"fines for consumers having more than 100ml of e-liquid in their possession"

Status
Not open for further replies.

awsum140

Resting In Peace
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 12, 2012
9,855
46,386
Sitting down, facing forward.
I guess I better get ready for some really serious jail time if NJ gets as stupid as NY, which isn't much of a stretch at all. Keep in mind "possession" means, generally in legal terms, having control of. Example, you and a friend are in a car and each of you have a 60ml bottle, you're both in trouble. Or, you have your accumulated bottles of liquids that you vape, or have "retired", sitting on a shelf or in the refrigerator in your house, bingo, you're busted.

One thing that is infinite, for certain, is the absolute stupidity of "well meaning" politicians. After all, it's for the children or, better yet, for our own good 'cause we're too stupid to know any better.

Off my soap box now.
 

zoiDman

My -0^10 = Nothing at All*
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 16, 2010
41,314
1
83,835
So-Cal
This is possibly the strangest proposal that I have ever heard. If you buy 2 60ml bottles of liquid, you would be breaking the law? Why do we need this? Do you have nothing better to do?

Welcome to NY where Dreams get Vaporized | Vaping Post

That Isn't exactly true.

It starts on Page 55...

New York State Assembly | Bill Search and Legislative Information

And it is Basically saying that if a person is in Possession of more than 100ml/500ml Without Tax Receipts that they are in Possible Violation.

NOTE: Don't get me Wrong. Not trying in ANY WAY to defend this NY Draconian Madness. Only clarifying what the Article should have made clear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rossum
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread