Attention all VA lawyers (who vape)

[novasteve]

Can anyone tell me?

Does the law affect bars and lounges?

Yes. There are no stand-alone bars in Virginia. In Virginia, to receive an on-premises ABC license from the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, the establishment must serve food and be able to show a set percentage of sales attributable to food.

What is a stand-alone bar? What if the bar is connected to other buildings? Can you get ABC Permits if you do not serve food and it is connected to another building? Or if you have to serve food to get ABC, are connected building exempt anyway? All I keep seeing is "Stand-Alone"

I also find it insulting that restaurants on the property of tobacco companies are exempt.


Are electronic cigarettes banned under the new law?

Electronic cigarettes are considered cigarettes and are banned in the same locations affected by the new law.

I would truly like to know where Gary Hagy gets off on saying an electronic cigarette is considered a cigarette.

VA requires you to serve food. In places like PA and NY, they have bar bars, where there's no food, other than perhaps free happy hour hors d'ourves

The ecigarette prohibition is just simply wrong.. I'm telling you guys, the approach to take is to go at it like you are a discriminated and disliked group. If they banned buttless leather chaps, you'd know it was out of hostility to homosexuals. THis is no different.

 

[novasteve]

It was Gary Hagy's FAQ of the Virginia Department of Health that was shown to a few bar owners in NOVA. And it stated that an electronic cigarette is considered a cigarette, which is completely untrue. It just "looks" like one. It doesn't smell like one, it doesn't put off any smoke what so ever, there is absolutely no tobacco in it, and people have been vaping over a year and have only gotten much better form when they smoked.

Since patrons of private clubs can smoke around food and other people, does this mean private clubs are exempt from health code?

So get manufacturers to shape them into giraffes and donkeys, something that doesn't look like a cigarette.

 

[Storyspinr]

Mac, there are two main reasons the anti-smoker groups are after e cigs (and my guess is they are working on the Va. Dept. of Health - why else would it even be in their "FAQs"?). First, they hate smoking. Anyone who puffs on anything that LOOKS like a cigarette is, to them, a smoker and they have no use for any other explanation. They have spent decades plotting how to force people to quit smoking and were doing well until this little device came along and completely screwed them up: no secondhand smoke, no ash, no fire, no tar, no litter, no nothing. There are a few "tobacco contol" types who support the e cig, but the big organizations have lined up against it.

Secondly, they receive a large amount of funding from the drug companies, who stand to make billions from their smoking-cessation drugs if people are forced to quit or reduce smoking through bans and other efforts. E cigs present a huge challenge to the income of that funding source and therefore to the anti-smoker groups.

VaporHead, as I understand it, a "stand alone bar" is just that - a bar in a separate building not connected to a restaurant. I don't drink, so can't tell you from personal experience if they serve any food, but I would guess food would be a very small percentage of their income, if any.

 

[novasteve]

Okay, I know this post goes the question of both e-cigs (which are not included in the new law anyway!) and regular, tobacco cigs, but what prevents individual businesses--bars, restaurants, and whatnot--from renaming themselves as private clubs? I would think this would solve the problem, especially for smaller bars, with regular customers. At least in theory, they could do whatever they wanted.

When the U.S. Dept. of Justice started the effort to force VMI to accept female students, there was a big push--including by VA legislators--to redesignate the school as "private," because the alumni and VA did not want the US government telling them what to do. In the end I believe a deal was struck. VMI does have women cadets.

However, UVA Law School gave up federal funding years ago in protest of federal mandates to do this, that and the other.

Certainly VA should be sympathetic to those businesses that choose to designate themselves as "private." Patrons could simply fill out a "register for membership" card, the same as we do on darn near every Web site we land on these days.

Given that the civil penalty/fine is "not more than $25," I don't see why everyone doesn't just ignore it. Certainly, the e-cig group could fill up the court dockets contesting vaping tickets?

I believe the veterans' groups are allowed liquor licenses, but I think they only grant thouse because they are for veterans. My cousin was in the military and for his funeral we had it at a VFW or American Legion (forget which one it was) somewehere in nova and they had a bar and people were smoking... I don't think they would grant a liquor license to any other group. So if a bar wants to become a private club, I'm sure they would allow smoking, but they wouldn't be allowed to serve alcohol.

I actually see a rather large loophole in the law, at least that can get you by sorta in bars too small for separate ventilation. It says there's an exception for rooms for private purposes only.... You could say it's for a club, or something. And if the smoke spills over, the statute doesn't say that room needs be separately ventilated.. My local bar toyed with the idea with becoming a private club, but I think they realized they wouldn't be able to keep their liquor license, and plus this area is so liberal, their b usiness might actually improve. I checked out the few remaining smoking bars today in Arlington, and, it kinda sucks. Summers didn't even have the smoking bar open. Ri Ra only has a smoking room. The Whitlows sandroom smoking bar wasn't open yet, but I hear taht Bailey's in Ballston mall is 2/3rds smoking. Id idn't think they would want to let smoking.. That place is huge. Might have to become my hangout given summers' crappy hours for their smoking bar.

 

[novasteve]

Mac, there are two main reasons the anti-smoker groups are after e cigs (and my guess is they are working on the Va. Dept. of Health - why else would it even be in their "FAQs"?). First, they hate smoking. Anyone who puffs on anything that LOOKS like a cigarette is, to them, a smoker and they have no use for any other explanation. They have spent decades plotting how to force people to quit smoking and were doing well until this little device came along and completely screwed them up: no secondhand smoke, no ash, no fire, no tar, no litter, no nothing. There are a few "tobacco contol" types who support the e cig, but the big organizations have lined up against it.

Secondly, they receive a large amount of funding from the drug companies, who stand to make billions from their smoking-cessation drugs if people are forced to quit or reduce smoking through bans and other efforts. E cigs present a huge challenge to the income of that funding source and therefore to the anti-smoker groups.

VaporHead, as I understand it, a "stand alone bar" is just that - a bar in a separate building not connected to a restaurant. I don't drink, so can't tell you from personal experience if they serve any food, but I would guess food would be a very small percentage of their income, if any.

Stand alone bar is what Joe Biden described as a "beer and a shot" place. I had a gf who lived in the philly suburbs, and I would go there often, and they had bar bars. They just had a bar. No tables. No food. People drink, they don't even take credit cards usually. NY has those too. They are common in Germany too. When I was in Cologne last month, you would order pizza into the bar if you wanted to eat something. Places like VA and MD don't allow bar bars. It also has to serve food, and devote a certain floor area to a dining area. Liberals may ban smoking, but conservatives are rather anti alcohol, and don't allow bar bars. Because they would pop up everywhere, because all they have to be is a hole in the wall.

 

[Mac]

I spoke to a lawyer today who assured me that the ban does not include e-cigs based on the letter of the law and that the FAQ is an opinion and not legally binding. She went on to tell me that no prosecutor in their right mind would want to try that case and that if an e-cig user were to be cited it would be a total fiasco that would reflect poorly upon the individual who wrote that FAQ. Furthermore that the case would be laughed out of court. Unforunately she also said that there isn't really anything we can do to get the FAQ changed short of such an instance. So I am left with this conundrum. Bar owners will afraid to allow e-cig use because of this individual on a power trip. He has in effect skirted our entire legislative system and taken the law successfully in his own hands. And I fear there is nothing we can do to stop him. My faith in society and it's laws is badly shaken..

 

[novasteve]

I spoke to a lawyer today who assured me that the ban does not include e-cigs based on the letter of the law and that the FAQ is an opinion and not legally binding. She went on to tell me that no prosecutor in their right mind would want to try that case and that if an e-cig user were to be cited it would be a total fiasco that would reflect poorly upon the individual who wrote that FAQ. Furthermore that the case would be laughed out of court. Unforunately she also said that there isn't really anything we can do to get the FAQ changed short of such an instance. So I am left with this conundrum. Bar owners will afraid to allow e-cig use because of this individual on a power trip. He has in effect skirted our entire legislative system and taken the law successfully in his own hands. And I fear there is nothing we can do to stop him. My faith in society and it's laws is badly shaken..

The point is, to get non smokers to complain about something they think is a cigarette. Your issue with this person is like every other political issue. You can 't due anything until challenged, which costs you money, meant to discourage people. THis person is an antismoker zealot.

 

[Slickstick]

This person should look both ways when crossing the street.

 

[yvilla]

I spoke to a lawyer today who assured me that the ban does not include e-cigs based on the letter of the law and that the FAQ is an opinion and not legally binding. She went on to tell me that no prosecutor in their right mind would want to try that case and that if an e-cig user were to be cited it would be a total fiasco that would reflect poorly upon the individual who wrote that FAQ. Furthermore that the case would be laughed out of court. Unforunately she also said that there isn't really anything we can do to get the FAQ changed short of such an instance. So I am left with this conundrum. Bar owners will afraid to allow e-cig use because of this individual on a power trip. He has in effect skirted our entire legislative system and taken the law successfully in his own hands. And I fear there is nothing we can do to stop him. My faith in society and it's laws is badly shaken..

The highlighted part - that is why I suggested trying to publicly embarass the Dept. of Health, for having something so obviously incorrect about the new law on its official website. And pressure in the form of many many letters to the Dept. of Health itself and its attorneys. And hopefully, also from some of the legislators as Storyspinr suggested; it seems there's got to be some who would take offense at the Dept. of Health "usurping" their legislative powers and misleading the public like that.

 

[Slickstick]

I just saw a thread about PM and Ruyan.

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/e-cigarette-news/47335-phillip-morris-ruyan-negotiations.html

This one is good too.

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...6-ryanair-introduce-smokeless-cigarettes.html

 

[TheBoogieman]

They pulled the same crap in Montana when their ban went into effect. I read an article about ecigs being banned. Wrote to the papers and got nowhere.
Heres the article:
State receives seven complaints in first week of smoking ban

From the article:
Some establishments began selling e-cigarettes, which steam tobacco and emit a vapor instead of smoke, as a way to placate their smoking customers.
But Campbell said the devices are not legal to sell in Montana and are considered cigarettes under the Clean Indoor Air Act.

Which was BS. And they still never corrected that article.
Heres is the corrected article:
Few smoking violations reported

Wrote a letter to Ms. Campell and all of a sudden--------The ecigs were OK.
Stay on these guys about changing that webpage. A Government agency should not be passing out false information. They are accountable. Make sure they know it. No way they should get away with this.
Boogie

 

[Janetda]

While I do think you should stay on top of this and make sure that it's written in as part of the law anywhere, I do want to caution you as to what to really expect when all is said and done. It's been my experience that bar & restaurant managers still won't let you openly use your e-cig in their establishments even if it's perfectly legal. The reasons I've been given are that I "appear" to be smoking and they don't want to have to explain it to every customer that complains. Frankly, I stopped asking and just ghost vape where ever I go. I've had no problems since then.

 

[oldlady]

Good point about the process/possibility for private clubs to get liquor licenses. I have no idea what loopholes are involved, but I do know that country clubs throughout Virginia have bars.

The private-function room thing works too. My sister booked a "private" room at an otherwise "no smoking" restaurant for my nephew's wedding rehearsal dinner precisely so all the guests could smoke. Of course, that was before the ban, but the law does seem to allow for that practice to continue.

The VA Health Department FAQ is clearly in error and needs to be corrected. Period. It is unacceptable for an agent of the state to broadcast information that is flat-out wrong!

Meanwhile, at the risk of $25 a pop, it would be worth it to fill the courts' dockets with garbage vaping tickets. Eventually, the courts and the cops would complain. Most important, if the local cops end up having to devote too much manpower to waiting in court all day to testify for contested tickets of "no more than $25," they'll stop writing them!

 

[Raenon]

Places like VA and MD don't allow bar bars. It also has to serve food, and devote a certain floor area to a dining area.

VA might be like that, but "bar bars" are common in Maryland. One of my favorite dive bars has no food except a few cans of pringles and some candy bars they keep in the red bull fridge. They do have a stack of delivery menus behind the counter, however.

This is Ledbetters II Tavern in Fell's Point, downtown Baltimore. I also vape there, and the management loves it.

 

[Storyspinr]

Janet, you're exactly right. With the ban just starting in Va., restaurant owners are for the most part going to be afraid to let people use e cigs just because they "look" like smoking, with that little puff of vapor rising into the air. It will take a lot of PR by vapers to educate the public. I also think a prominent sign "Electronic Cigarettes Permitted" with a photo might help "explain" to customers what that little glowing thing is (a picture is worth a thousand words may never be more true). It's going to take a lot of education of the public, the bureaucrats and the politicians. At least many of them have now heard about e cigs after all the news coverage, even when it's bad.

Oldlady, I think the dockets are going to have quite a few $25 tickets for smoking from restaurants, too. It's the best way to fight the ban - in court. The mere fact Phillip Morris has the only public restaurant not required to have a separate smoking room may be enough to throw the ban out...the old "level playing field" argument. Even if the ban would ever be overturned, though, I'm sure many restaurants will remain smokefree and we can only hope they accept the e cig.

We also don't know if Phillip Morris is playing any role to squash the e cig, and PM has a lot of clout in Virginia - just like the drug companies have in New Jersey and Connecticut, where they're trying to ban the e cig.

It will be interesting to see what kind of response everyone gets who has contacted a politician, newspaper or bureaucrat about the Dept. of Health "FAQ". That's going to tell us quite a bit about how much of a fight we have ahead of us.

 

[novasteve]

VA might be like that, but "bar bars" are common in Maryland. One of my favorite dive bars has no food except a few cans of pringles and some candy bars they keep in the red bull fridge. They do have a stack of delivery menus behind the counter, however.

This is Ledbetters II Tavern in Fell's Point, downtown Baltimore. I also vape there, and the management loves it.

Oops. Must be a montgomery county thing. There is one bar bar in montgomery county, deitels or something like that by white flint. It's so old that it got a grandfather clause.. Can't say that I've seen a bar bar anywhere in Maryland.

 

[kristin]

I spoke to a lawyer today who assured me that the ban does not include e-cigs based on the letter of the law and that the FAQ is an opinion and not legally binding. She went on to tell me that no prosecutor in their right mind would want to try that case and that if an e-cig user were to be cited it would be a total fiasco that would reflect poorly upon the individual who wrote that FAQ. Furthermore that the case would be laughed out of court. Unforunately she also said that there isn't really anything we can do to get the FAQ changed short of such an instance. So I am left with this conundrum. Bar owners will afraid to allow e-cig use because of this individual on a power trip. He has in effect skirted our entire legislative system and taken the law successfully in his own hands. And I fear there is nothing we can do to stop him. My faith in society and it's laws is badly shaken..

Mac, an official looking letter from an attorney is often quite effective, in-and-of-itself. Often, there is no need for further action, because people get scared by the threat of legal action. I would recommend that you contact your employer, who I am sure has a budget for an attorney, and recommend they get their attorney to draw up a "cease and desist" letter regarding the erroneous "fact" on their site and direct it straight to that Gary guy. He'd probably take it to his supervisor, who probably has no idea that the comment is on the site, and it'll get taken down.

 

[Mac]

Mac, an official looking letter from an attorney is often quite effective, in-and-of-itself. Often, there is no need for further action, because people get scared by the threat of legal action. I would recommend that you contact your employer, who I am sure has a budget for an attorney, and recommend they get their attorney to draw up a "cease and desist" letter regarding the erroneous "fact" on their site and direct it straight to that Gary guy. He'd probably take it to his supervisor, who probably has no idea that the comment is on the site, and it'll get taken down.

I am kind of afraid to even tell them. Alot of people don't understand that this is my job and my livelyhood. That could really backfire. Lets say I tell them and instead of hiring a lawyer they panic and start cutting hours. limiting my budget for new products or ordering supplies. No more christmas for my family if that happens. See what I mean?

 

[TropicalBob]

Janet is right, and we are not going to win this one. Note the 76-0 vote of the New Jersey Assembly yesterday to prohibit e-cigs everywhere cigs are prohibited. The "perception" is that we're smoking. That won't be tolerated in most bars and restaurants where no-smoking is the law.

If the choice is inconvenience for e-smokers or convenience for a manager not wanting to explain why someone at a table across the room appears to be smoking, well ... we lose.

And the greatest inconvenience of all is for addicted smokers. That's one in every five adult Americans. If that group can be inconvenienced by law, the minority who vaporize nicotine liquid for kicks won't get special treatment. The official position will be Just Say No.

A far greater concern is continued marketing of e-cigs and advancement of harm reduction as an acceptable strategy to reduce the risks from smoking in addicted adults. That's the battle we must win.

 

[Mac]

Janet is right, and we are not going to win this one. Note the 76-0 vote of the New Jersey Assembly yesterday to prohibit e-cigs everywhere cigs are prohibited.

Are you trying to tell me that you can't see the tremendous difference between that case and this one?