Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!

beckdg

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Oct 1, 2013
11,018
35,705
TN
Totally agree but a non-vaper could argue that vaping isn't safe because the devices can and do blow up in your pocket. If we say the batteries are the same ones used in hybrid/electric cars, one could argue that it is a very rare occurance to hear about a Tesla or Volt spontaneously combusting due to a battery issue.

It's a tough one. 18650 batteries the way we use them ARE very dangerous. Fortunately 99.99% of vapers are smart enough not to hurt themselves. It's the .001% that are dummies and make the news.
Tesla Fires Raise Doubts About Seemingly Untouchable Company

:blink:

Percentage wise...
VS vaping...

Hell, there was a whole lot full of Fisker Karma electric vehicles burnt up after Hurricane Sandy. ;)

https://www.google.com/amp/www.chro...llion-in-electric-cars-burn-after-4000001.php

Tapatyped
 

beckdg

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Oct 1, 2013
11,018
35,705
TN
Not sure what you mean.

The batteries we use ARE intended for cars.... and power tools and many other devices. Vaping didn't cross their mind when LG, Sony and Samsung came up with 18650's as a standard.

Also, many of the thermal runaway or venting batteries I have heard about have been due to spare batteries not covered in pockets with change/keys.

Here's an example of an application that 18650's are generally made for.... Tesla battery pack. Very likely LG HG2's in a protected configuration....

6c8de6242b1751aef23ba94b59a15ea5_zpsjze6rang.jpg
Makes me wonder why there's been so many failures in the cars.

Joe schmoe can't screw them up.

What's the excuse for having a higher failure rate than any average idiot direct connecting them to a metal tube without prior knowledge?!?!

Tapatyped
 

Eskie

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 6, 2016
16,087
77,743
NY
Just got back from a vacation and United heavily restricts the use of Galaxy Note7 on flights.

Must not be turned on or plugged in at any time.
Must be visible at all times.

If you have one, notify the flight attendant.

Given they were all recalled, why would anyone still have one?
 
  • Like
Reactions: beckdg

Bronze

ECF Guru
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 19, 2012
40,240
187,240
I Don't know much about Tom Price.

Here is one of those "5 Mile Views" of some of what he has Done.

Tom Price on the Issues
From your link....
  • Voted NO on regulating tobacco as a drug. (Apr 2009)
Just want to caution people about these lists these organizations put out showing what various congressmen voted for or against. Let me give you a hypothetical example. One party will propose legislation that, say, allows animals to have equal rights as humans (don't laugh, it's been proposed). It's off the wall legislation they know has no way of passing so they attach another proposal to the bill that copies legislation currently in law...say a law that protects children from predators. They even name the bill the "Child Predation Protection Act". The purpose is to make it hard for a politician to vote against legislation called the, "Child Predation Protection Act". So if the person votes for their silly animal rights legislation the proposing party wins. If they vote against it the proposing party can smear their opponent as being, "Anti-Children". So be careful when reading lists of how various politicians vote.
 

motordude

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 1, 2015
1,386
6,264
58
VA, USA
From your link....
  • Voted NO on regulating tobacco as a drug. (Apr 2009)
Just want to caution people about these lists these organizations put out showing what various congressmen voted for or against. Let me give you a hypothetical example. One party will propose legislation that, say, allows animals to have equal rights as humans (don't laugh, it's been proposed). It's off the wall legislation they know has no way of passing so they attach another proposal to the bill that copies legislation currently in law...say a law that protects children from predators. They even name the bill the "Child Predation Protection Act". The purpose is to make it hard for a politician to vote against legislation called the, "Child Predation Protection Act". So if the person votes for their silly animal rights legislation the proposing party wins. If they vote against it the proposing party can smear their opponent as being, "Anti-Children". So be careful when reading lists of how various politicians vote.
True!!!
Plus you don't know what asinine attachment it has without reading the entire bill.
 

Mazinny

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jul 25, 2013
4,263
22,713
NY
Last edited:

zoiDman

My -0^10 = Nothing at All*
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 16, 2010
41,315
1
83,837
So-Cal
From your link....
  • Voted NO on regulating tobacco as a drug. (Apr 2009)
Just want to caution people about these lists these organizations put out showing what various congressmen voted for or against. Let me give you a hypothetical example. One party will propose legislation that, say, allows animals to have equal rights as humans (don't laugh, it's been proposed). It's off the wall legislation they know has no way of passing so they attach another proposal to the bill that copies legislation currently in law...say a law that protects children from predators. They even name the bill the "Child Predation Protection Act". The purpose is to make it hard for a politician to vote against legislation called the, "Child Predation Protection Act". So if the person votes for their silly animal rights legislation the proposing party wins. If they vote against it the proposing party can smear their opponent as being, "Anti-Children". So be careful when reading lists of how various politicians vote.

Yeah... Hence the "5 Mile View" disclaimer.

Because as you Mentioned, the Lay Title of a Bill might not reflect the Totality or Fiscal Impact of such a piece of Legislation.

Or the Riders and Pork that can be stuffed into a Bill that has a Good Chance of Passage.
 

zoiDman

My -0^10 = Nothing at All*
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 16, 2010
41,315
1
83,837
So-Cal

Mazinny

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jul 25, 2013
4,263
22,713
NY

Bronze

ECF Guru
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 19, 2012
40,240
187,240
Yeah... Hence the "5 Mile View" disclaimer.

Because as you Mentioned, the Lay Title of a Bill might not reflect the Totality or Fiscal Impact of such a piece of Legislation.

Or the Riders and Pork that can be stuffed into a Bill that has a Good Chance of Passage.
True dat!
 
  • Like
Reactions: beckdg

Fozzy71

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Jul 7, 2016
3,370
11,735
52
8 Mile + 2.5
Johnson Asks Obama Administration to Cease Implementing Regulations that Will Likely be Repealed

In a letter to Califf, Johnson wrote, “In light of the significant economic costs on the e-cigarette industry and the substantial likelihood that the incoming administration and the 115th Congress will unwind this burdensome regulation, I call on the FDA to cease its implementation of the current regulation over e-cigarettes. I hope the FDA will acknowledge the reality of the situation and ensure that small businesses and consumers do not continue to incur avoidable financial costs due to this regulation.”
 

beckdg

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Oct 1, 2013
11,018
35,705
TN
From your link....
  • Voted NO on regulating tobacco as a drug. (Apr 2009)
Just want to caution people about these lists these organizations put out showing what various congressmen voted for or against. Let me give you a hypothetical example. One party will propose legislation that, say, allows animals to have equal rights as humans (don't laugh, it's been proposed). It's off the wall legislation they know has no way of passing so they attach another proposal to the bill that copies legislation currently in law...say a law that protects children from predators. They even name the bill the "Child Predation Protection Act". The purpose is to make it hard for a politician to vote against legislation called the, "Child Predation Protection Act". So if the person votes for their silly animal rights legislation the proposing party wins. If they vote against it the proposing party can smear their opponent as being, "Anti-Children". So be careful when reading lists of how various politicians vote.
Same thing as attaching riders, omnibus and minibus onto appropriations bills.

So many damn laws attached to a spending bill anyone in their right mind would refuse to sign it.

Then one party points to the other (whole or as individuals) and says THAT'S why your xxxxxxx (fill in the blank) didn't get funded. Blank senator (s) voted against filling in the potholes in your community...

:facepalm:

Tapatyped
 

mattiem

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Verified Member

Users who are viewing this thread