Banning of e-cigarettes on College Campus

[Fulgurant]

This raises an interesting question that I really had not considered myself. Do smokers in general think that switching to vaping will free them from any and all restrictions ?

Any and all restrictions? Doubtful. But envision a future in which both smoking and vaping are so punitively expensive and stigmatized that there's only a speculative advantage to switching. Can you say with any degree of certainty that you would have switched under those conditions? I honestly can't.

Even as things stand currently, it's an albeit small financial risk to try to switch. It costs so much money to keep smoking that any expense you add on top of it is hard to justify. And since you can't know at the beginning how well any alternative will work, the cost of the alternative must initially be regarded as a supplemental cost. I can't tell you how much money I spent on patches and gum over the last twenty years; in comparison to the money I spent on smoking, it's a pittance, but it still rankles because in retrospect I might as well have burned the money.

The point of all of this rambling is that policies like the college rule referenced in the OP can't just be taken at face value. It's easy to look at any individual case, shrug your shoulders, and declare that property rights are what they are. But the collective mindset that leads to anti-vaping policies is deeply troubling, and potentially deeply problematic.

Well, at least now I have some hope of living long enough to see how this plays out ...

Amen.

 

[DC2]

But the collective mindset that leads to anti-vaping policies is deeply troubling, and potentially deeply problematic.

And on that note I would like to thank you for the opportunity to post this once again...
Rampant Antismoking Signifies Grave Danger

The contemporary antismoking crusade has manipulated/altered psychology and social/economic/cultural/political structures the world over. One of the manipulations instrumental in its ‘success’ is avoiding scrutiny by smearing anyone that dares question antismoking policies and methods. By its beliefs and tactics, antismoking conducts itself like a cult. The antismoking industry is now so large and mainstream that questionable, inflammatory claims are produced with high regularity. There are so many such claims working to an agenda that it is impossible to keep up with scrutiny.

The current antismoking crusade has a clear beginning and framework. Rather than try to keep abreast of a myriad of questionable claims, it is wiser to consider what the antismoking framework has been from the outset, and to consider it by antismokers’ own words. Provided below are excerpts from antismoking conferences and manuals. By this information, the public can then properly judge the basis and nature of the contemporary antismoking ‘movement’.

 

[Anjaffm]

Gosh, DC2, that link gives me the creeps every time I look at it.

 

[Robino1]

It makes me ill........

 

[joeybear]

Colleges are jumping on the bandwagon because they are ill informed. I walk through the university, outside, with my SVD almost everyday and never hear a peep. Even some of my colleagues have quit smoking to give vaping a try. This is a dumb decision because it's very non-enforceable. Smokers are everywhere on campuses across the country, even with no smoking policies.

 

[DC2]

Gosh, DC2, that link gives me the creeps every time I look at it.

It makes me ill........

It makes me want to have a brief discussion with Stanton Glantz.

 

[EddardinWinter]

No, but we certainly have a right to challenge the reasoning behind their policies. Hence the topic. To observe that property owners (public or private) have a right to institute (most) any stupid policy they wish on their own grounds is to state a truism. At best it's a pointlessly obvious observation; at worst, it's an actively disingenuous attempt to derail the debate.

We know they have a right to make the policy. The questions are why do they make the policy, where their reasoning comes from, and what the unopposed perpetuation of that reasoning means for us in the long term. Do we want vaping to become synonymous in the public's consciousness with smoking? Do we want any prospective former smoker to feel as if trying e-cigarettes isn't worth his time, because both activities are equally subjected to increasingly oppressive restrictions? Do you really think it's reasonable to ban e-cigs on outdoor college grounds?

I know (or I have reason to suppose, based on what I've seen of your post history) that you think topics like this one are overwrought or alarmist, but it really isn't a stretch to argue that we discuss a matter of life or death. There are powerful forces who, for a variety of reasons (consciously malicious or benign but misguided), have declared themselves in opposition to tobacco harm reduction products of all shapes and sizes. That is a fact. If you don't think it's worth your trouble to oppose them, then that's your prerogative; I certainly won't judge you for making that choice -- but please, don't patronize the rest of us by painting our cause as some sort of childish misunderstanding of private property rights.

Thank you, sir.

 

[Fulgurant]

Thank you, sir.

No, thank you. I've very much enjoyed reading your posts.

(And I'm not just saying that because you're an apex predator!)

 

[Fulgurant]

It makes me want to have a brief discussion with Stanton Glantz.

Just don't let him talk much; your IQ is at stake!

 

[wharr]

Has anyone at any of these Colleges or Universities gone out and got enough signatures to show the schools there is a reason to listen to both sides? It may not get the bans lifted but at least it will stop them long enough to listen and learn what vaping is and how it actually is one of the things that helps people quit the analogs.

 

[EddardinWinter]

No, thank you. I've very much enjoyed reading your posts.

(And I'm not just saying that because you're an apex predator!)

Well, in your above post, you expressed my purpose for the OP quite clearly. The all or nothing fallacy that is represented in these sorts of topics are just baffling. I am not seeking unrestricted indoor vaping for people at all times. I am seeking to halt the blanket bans which are absent any sound logic. When we give ground on issues without resistance, our enemies are emboldened. I think surrender of any of our vaping freedoms (not constitutional rights) is foolish and will only hasten our loss of the enjoyment. This does not mean I think we should engage in boorish vaping behavior that disregards the wishes of an owner of a business, it means we convince owners of businesses why it is to their advantage to be vape friendly! When vaping is banned outside in any nonsensical case, I oppose it.

I tolerate excess perfume, loud and obnoxious children, smelly people, etc. When they bother me too much, I simply leave the area they are in. Why can't that be my expectation of people who are offended by vaping for no logical reason when I am vaping with the blessing of the owner of an establishment?

So back to the OP. They have the "right" to ban vaping among their students, and indoors. What right do they have to restrict my vaping inside of my car as I travel through campus on a state maintained road? I would say none at all.

I bring this up, because I regularly defy my county's edict of banning possession of e-cigarettes on any grade school campus. I make it a point to vape openly in my car when I pick up my son from football, or (rarely) when I drop one off to school. The staff have threatened to take my PV from me several times. I have invited them to attempt to do so. None have accepted the invitation for some reason.

The county school board's decision to ban a legal product used by a non-student is an example of the arrogance that I find disgusting. This is county property. You control the school interior, and perhaps the immediate grounds by entrances. When I am in my car on county property, they exceed their authority when they order me to stop using a legal product for its intended use, and I am calling them out on it. I am fully prepared to face whatever consequences are the result of my behavior.

Is it wrong to challenge rules that are made without legal/ethical/moral authority? If we believe our cause is just, should we not fight for it? I believe the decision to ban vaping absolutely on a college campus to all people is a rule carried to an unreasonable extreme. I think it should be opposed vigorously.

 

[Dusty_D]

(And I'm not just saying that because you're an apex predator!)

Pfft!

 

[Anjaffm]

The staff have threatened to take my PV from me several times. I have invited them to attempt to do so. None have accepted the invitation for some reason.

I love it!

The county school board's decision to ban a legal product used by a non-student is an example of the arrogance that I find disgusting. This is county property. You control the school interior, and perhaps the immediate grounds by entrances. When I am in my car on county property, they exceed their authority when they order me to stop using a legal product for its intended use, and I am calling them out on it. I am fully prepared to face whatever consequences are the result of my behavior.

GREAT!

 

[EddardinWinter]

Pfft!

At 6:30 EST, the over pays, as the thread will have somehow (against all odds) survived 30 hours.

 

[Fulgurant]

I love it!

GREAT!

Those two quotes were my favorites too.

 

[Dusty_D]

At 6:30 EST, the over pays, as the thread will have somehow (against all odds) survived 30 hours.

 

[Zealous]

I bring this up, because I regularly defy my county's edict of banning possession of e-cigarettes on any grade school campus. I make it a point to vape openly in my car when I pick up my son from football, or (rarely) when I drop one off to school. The staff have threatened to take my PV from me several times. I have invited them to attempt to do so. None have accepted the invitation for some reason.

The county school board's decision to ban a legal product used by a non-student is an example of the arrogance that I find disgusting. This is county property. You control the school interior, and perhaps the immediate grounds by entrances. When I am in my car on county property, they exceed their authority when they order me to stop using a legal product for its intended use, and I am calling them out on it. I am fully prepared to face whatever consequences are the result of my behavior.

This seems strange to me. I mean, my kids' school also has this ban as well as a few others (guns, etc.) but it just seems bizarre to me that anyone would think they have the authority to take it away from you. I'm pretty sure anyone who smokes cigarettes has their pack in their purse or pocket when they go to pick up their kids too. Would the school district expect people to not bring their smokes with them too (that would never happen as I remember being a smoker & I would never just not have my cigarettes with me for any reason)?

All I know is I always have an ecig on me when I go pick up the kids & I have vaped while waiting in the carpool line to pick them up. Never thought about that being a problem so it seems weird to me that someone even cares enough to threaten to take someone's PV away over it.

 

[DC2]

Has anyone at any of these Colleges or Universities gone out and got enough signatures to show the schools there is a reason to listen to both sides? It may not get the bans lifted but at least it will stop them long enough to listen and learn what vaping is and how it actually is one of the things that helps people quit the analogs.

One guy did, and a lot of us here signed it.
But I can't find the thread and I don't think he ever posted the results of his efforts.

 

[Myrany]

This seems strange to me. I mean, my kids' school also has this ban as well as a few others (guns, etc.) but it just seems bizarre to me that anyone would think they have the authority to take it away from you. I'm pretty sure anyone who smokes cigarettes has their pack in their purse or pocket when they go to pick up their kids too. Would the school district expect people to not bring their smokes with them too (that would never happen as I remember being a smoker & I would never just not have my cigarettes with me for any reason)?

All I know is I always have an ecig on me when I go pick up the kids & I have vaped while waiting in the carpool line to pick them up. Never thought about that being a problem so it seems weird to me that someone even cares enough to threaten to take someone's PV away over it.

Last school year the principal of the school my husband teaches at threatened my husbands job if she saw me vaping in my car in the parking lot again. It happens.

 

[Robino1]

Last school year the principal of the school my husband teaches at threatened my husbands job if she saw me vaping in my car in the parking lot again. It happens.

I have no words to verbalize my utter amazement at the idiocy of people in so called authority. I seriously cannot express my anger.

I'm speechless.