Round 1 lost in Los Angeles

[Roger_Lafayette]

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2014/02/24/
city-council-panel-eyes-tougher-limits-on-e-cigarette-use-in-public/

[Link broken due to junk. You can paste the whole thing into your browser - extra line doesn't hurt.]

LOS ANGELES (CBSLA.com) — A Los Angeles City Council committee approved a proposal Monday to sharply restrict the use of electronic cigarettes — known as “e-cigarettes” — in public areas.

The Arts, Parks, Health, Aging and River Committee recommended the ordinance, which bans e-cigarette use at farmers markets, parks, recreational areas, beaches, bars, nightclubs, and outdoor dining areas.

The committee also approved an amendment by Councilman Mitch O’Farrell that would exempt vaping lounges and film production sets from the ban.

The regulation now goes to a vote by the city council.

We didn't get one lousy vote - decision was unanimous.

 

[Sundodger]

WOW! vaping lounges are exempt. OK, I'm sure we see that as a little victory, but, thinking about it, why? Because those very lounges bring in TAX money! Oh, and the film production sets are exempt. Why? Hollyweird Big Bucks talk, the average man.....goes back to smoking.

What a crock.

 

[SamNapolitanke]

It's LA... if something can be banned, it will be banned first in LA.

 

[eeevilyn.]

I'm not from or even near there but that's very disappointing to hear. There is no reason for that decision.

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

It gets worse ...

http://clkrep.lacity.org/
onlinedocs/2013/13-1204-s2_rpt_cla_2-21-14.pdf

[Link broken due to junk - including FDA '09. You can paste the whole thing into your browser - extra line doesn't hurt.]

City Atty's Ofc. recommends "Impose taxes ... to make retail prices comparable to those of cigarettes." (This wasn't voted on today.)

***

Even more crazy ... from the LA Times: http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2014/02/24/
city-council-panel-eyes-tougher-limits-on-e-cigarette-use-in-public/

"Even if it were determined later on that the emissions from e-cigarettes aren't dangerous to a bystander in an outside environment, the existence of devices like this … in public places does threaten to renormalize the behavior of smoking," [City Atty. Mike Feuer] said."

(Ah ha. So that's why one shouldn't be allowed to vape in a public park. The vaper would be setting a bad example for others. This is precisely the sort of harm from which innocent folks need to be protected.)

 

[Coelli]

I'll be calling Fuentes's office tomorrow. This is utterly ridiculous. I don't expect to get far with him anyway, he's so deep in pocket with just about everybody it's not funny.

 

[DrMA]

I'm actually glad these guys are threatened by the very existence of "these devices". It tells me that, deep down inside, the ANTZ know ecigs are the axe falling on their necks and there's nothing they can do to stop it.

Vape on my fellow vapers, the very sight of you strikes fear in the eyes of the ANTZ. Delight in the look of terror on their faces and revel in the thought that it will keep them awake at night.

 

[AegisPrime]

I'm actually glad these guys are threatened by the very existence of "these devices". It tells me that, deep down inside, the ANTZ know ecigs are the axe falling on their necks and there's nothing they can do to stop it.

I wish that were true. Relegating vapers to vaping only where smoking is permitted and taxing e-cigs at a comparable rate to cigarettes will make smoking a more compelling option for those that can't afford the taxes. E-cigs (liquid/cartos etc.) are cheaper now but if this kind of legislation goes through they'll be more expensive than smoking.

The taxation issue must be fought tooth and nail to prevent vaping being a luxury of the elite and the Hollywood glitterati. People will die otherwise.

 

[Sundodger]

I wish that were true. Relegating vapers to vaping only where smoking is permitted and taxing e-cigs at a comparable rate to cigarettes will make smoking a more compelling option for those that can't afford the taxes. E-cigs (liquid/cartos etc.) are cheaper now but if this kind of legislation goes through they'll be more expensive than smoking.

The taxation issue must be fought tooth and nail to prevent vaping being a luxury of the elite and the Hollywood glitterati. People will die otherwise.

I have to agree. While most will try and stay vaping because of the health benefits, a lot will fall off if the cost is equal to cigs. Maintenance of PV's while not hard is time consuming. Cigs, you buy them and a lighter or matches, open the pack, light, smoke, put out and wash the ash tray now and then.
If health were indeed the great concern, the ANTZ would see ecigs as away from burning cigs, allow the process several years to show good or bad and THEN make decisions on the safety. Considering what is already known even this shouldn't really come into play but at least they could try. But then again it's not about us ex-smokers, it's about them and their money they get from us when we smoke.