Utah residents should call their rep and ask that a separate bill be introduced that would solely ban hookah.
Interesting bit from the bill:
(4) "Smoking" means: <snipped for brevity>
(d) using an oral smoking device intended to circumvent the prohibition of smoking in this chapter.
(Emphasis mine)
Many people I have spoken with re: e-cigs feel this is the reason myself and others started using one. Not true in my case, but with various companies using that as a selling point, I can see why others might feel that way.
Honestly though, it's silly to think we wouldn't eventually get to this point. If it looks like smoking, it must be smoking. I've never smoked in a public building and have never felt the need to vape in one either.
This would be a devastating action for all Utah vapers.This is a bill to add hookah AND e-cigarettes to the state's definition of smoking.
That is so full of crap it's hard to fathom.Interesting bit from the bill:
(4) "Smoking" means: <snipped for brevity>
(d) using an oral smoking device intended to circumvent the prohibition of smoking in this chapter.
Many people I have spoken with re: e-cigs feel this is the reason myself and others started using one. Not true in my case, but with various companies using that as a selling point, I can see why others might feel that way.
This would be a devastating action for all Utah vapers.
That is so full of crap it's hard to fathom.
It sounds like something the ANTZ came up with.
[snip]
Makes me want to puke.
O. “Smoking” means inhaling, exhaling, burning, or carrying any lighted or heated cigar, cigarette, or pipe, or any other lighted or heated tobacco or plant product intended for inhalation, in any manner or in any form. “Smoking” also includes the use of an ecigarette which creates a vapor, in any manner or in any form, or the use of any oral smoking device for the purpose of circumventing the prohibition of smoking in this Article.
Just to set the record straight since there has been a lot of democrat bashing on this forum, the folks that introduced this bill are not democrats, they are republicans. So stop with the party dividing mumbo-jumbo and stick to the issues. E-Cigs.
There is absolutely no reason someone shouldn't be able to vape in a bar that allows it or use a hookah in a hookah bar.
Just to set the record straight since there has been a lot of democrat bashing on this forum, the folks that introduced this bill are not democrats, they are republicans. So stop with the party dividing mumbo-jumbo and stick to the issues. E-Cigs.
Just to set the record straight since there has been a lot of democrat bashing on this forum, the folks that introduced this bill are not democrats, they are republicans. So stop with the party dividing mumbo-jumbo and stick to the issues. E-Cigs.
Just to set the record even more straight, can you point out where, in this thread, Democrats (collectively or individually) were 'bashed'?
Getting back to the actual topic, both the amendment's author and sponsor have their email addresses on their sites, so I do intend to write them.
Since the proposed legislation only includes "lighted or heated", I'm guessing that this would not include the FDA-approved nicotine inhalers...but why not? What is the actual aim, here? If the intent is to protect the air within a specified space, as implied by "INDOOR CLEAN AIR ACT", then shouldn't this include those inhalers since the propellant, the carrier, and the residual nicotine would be expelled through exhale? The difference being that eCigs can 'look' like smoking, while an inhaler does not?
Classifying ecigs as tobacco products serves to make ecigs fall into the same vein as cigarettes when it comes to legislation.