people). Third that this will probably happen. Fourth that all the small ecig businesses that we're now dealing with will be put out of business because they can't afford to deal with all the new regulations, paperwork, and testing. Fifth that the new Marlboro and Camel ecigs (that replace the current businesses) will be lower quality and more expensive. Sixth that I will be paying the FDA to do this in the form of income tax. Seventh, and definitely not least, that my rights as a US Citizen will once again be trampled upon as the US Constitution is continually ignored because people think it's the government's job to protect them from cradle to grave rather than be responsible for their own actions.

How many people died some 200 odd years ago to fight for the rights that you now so eagerly give away? This is truly a shame.

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

[DisMan]

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

Allow me to elaborate on that quote...

The key to BF's quote is "essential liberty". In the end, not many suppliers have stepped up to take these actions. As you see by the poll, the actions are desired.

None of the "liberties" being requested is not really "essential" liberties. That opens a whole can of worms. Anyway, I do not see how a child proof cap or education to the user is a bad thing. Actually, I think educating the user is an essential liberty and should not be eliminated by corporate desires, directly or indirectly.

You tell people what they're putting in their bodies. That's very fair and, as you see by the poll results, is held highly valuable to the community.

[Sun Vaporer]

Let me get this straight... people are now voting for what rights they'd like to have the US Government infringe on next?

This is really sad. First that people actually want this. Second that people think the FDA actually protects anybody from anything (it protects corporate monopolies, NOT people). Third that this will probably happen. Fourth that all the small ecig businesses that we're now dealing with will be put out of business because they can't afford to deal with all the new regulations, paperwork, and testing. Fifth that the new Marlboro and Camel ecigs (that replace the current businesses) will be lower quality and more expensive. Sixth that I will be paying the FDA to do this in the form of income tax. Seventh, and definitely not least, that my rights as a US Citizen will once again be trampled upon as the US Constitution is continually ignored because people think it's the government's job to protect them from cradle to grave rather than be responsible for their own actions.

How many people died some 200 odd years ago to fight for the rights that you now so eagerly give away? This is truly a shame.

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

Ninj--You are missing the point. If it is not done volunarily--it begs a mandate--and I for one think that these are reasonable saftey standards--or are you to young to remember how Big Tobacco fooled us and killed many of us holding out on what they knew----that is my take---Sun

[ninjapuff]

Allow me to elaborate on that quote...

The key to BF's quote is "essential liberty". In the end, not many suppliers have stepped up to take these actions. As you see by the poll, the actions are desired.

None of the "liberties" being requested is not really "essential" liberties. That opens a whole can of worms.

I consider all my liberties essential. Sorry if I take offense to any of them being taken away. Benjamin Franklin would also take offense. One of the reasons for creating our limited republic was to guard against the corporatism that was rampant in Europe. Giving quality control over to the FDA also gives the FDA the power to shut down and shut out any smaller competitors to big tobacco.

If you think that big tobacco isn't in bed with the government, you're fooling yourself. Just look at the federal tobacco tax increases that will come into effect on April 1st. There's a 2173% tax increase on roll-your-own tobacco (yes, 2173%, that's not a typo). In effect, this will push a lot of people back to buying packs of cigarettes from big tobacco. Any argument that big tobacco didn't play a part in this tax would be silly.

Anyway, I do not see how a child proof cap or education to the user is a bad thing.

Actually, I think educating the user is an essential liberty and should not be eliminated by corporate desires, directly or indirectly.

You tell people what they're putting in their bodies. That's very fair and, as you see by the poll results, is held highly valuable to the community.

I agree, there's a lot of things that the suppliers could be doing, and there's demand for it. The only problem that I have with it is having the FDA mandate everything. This will only drive out small competitors, and leave a semi-monopoly for whichever corporations decide to supply ecigs (most likely big tobacco). At that point, there will be a drop in innovation because of the lack of competition, and we'll be stuck with whatever the corporations make available at whatever price they decide to charge.

[ninjapuff]

Ninj--You are missing the point. If it is not done volunarily--it begs a mandate--and I for one think that these are reasonable saftey standards--or are you to young to remember how Big Tobacco fooled us and killed many of us holding out on what they knew----that is my take---Sun

I do get the point... see my previous reply to DisMan.

I think that suppliers should be doing most of these things listed in the poll. Obviously, people want it done, and it would be outright stupid for a supplier to ignore what people want because it would give them a competitive edge.

I just don't want the FDA involved at all. That would be big bad. Maybe I'm just barking up the wrong tree here, but the poll question is, "What requirements should the FDA put on e-liquid?"

If the poll question was, "What should suppliers do to address safety concerns?" I'd have a completely different opinion of this thread.

[Sun Vaporer]

I do get the point... see my previous reply to DisMan.

I think that suppliers should be doing most of these things listed in the poll. Obviously, people want it done, and it would be outright stupid for a supplier to ignore what people want because it would give them a competitive edge.

I just don't want the FDA involved at all. That would be big bad. Maybe I'm just barking up the wrong tree here, but the poll question is, "What requirements should the FDA put on e-liquid?"

If the poll question was, "What should suppliers do to address safety concerns?" I'd have a completely different opinion of this thread.

I would agree with that title, but at this point it is indeed--"a Bridge to Far"---Sun

[DisMan]

I consider all my liberties essential. Sorry if I take offense to any of them being taken away. Benjamin Franklin would also take offense.

And what liberties are being taken away?

One of the reasons for creating our limited republic was to guard against the corporatism that was rampant in Europe.

And then we allowed corporations in the USA....we learned our lessons.

If you think that big tobacco isn't in bed with the government, you're fooling yourself. Just look at the federal tobacco tax increases that will come into effect on April 1st. There's a 2173% tax increase on roll-your-own tobacco (yes, 2173%, that's not a typo). In effect, this will push a lot of people back to buying packs of cigarettes from big tobacco. Any argument that big tobacco didn't play a part in this tax would be silly.

That's interesting. I thought they were making the tax fairer by finally taxing everybody who uses tobacco..you know, the people skirting the law by not buying regular cigarettes due to a loophole. My bad.

[Kate]

Only a few traders have voluntarily tried to protect customers from harm with product packaging and testing. Vested interests cannot be trusted to regulate themselves they need government oversight. In the US you have the FDA to protect the public.

[Nuck]

Wall Street is a perfect example of what happens when government regulations are relaxed and corporations are allowed to self-regulate. We all know how well that worked out.

[DisMan]

Wall Street is a perfect example of what happens when government regulations are relaxed and corporations are allowed to self-regulate. We all know how well that worked out.

That's really all I have to say there. Mr. hammer, here's the nail. You just hit it on the head.