I would point out that Fred Nile has no juristiction over my dam... and if he tries he would be given a close examination of it as yabby ( umm crawfish for you yanks??? ) food 
Australian ban; Egar illegal
- Thread starter TropicalBob
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Hah! Fred Nile. He's the worst human being ever to exist in Australian politics.
Back on topic now... It's looking more and more like the ban in Victoria only applies only to liquid and cartridges containing nicotine (possibly also factory primed atomisers if there are traces of nicotine in them), and is only being enforced in the case of supply (not possession as some articles suggested). This is far from the worst case scenario. For the common vaper, the worst that could happen is that an order could get seized by customs.
Now we need to convince the manufacturers to prime the atomisers with no nicotine liquid.
Where did you pick that up cucurucho? you are right some of the articles were heavier than others. the one from theage.com.au said:
but what do you think of being able to purchase nicotine liquid that is labelled "not meant for human consumption" ? do you think that would be a valid loophole?
I've heard that joke about Kiwis
It's all definitely good natured, we have great respect for our ANZAC buddies both on and off the field and track. As Trumpy said, when we aren't ribbing them, we're ribbing each other or ourselves. I've come across many people that don't understand self depreciating humour on the internet, so I guess it's more of a regional thing.Fred Nile is a bit like the Australian version of Pat Robertson, he's always calling for these types of things. He rarely suceeds though, and I can't see him doing it this time.
I just had a lengthy conversation with the Victorian Duty Officer of the Drugs and Poisons Regulation Group. From all interpretations:
"possession or use of nicotine delivery systems for humans that are classified as Schedule 7 poisons"
"electronic cigarettes containing nicotine intended for human use"
It is only nicotine that has been banned by classing it as a Schedule 7 poison. This is regardless of strength or quantity. Products that are affected are electronic cigarettes THAT CONTAIN Schedule 7 Nicotine.
I am told that this classification of nicotine as a schedule 7 poison is an amendment to the national act and that it is up to each individual state to regulate it.
Victoria being the first, has stated that they are enforcing it by banning the sale of Schedule 7 Nicotine and that they are preventing the supply of Schedule 7 Nicotine through monitoring organisations and individuals who try to obtain supply for apparent retail purposes.
Enforcement can include prosecution and it is unclear if there is any leniency offered, it is classed as a schedule 7 poison regardless of strength or quantity. Remember, it is the supply for apparent retail they are talking about.
So, in Victoria are you breaking the law by possessing a personal vaporiser that contains NO Schedule 7 poison?
NO - (see below).
So, in Victoria are you breaking the law by possessing and using a schedule 7 poison but not supplying it to others?
Apparently not - but the Victorian Premiers statement conflicts this by coupling the phrases "possession & use" and "nicotine delivery systems for humans that are classified as Schedule 7 poisons".
The Drugs and Poisons Regulation Group states that they are only enforcing the ban on the supply of Schedule 7 Nicotine for retail.
So, in Victoria are you breaking the law by supplying a schedule 7 poison to others?
YES.
And one final note: Customs has confirmed (but not in writing) that Schedule 7 Nicotine will be confiscated when detected regardless of which state it is destined for. If it is within a "Personal Vaporiser", expect that also to be confiscated.
Remember, it is not just carts that can potentially contain nicotine - what have the atomisers been primed with?
I cannot find any other official documentation from other states but at this stage, it's the customs part that will potentially affect other parts of Australia.
"possession or use of nicotine delivery systems for humans that are classified as Schedule 7 poisons"
"electronic cigarettes containing nicotine intended for human use"
It is only nicotine that has been banned by classing it as a Schedule 7 poison. This is regardless of strength or quantity. Products that are affected are electronic cigarettes THAT CONTAIN Schedule 7 Nicotine.
I am told that this classification of nicotine as a schedule 7 poison is an amendment to the national act and that it is up to each individual state to regulate it.
Victoria being the first, has stated that they are enforcing it by banning the sale of Schedule 7 Nicotine and that they are preventing the supply of Schedule 7 Nicotine through monitoring organisations and individuals who try to obtain supply for apparent retail purposes.
Enforcement can include prosecution and it is unclear if there is any leniency offered, it is classed as a schedule 7 poison regardless of strength or quantity. Remember, it is the supply for apparent retail they are talking about.
So, in Victoria are you breaking the law by possessing a personal vaporiser that contains NO Schedule 7 poison?
NO - (see below).
So, in Victoria are you breaking the law by possessing and using a schedule 7 poison but not supplying it to others?
Apparently not - but the Victorian Premiers statement conflicts this by coupling the phrases "possession & use" and "nicotine delivery systems for humans that are classified as Schedule 7 poisons".
The Drugs and Poisons Regulation Group states that they are only enforcing the ban on the supply of Schedule 7 Nicotine for retail.
So, in Victoria are you breaking the law by supplying a schedule 7 poison to others?
YES.
And one final note: Customs has confirmed (but not in writing) that Schedule 7 Nicotine will be confiscated when detected regardless of which state it is destined for. If it is within a "Personal Vaporiser", expect that also to be confiscated.
Remember, it is not just carts that can potentially contain nicotine - what have the atomisers been primed with?
I cannot find any other official documentation from other states but at this stage, it's the customs part that will potentially affect other parts of Australia.
SIN thank you very much for clearing the situation up and delivering the facts.
thanks sin, does this mean that they can be imported directly from china, seeing as these sellers would be outside their jurisdiction? and do you think this means that you could supply the nicotine liquid if it is marked "not for human consumption", along with devices that are only primed with PG, perhaps from seperate outlets ?
Cigarettes contain nicotene which is for human consumption ?
How do they get around this ban ?
Don't you have Any opposition politicians in Victoria ?
How do they get around this ban ?
Don't you have Any opposition politicians in Victoria ?
Cigarettes are exempt because current policy everywhere is "quit [completely] or die [continue to use cigarettes]".
It's called "personal freedom", apparently.
Nicotine in tobacco is exempt from all the usual restrictions. The whole situation utterly ridiculous.
Cigarettes are exempt because nicotine is a natural byproduct of tobacco combustion. Our nicotine is synthesized, a pure chemical. To government regulatory agencies, that's a big difference.
In the U.S., cigarettes have their own regulatory government agency. And they have history and money behind them.
E-stuff has neither.
I think outside of Australia we're looking at one of two possible declarations: Nicotine for inhalation purposes is a drug that will be classified as medicinal, requiring extensive regulation and a prescription to obtain; or it's a toxic poison in strengths needed for e-smoking, requiring a full ban to protect the innocent.
In the U.S., cigarettes have their own regulatory government agency. And they have history and money behind them.
E-stuff has neither.
I think outside of Australia we're looking at one of two possible declarations: Nicotine for inhalation purposes is a drug that will be classified as medicinal, requiring extensive regulation and a prescription to obtain; or it's a toxic poison in strengths needed for e-smoking, requiring a full ban to protect the innocent.
Yeah, can't really argue that, Bob. The latter is more likely (far less labour-intensive).
I really need to start stockpiling...
Emp
I really need to start stockpiling...
Emp
the people who will attack us will use the "flavored" liquid against us. if we get non-flav nic liquid and flavor it ourselves, it might help our cause.
Last edited:
That is one of many arguments that will be used. But it might not get to that. See the latest posts in the FDA Approval thread. The FDA disapproved all of the E-Cig products when they were submitted to that agency in late November. The FDA said this was a "new drug" and needed to follow regulations for drug approval. Drug for what? Smoking cessation? Get ready for years of testing that won't be done. Drug for fun? It's a toxin. Besides, the FDA has authorized other, approved nicotine delivery systems. It is under no pressure to approve yet another method.
And if E-Cig continues to sell these products to America via the Internet, then E-Cig will be selling unapproved drugs, which will lead to enforcement against such unapproved sales. No one would argue that unapproved drugs should be allowed, would they? This goose is all but cooked. We're waiting for the timer to buzz.
And if E-Cig continues to sell these products to America via the Internet, then E-Cig will be selling unapproved drugs, which will lead to enforcement against such unapproved sales. No one would argue that unapproved drugs should be allowed, would they? This goose is all but cooked. We're waiting for the timer to buzz.
I know that there is little to nothing I can do to keep my "holy grail" of asthmatic smoking, TB. I just want to believe that there is a way and that we can fight it and get a movie (not indie) ending. Hopefully by the time it all goes down I'll have enough supplies to last me long enough to get off the nic.
Makes me very angry. We finally get a relatively inexpensive, enjoyable and effective alternative to smoking cigarettes ... and it likely will be banned.
For me, NRT is worthless. Too weak, too expensive. E-smoking works. For me, nicotine is not a drug. It belongs atop my Food Pyramid, with coffee just below it. For me, taxes are putting cigarettes out of my reach. E-smoking is affordable and I even can make my own flavored liquids.
So now we could lose it? No, no, a thousand times no. Where is a leading manufacturer who will qualify and legalize this nicotine inhaler? Where is the company willing to submit to inspection and regulation, instead of shoveling out unapproved products of unknown quality?
I swear, I'd pay Ruyan prices to keep doing this. I'd gladly pay Janty prices if they will lead the way for us. But someone has to prevent even a temporary ban. Once momentum ceases, it might not be regained down the road.
For me, NRT is worthless. Too weak, too expensive. E-smoking works. For me, nicotine is not a drug. It belongs atop my Food Pyramid, with coffee just below it. For me, taxes are putting cigarettes out of my reach. E-smoking is affordable and I even can make my own flavored liquids.
So now we could lose it? No, no, a thousand times no. Where is a leading manufacturer who will qualify and legalize this nicotine inhaler? Where is the company willing to submit to inspection and regulation, instead of shoveling out unapproved products of unknown quality?
I swear, I'd pay Ruyan prices to keep doing this. I'd gladly pay Janty prices if they will lead the way for us. But someone has to prevent even a temporary ban. Once momentum ceases, it might not be regained down the road.
It's good to see the fire TB. I think too many people fold their hands with small raises these days. If we can light some fires 
under some of the people that seem to be giving up, I'll feel it was all worth it. even if we lose.
under some of the people that seem to be giving up, I'll feel it was all worth it. even if we lose.
We need to keep this thread high until all issues on this are settled. This was posted earlier about the ban:
Note those words. Are they true? Or is the ban being applied only to sale of liquid and advertising of the devices, as one poster suggested. Has "use" and "possesson" been made illegal? And is it only Victoria?
Note those words. Are they true? Or is the ban being applied only to sale of liquid and advertising of the devices, as one poster suggested. Has "use" and "possesson" been made illegal? And is it only Victoria?
Well this is the conclusion that I've come to based on a hell of a lot of reading, emails and phone calls:
- The ban does not include devices unless they contain nicotine.
- Only devices or preparations containing nicotine that are not registered with the Therapeutic Goods Administration are banned.
- Nicotine (when not in tobacco, used for NRT or for use with animals) was already considered a schedule 7 poison in other states (at least in NSW) before the ban in Victoria. See Australian state and territory regulatory controls on Schedule 7 poisons
- Supply of liquids/devices containing nicotine is illegal and enforced.
- Possession/use is illegal, but not enforced.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
