An Open Letter to the Powers That Be

[Cool_Breeze]

Much of what public administrators, public health officals and legislative personel are questioning regarding ecigarettes and vaping is about 'what we don't know,'...long term effects and such.

In the legal system of the United States, an accused is 'presumed innocent until proven guilty.'

I ask for the same consideration for ecigarettes and vaping.

 

[crxess]

In the legal system of the United States, an accused is 'presumed innocent until proven guilty.'

No, this is just something written on a piece if paper and often completely ignored by the Media and most of the legal system.

The more popular something or someone is the more sensationalism involved before final judgement.

 

[zoiDman]

Much of what public administrators, public health officals and legislative personel are questioning regarding ecigarettes and vaping is about 'what we don't know,'...long term effects and such.

In the legal system of the United States, an accused is 'presumed innocent until proven guilty.'

I ask for the same consideration for ecigarettes and vaping.

Not going to play the Devil's Advocate here.

But when it comes to "Safety" and "Health", policy makers Historically have taken the approach that something is Potentially Harmful Until Proven that it Isn't.

Not making a Comment as to Right vs. Wrong. Just an Observation as to What it Is.

BTW - Are there Other Factors that Influence a Policy Maker on something like this Besides Health and Safety?

Like perhaps a Multi-Billion Dollar Industry that can be Taxed Easily?

 

[bikerbeagle]

The right to a presumption of innocence is only afforded in criminal law and doesn't apply to government regulation, and ...more importantly for our situation ...taxation.

 

[Cool_Breeze]

I suppose if we all are going to roll over and not ask for consideration, we shouldn't expect it.

 

[zoiDman]

I suppose if we all are going to roll over and not ask for consideration, we shouldn't expect it.

I don't see it much that way.

I think the e-Cigarette Industry was Very Slow in Countering the Junk Science Studies that came out Early on. I also think that OEM's were/are Poorly Organized.

Many Retailers took the Attitude Early that e-Cigarettes/e-Liquids being Regulated and Taxed was Inevitable. So Screw Tomorrow. Make Profits Today as Fast as they Can.

 

[crxess]

I suppose if we all are going to roll over and not ask for consideration, we shouldn't expect it.

I do not see where realizing Government is Biased and Greedy is in any way a concession or Rolling over.

For me it IS a realization life is not all Rose Gardens and if we expect anything we must be prepared to stand against opposition.

Now, Post your request in a petition to officials and I will gladly jump in line to sign.

 

[Ohms Lawbreaker]

Laws don't bother me, I never paid them much mind. Just so happens that most of what I do falls within them. Though I can just see a state like mine legalizing ........ and outlawing e-cigs. California is stupid-liberal that way. We practically outlawed plastic shopping bags and what was the only result? A flood of dog poop because the bags aren't available anymore. Gotta love it here.

Edit: Oh come on now! I was just censured for merely mentioning a certain substance is that medicinally legal in my state! I was just trying to make a point, not advocate one way or another. Dissapointing, ECF. This is a thread about legislation and politics, and nothing I said should have been edited.

 

[zoiDman]

Laws don't bother me, I never paid them much mind. ...

This is Something you might want to Look Into...

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-shipment-e-cigarettes-anyone-california.html

Because if it Does become Law, the way you Buy PV's, e-Liquids, Cartos, Clearos, Tanks, RBA's and just about anything that "makes vapor" is going to Change Dramatically.

 

[RoseB]

I don't see it much that way.

I think the e-Cigarette Industry was Very Slow in Countering the Junk Science Studies that came out Early on. I also think that OEM's were/are Poorly Organized.

Many Retailers took the Attitude Early that e-Cigarettes/e-Liquids being Regulated and Taxed was Inevitable. So Screw Tomorrow. Make Profits Today as Fast as they Can.

You make good points. Taxes an profit. That's what brought on so many problems. Hopefully as more people pick up e cigarettes, and prefer them to actual cigarettes: the out look will get better. We've got some awesome advocates in the vaping corner. All is not lost. Sending e mails, making phone calls, and posting on social media is much less time consuming, compared to ordering and hoarding vaping supplies. While I don't blame people for hoarding, making a little effort really isn't that big of a deal. I am more than happy to continue using an e cigarette. Adults who'd rather roll the dice and see what happens should be left the H alone. How often is there such a large competent group of willing adult test subjects? Honestly, you'd think the health officials would be happy. Corporations can keep pulling profits, and so far there really are no serious adverse affects. Unlike cigarettes which we know bring on a host of health problems Meh...

 

[zoiDman]

...

Edit: Oh come on now! I was just censured for merely mentioning a certain substance is that medicinally legal in my state! I was just trying to make a point, not advocate one way or another. Dissapointing, ECF. This is a thread about legislation and politics, and nothing I said should have been edited.

Devils Advocate again.

The discussion of Drug Use is in the ECF TOS.

 

[zoiDman]

You make good points. ...

Thank you RoseB.

Something else to consider. The Members of the ECF are Very Knowledgeable about e-Cigarettes/e-Liquids. But we make up a Very Small percentage of the Actual Vapers.

And Vapers make up a VERY SMALL percentage of the General Population.

So while we may Pick Apart a Study/Report done by the CDC or FDA and Expose it's Weaknesses (or in some case - Blatant Untruths), the General Public does Not. They tend to believe what they are Told First.

To much of the General Public, using an e-Cigarettes is just the Same as Smoking. And Perception IS Reality to Many People.

So .08% of the General Public can come out and say that there is Nothing Wrong with using an e-Cigarette. And that there is No Harm to Anyone around them. The remaining Percentage of the General Population may Not see it that way.

 

[beckdg]

unfortunately because it is written and oft referenced and repeated doesn't make it necessarily the most common practice.

let alone as it pertains to (or doesn't) products and entire industries.

however, if you write it, I will sign it.

 

[RoseB]

Thank you RoseB.

Something else to consider. The Members of the ECF are Very Knowledgeable about e-Cigarettes/e-Liquids. But we make up a Very Small percentage of the Actual Vapers.

And Vapers make up a VERY SMALL percentage of the General Population.

So while we may Pick Apart a Study/Report done by the CDC or FDA and Expose it's Weaknesses (or in some case - Blatant Untruths), the General Public does Not. They tend to believe what they are Told First.

To much of the General Public, using an e-Cigarettes is just the Same as Smoking. And Perception IS Reality to Many People.

So .08% of the General Public can come out and say that there is Nothing Wrong with using an e-Cigarette. And that there is No Harm to Anyone around them. The remaining Percentage of the General Population may Not see it that way.

Also good points. There have been several times I've mentioned using and e cig, and the response is "those things can blow and hurt you". That is where my ability to blab comes in handy I will inform and educate as many as I can. Even if it's just one person a day. While it is true that people believe what ever they see on the nightly news, there are options for getting the word out. Just for fun...Do you think that if smokers switched to eating Hershey kisses, that people would throw a fit? Is it perhaps more about tormenting smokers, and not about what's safe I kind of feel that it is.

 

[Don Robertson]

I suppose if we all are going to roll over and not ask for consideration, we shouldn't expect it.

Rolling over? When you say:

"Much of what public administrators, public health officals (sic} and legislative personel (sic) are questioning regarding ecigarettes (sic) and vaping is about 'what we don't know,'...long term effects and such."

"In the legal system of the United States, an accused is 'presumed innocent until proven guilty.'"

"I ask for the same consideration for ecigarettes (sic) and vaping."

Innocent or guilty of what? Where? When? In the opinion of...? Being vague in law means "squat".

This is open to going nowhere quickly. Interpretation can drift a dozen directions. Specificity is all important. So you know what you intended to present or was it a moment of frustration running amok?

Don't confuse the senile - life is already difficult enough with the added burden of trying to decypher the confusing queries of the confused. Have mercy please.

Ya can't finger out that which is vague and foggy in the mind of the author.

TOS? Include a section on clarity and having a vague idea about that which is asked before putting it in front of the masses. I don't want to guess what anyone means. There is no query presented; it's a wide open statement with a multitude of possible meanings. Someone mentioned 'DRUGS"? OH my gawd? Let's tie 'em to a pank an whip 'em with a wet chunk o' spaghetti! Hello Colorado! How's that Marywanna Law workin' out for Ya? It's the LAW ............. but alas ......... we can't mention a LAW....... because it THE RULE! Only the elite can break a RULE ....... they have dispensation for such things. They be special.... or, so I see every day it seems. Now back to the query ........... I still don't understand what the heck it MEANS.

Senile Old Man Don ............. The rules ........ always apply .... except when accidentally overlooked.

 

[Cool_Breeze]

The internet is such a funny shooting gallery!

People are sitting at their computers/devices, waiting for what is posted, give it an evaluation and either support it or shoot it down vigorously.

Ecigarettes are in the public dialogue and have been/are under consideration for various regulatory actions. It seems to me that regulation and/or bans would be based on some notion of harm, or at least the perception that there 'might be.' While regulators might disagree, it does us no harm to take the position that the burden of proof lies with the accuser/regulator.

While initiation of regulation may not respect that notion, we would be fools not to ask for such evidence as ecigarettes are indeed on trail...I don't see where that costs us anything more than the efforts that are currently being made on behalf of vaping. 'No harm, no foul' is only a mindset and a tool for our use.

I know some just want to argue 'the way things are.' Isn't that sort of an arrogant snobbery? I'll argue, it's all in your mind.

Those who would like to make the case in favor of those who oppose vaping, go ahead if you must.

 

[Dan_The_Viking]

The internet is such a funny shooting gallery!

People are sitting at their computers/devices, waiting for what is posted, give it an evaluation and either support it or shoot it down vigorously.

Internet Gangsters. MY OPINION RULES THE WORLD. YOUR OPINIONS ARE STUPID.

 

[DetraMental]

I still don't get the point of your post. I get that those who try to prove vaping is harmful need to provide sufficient evidence to the people instead of all this misinformation without basis. After that I don't understand.....I'm lost.