Question for those who think we should not vape where we can not smoke...
- Thread starter DC2
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Yes I did not address the civil disobedience comment; I highlighted what I was responding too.
Concerning the civil disobedience part, I consider that... unimportant? It is either supposition or alleged or merely claimed as excuse?
It can't be that you presume to know what they are thinking; can it?
By the way, for those reading this that think such a thing could never happen...
Seattle Housing Authority Proposes Banning E-Cigarettes in Low Income Public Housing
Council member wants e-cigarettes banned from public housing, restaurants
Housing smoking ban allows e-cigarettes, but untested devices are next in cross hairs
That was all I meant, I did not say anything should be Illegal. I think people tend to self govern more effectively when the government stays out of it. 100 years ago it was legal to smoke anywhere. Most people asked if a person minded and did not do it if they did. I understand why certain places were made non smoking. Such as offices and airplanes etc. It has gone too far, but that is a completely different topic for the chat thread. I think the attitude of "FU, I'm going to vape anywhere there isn't a law against it and you won't stop me." is about as harmful as anything we can do for vaping. The same with the juvenile name calling that I am seeing in this very thread, I think it is not helpful in any way.
Which of the three links are you referring to?
And this, I suppose gives me the opportunity to reiterate my point.
The smoking laws are getting more and more draconian, and vaping is increasingly becoming the next target.
To acquiesce to this garbage is to ask for what you're going to get.
The idea of not being able to vape where you are not allowed to smoke will get us nowhere fast.
And when I say nowhere I mean that is where we will be able to vape.
thank you very much indeed
And if any of those little-mouse vapers even care what we are up against in Europe (which they will not, even though they will be affected next, but what do they care?) they can take a look at the thread / sub-forum that you mentioned.
But.. it does not affect them. Not yet. So they do not care. Until the FDA acts. And then most of them will just go back to smoking tobacco anyway.
No use talking to such people. All they care about is themselves. As long as Big Nanny does not prohibit what they do. Then they just say "Yes, Big Nanny, very well, Big Nanny" and do whatever Big Nanny tells them to do.
Oh yes, and they will probably blame all actions by Big Nanny on some mythical people who actually dared to vape in public. Instead of the very real interests of Big Money.
Ah well... even talking to them is a waste of time.
As they have been more thoroughly indoctrinated than any dyed-in-the-wool communist in the USSR ever was.
Last edited:
in my opinion, i think the issue has two aspects:
1) i think one should not be allowed to vape in places where smoking is banned
2) smoking is not allowed in many places where it should be allowed: public parks, beach, your own apartment (some counties), city streets (some cities), and many other moronic prohibited places. the anti smoking gang is rather fanatical. bars and pubs and similar should be up to the owner!
car exhaust and coal kills more people than smoking i believe. definitely more than vaping
1) i think one should not be allowed to vape in places where smoking is banned
2) smoking is not allowed in many places where it should be allowed: public parks, beach, your own apartment (some counties), city streets (some cities), and many other moronic prohibited places. the anti smoking gang is rather fanatical. bars and pubs and similar should be up to the owner!
car exhaust and coal kills more people than smoking i believe. definitely more than vaping
There is nothing misleading about it, given that it was in fact proposed.
It would be useful for people to read that entire thread though.
It is highly likely that the proposal was defeated due to the actions of those of us who fought against it.
I know I personally called the Seattle Housing Authority myself, and spoke with them about it.
I'm not saying we all need to fight, but at least let's not just roll over and play dead.
I did that as a smoker, but I won't do it as a vaper.
I've been looking for where you dug up that quote and so far haven't found it; so far I've only found wording that conflicts with your quote.
It was actually the 3rd link, from Cambridge Day; a very pro vaping article IMO.
thank you very much indeed
And if any of those little-mouse vapers even care what we are up against in Europe (which they will not, even though they will be affected next, but what do they care?) they can take a look at the thread / sub-forum that you mentioned.
But.. it does not affect them. Not yet. So they do not care. Until the FDA acts. And then most of them will just go back to smoking tobacco anyway.
No use talking to such people. All they care about is themselves. As long as Big Nanny does not prohibit what they do. Then they just say "Yes, Big Nanny, very well, Big Nanny" and do whatever Big Nanny tells them to do.
Oh yes, and they will probably blame all actions by Big Nanny on some mythical people who actually dared to vape in public. Instead of the very real interests of Big Money.
Ah well... even talking to them is a waste of time.
As they have been more thoroughly indoctrinated than any dyed-in-the-wool communist in the USSR ever was.
Geesh that's getting annoying. I think you might be alienating some of the very people that you're trying to reach with your delivery.
I've signed the petitions for the EU, plastered messages on facebook pages for the EU company who stands to benefit from the ban, and have reached out to my admittedly-limited local contacts to see what I can do to try and educate anyone who has some modicum of power AND who will listen to intelligent discourse.
With that said, I do not understand why every post you make lately seems to belittle a bunch of faceless forum members? Are you trying to shame people into feeling sympathy for you and everyone in the EU? You have to realize that there is a continuum of passion in this scene. On one end, your so-called "mouse vapers" and apparently ends with militant alarmists who are just trying to shout over everyone. I am not saying you fall into the latter category but your tactics are, in my opinion, ineffective and accusatory. I feel for you all over there and I hope you get a Chicagoan about-face from the jackasses trying to make your rules and laws. But calling out people on a forum dedicated to supporting the vaper as a global whole, just seems to defeat the purpose. Hopefully you have ignited support with your posts, they certainly are polarizing - and that's not a bad thing necessarily.
As to the point of the thread? Banning vaping outdoors is excessive. I support a business owner's right to decide for themselves and their property - unfortunately extended to government-owned property and businesses - but if it's public domain and there is not incontrovertible proof that aerosolized PG/VG/Nic/flavoring is harmful to bystanders, leave me be and go away, else show me the proof. And if anyone tries to dictate what I can do in the home I own? Well I also fully recognize, support, and participate in the 2nd amendment. Just sayin'
Todd
Ok the point is the entire paragraph not one section cherry picked. If you read enough of these sorts of thread you will eventually run into one of the many that post and say if they tell me no I will do it anyways and they will never know, then justify it by calling it civil disobedience. I was making the point in that paragraph that I do not understand that stance since it is NOT civil disobedience it is simply I am gonna do what I want and you can't catch me.
You are making a ton out of a line that is meant as part of the entire thing not a separate thing.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
