And this, I feel, is the crux of it. I'm not saying I like it (from my side - obviously, I vape). I'm not saying we shouldn't educate or stand up for our rights...when we have them. But really...as the above poster says: never the twain shall meet.
Banning of e-cigarettes on College Campus
- Thread starter EddardinWinter
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
And this, I feel, is the crux of it. I'm not saying I like it (from my side - obviously, I vape). I'm not saying we shouldn't educate or stand up for our rights...when we have them. But really...as the above poster says: never the twain shall meet.
So then you agree with all of the following bans as well at private universities, correct?
They could therefore ban insulin on campus to hell with those diabetics! It is not constitutionally or otherwise legally protected.
They could therefore ban a specific food, let's say chinese food? It is not constitutionally or otherwise legally protected.
They could therefore ban bottled water on campus? It is not constitutionally or otherwise legally protected.
They could ban bicycles, they could ban paper airplanes, they could ban books they find offensive, they could ban milk, they could ban a brand of shirts, etc.
What about State schools? That is technically not private property at all, so do they have a right to ban things the State has not deemed illegal?
Okay. What I'm seeing here (if I'm correct about this) is that ALL nic/tobacco is being banned on these campuses, not just e-cigs. Which makes sense if it's an overall no-nic policy.
What I'm NOT seeing is anybody standing up to say kids should be able to smoke on campus.
Not trying to stir the pot here, but I notice when we speak generally about "rights" here, and get so passionate about those, they only extend to our rights. Indeed, I see storm after storm and jibe after jibe about smelly, cancer-courting smokers; there is very little tolerance (sometimes, none)...of someone else's choice of nic delivery system.Would everyone, then, be cool about smoking all around campus, around you if you attend, your kids, etc.?
It's a legitimate question, I'm not trying to ah-ha anybody. I think it bears stressing that if we are standing up for our rights then we are standing up for all tobacco rights...and that should definitely be considered.
And no, "but it's not (as) smelly" does not stand up, in my mind at least, to a good reason why people who bug us should have their rights taken away...but when we bug others, that's just tough darts because we have rights.
Just my $.02, probably worth half that.
I agree with your closing statement, but just because it is easier that doesn't make it right.
I don't see how vaping outside can be viewed as throwing anything in anyone's face.
Okay. What I'm seeing here (if I'm correct about this) is that ALL nic/tobacco is being banned on these campuses, not just e-cigs. Which makes sense if it's an overall no-nic policy.
What I'm NOT seeing is anybody standing up to say kids should be able to smoke on campus.
Would everyone, then, be cool about smoking all around campus, around you if you attend, your kids, etc.?
It's a legitimate question, I'm not trying to ah-ha anybody. I think it bears stressing that if we are standing up for our rights then we are standing up for all tobacco rights...and that should definitely be considered.
And no, "but it's not (as) smelly" does not stand up, in my mind at least, to a good reason why people who bug us should have their rights taken away...but when we bug others, that's just tough darts because we have rights.
Just my $.02, probably worth half that.
This is an interesting point, and I agree we should stand with others, BUT...
The topic of this thread is as specified in the OP (e-cigarette campus wide bans only), and I can tell you, if we get too far off topic it will get shut down or moved into la-la land.
But the person standing next to you, who doesn't vape, could see it.
And again. It's about everyone's rights, so...yes, it's a tricky area.
Again: do I like it? No. Why? Because I'm selfish. I want to vape. But I am not the whole world, any more than the person who doesn't want me to vape is the whole world.
This is why it's not such a simple matter of "duh, nobody should mind vaping, what the hell is wrong with people." (Not quoting you obviously, Eddard! You state your cace very rationally.)
1) No it's protected under federal law.
2) Bad analogy, why would they try to ban food? Food doesn't burst into clouds or create distractions in class or motivate non-smoking students to try such devices.
3) Again silly, but they could if people were misusing it for some stupid reason, their property.
4) Bicycles have been banned at some schools, again this is their choice. Keyword: Private Property
5) State schools are owned by the state, the state therefore has rights to dictate rules. Do they not dictate laws?
If you don't agree with a school's policy just don't go there. But you have no "right" to vape there.
I'm not sure why it's OT, the subject is banning vaping on campuses, connected with that (directly connected - in fact, caused by it) is banning of all tobacco products.
I don't see how it's even possible to separate the two. They are all nicotine bans.
And I do think it bears thinking about the next person.
Again, not sure how those subjects are OT and I feel that I raised a legitimate question: is smoking, spitting chaw and the like acceptable to people? Because if these are not, then this will and should directly impact a person's "decision" whether vaping, too "should" be allowed on campus.
We have nic rights or we do not have nic rights.
But if me not liking something is all that is required for a campus wide ban, why can't I ban loud, obnoxious, squalling children? They make me crazy and hurt my ears and raise my BP. Why can't I ban children from campus?
For whatever reason... not that it is good or bad for someone.. we blow vapor out which can be annoying to others.. The smell could be. Yes I realize there are other smell too but we are just talking about vapor here. One person has the freedom to walk in public and be free from it. You walk down the street and blow a cloud in their face. They are no longer free of it. They say something and you say, suck it up it is just water vapor.
I agree it doesn't make it right. Ever read the tax code? all 74,000 pages? I can give you 74,000 pages of crap that isn't right. Our world is full of things that aren't right.
Because it's not your property, otherwise maybe you could.
See what I did there?
Keyword: Private Property
Not sure why you wouldn't be free to try? Just as the people who want to ban nicotine/tobacco products. If you feel that crying children deserved to be banned from campus, I am sure you can bring that up with the University. You may or may not get your wish... but you will have the chance to persuade them.
Aren't children banned from some campus locales and activities where they will be disruptive?
The classrooms (I know you don't want to discuss classrooms, but they ARE a part of the school) don't allow them. I doubt they're allowed in study groups. Etc.
And most people even without having children "banned" will keep them off campuses anyway, because they'll be disruptive. Thoughtful people don't need laws or bans, they just use common sense, and try not to annoy the rest of the general population when possible.
In addition, with nicotine, you're not just talking about "annoying," you're talking about a chemical/drug being released into the air. Chemicals/drugs are far more regulated than children (unfortunately).
Well, I see your point.
I understand we need to swerve into the other issues (and have done so myself) to make points on topic, but the point that we need to stand with smokers against campus wide smoking bans (while I agree with it) does not directly address my original question. Yes, the same question of moral/ethical/legal authority is applicable. I don't want to change what you said or chide you for saying it, the points are valid and well made, I just want to bring the thread back towards home.
Thank you! I'm glad some here are aware of this.
My brother in law is an insulin user, most if not all medical devices that could kill you if you don't use them are protected under federal law.
I think a campus-wide ban on smoking is just about as screwed up as a ban on vaping.
You said they could make whatever rules they wished.
You said this:
and
So it doesn't matter why they would do it, it only matters that by your logic, the school could do it.
I challenge you to cite the federal law that protects insulin use.
You also ask:
My answer:
No, these are university officials who are making decisions to ban legal items within the state. The state is not setting the rules, it is the University administration. If the state passed laws against it, there is no debate as to the legal/ethical/moral authority.
Thank you, this is what I was wondering - how people feel about nic bans on campus overall.
I have to go for a bit, I will be back a bit later, you guys keep it on topic as much as possible.
Thanks for all the perspectives, especially those of you disagreeing with me....which at this point is just about all of you.
Thanks for all the perspectives, especially those of you disagreeing with me....which at this point is just about all of you.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
