Being Proactive... Thought.

[Demarko]

What if we make efforts to introduce bills/initatives/propositions in our home states, in advanced, banning the sale of e-cigarette's to minors? It seems that in the cases we've already seen, they try to tack on legislation banning them to adults along with minors - so no one wants to be seen as voting AGAINST preventing sales to minors. But, if the law were already on the books keeping them out of the hands of children, then it would take away this powerful tool that they use to simply tack on adult use in public/sales to adults as a "rider".

But for the language about children, there's no way the one in King county would've passed. And then after it passed, they never commented on the adult usage or tried to defend it, they simply said, "We feel it's important to keep out of the hands of children."

 

[Demarko]

Hmm, meant to post this in ecigarettes and the law forum.

 

[Vocalek]

My initial feeling upon reading this was, "Uh, oh. This could fall in the opposite direction. We could be saving the antis a bunch of work by introducing the bill, and then all they have to do is walk in and add a section to outlaw sales to adults."

And then it occurred to me that if our model bill was very carefully worded, bringing out the truths about the product, we could make it very difficult to achieve their goals by merely adding on text. They would have to totally rewrite the original bill.

I don't know. I would defer to the opinion of those on this forum with a background in law and/or politics.

 

[superfrog]

Here was a thought I had on duty the other night, about spinning the media.

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/campaigning-discussions/155904-media-spin-idea.html

I've posted this on another forum, which I've gotten some other feedback on the idea too. Of course, it's just an idea or a concept. The one thing that I figure, anything we do, we need to do together as one BIG voice. And of course, we need money!!! If we can find something to spin the media our way a bit, alot of it initially will be on their dime. And the only two things that I know that will spin the media quickly is a bus full of nuns blowing up in a major US city or a political scandal. I don't think any of us what to see a GreyHound full of penguines blown up in Chicago.

I'm only reposting here in the news section, seeing a couple of other posts wanting to go proactive. Just want to add my two cents, and if we can take even a hodge podge of ideas and make in to one great idea, we're good.

Me personnally, I can't wait until late this summer when I can def get more active in the 'cause'.

 

[DaveP]

It's funny how localities jump on the bandwagon. Here's an article about outlawing sales of ecigs in Dubai. They've slapped a fine on anyone selling ecigs in the Arab Emirates.

Pharmacies selling e-cigarettes can be closed - Emirates24|7

 

[n2xe]

I'm focusing on New York. I reject the premise that the issue is e-cigs. It's about tobacco death. New York rakes in $1.4 billion a year on tobacco and they want to keep that no matter how many die in the process. That is the issue, short and sweet. I will not defend e-cigs, it's not necessary. I will go on offense and make them defend their pro-tobacco, pro-death position.

 

[Thulium]

I'm focusing on New York. I reject the premise that the issue is e-cigs. It's about tobacco death. New York rakes in $1.4 billion a year on tobacco and they want to keep that no matter how many die in the process. That is the issue, short and sweet. I will not defend e-cigs, it's not necessary. I will go on offense and make them defend their pro-tobacco, pro-death position.

Unfortunately, I think you're on the right track.

In the course of my research to "defend" e-cigs I discovered some disturbing facts:

• Tobacco Control has known for more than 30 years that every form of non-combustible tobacco product is one or more orders of magnitude less dangerous than smoking.
• Rather than encourage people to switch to products with lower known risks, so-called "public health" professionals who financially depend on the taxes, legal settlements, hospital bills, treatment programs, and sales of tobacco and pharmaceutical substitutes convinced the public that it was Evil Tobacco that was the cause of all society's problems and even a second, third, or fourth-hand association with tobacco is guilty by association of attempted infanticide.
• Rather than allowing adult smokers to choose from a variety of smoke-free alternatives, TC attempts to ban and vilify smokeless tobacco telling people they should just take FDA drugs if they want to stop smoking; all the while knowing that NRTs and the horrors of Chantix are so miserably ineffective that a relapse to smoking and continuation of the financial status quo is nearly certain.

All the "demonization" (that has escalated into public ostracism rather than public health) is an attempt to distract us from the very plain and simple truth: Combustion is dangerous and messy. Reduce or eliminate combustion, and you're left with the tobacco plant looking a lot like its sibling recreational plant products coffee and tea. ...The problem is that means fewer people needing some form of therapy for smoking cessation, cancer, or COPD.

 

[n2xe]

Unfortunately, I think you're on the right track.

In the course of my research to "defend" e-cigs I discovered some disturbing facts:

• Tobacco Control has known for more than 30 years that every form of non-combustible tobacco product is one or more orders of magnitude less dangerous than smoking.
• Rather than encourage people to switch to products with lower known risks, so-called "public health" professionals who financially depend on the taxes, legal settlements, hospital bills, treatment programs, and sales of tobacco and pharmaceutical substitutes convinced the public that it was Evil Tobacco that was the cause of all society's problems and even a second, third, or fourth-hand association with tobacco is guilty by association of attempted infanticide.
• Rather than allowing adult smokers to choose from a variety of smoke-free alternatives, TC attempts to ban and vilify smokeless tobacco telling people they should just take FDA drugs if they want to stop smoking; all the while knowing that NRTs and the horrors of Chantix are so miserably ineffective that a relapse to smoking and continuation of the financial status quo is nearly certain.

All the "demonization" (that has escalated into public ostracism rather than public health) is an attempt to distract us from the very plain and simple truth: Combustion is dangerous and messy. Reduce or eliminate combustion, and you're left with the tobacco plant looking a lot like its sibling recreational plant products coffee and tea. ...The problem is that means fewer people needing some form of therapy for smoking cessation, cancer, or COPD.

I agree. E-cigs defend themselves, not much explanation needed. Electronic cigarettes are not the issue, smoldering tobacco is. Nicotine is not an issue, tar, cancer and COPD is. The argument is silly to even the most casual of observers. These people want to preserve tobacco-death. That is the debate and that is what they need to defend come re-election. DO NOT let your opponent define the argument!

 

[Demarko]

I agree. E-cigs defend themselves, not much explanation needed. Electronic cigarettes are not the issue, smoldering tobacco is. Nicotine is not an issue, tar, cancer and COPD is. The argument is silly to even the most casual of observers. These people want to preserve tobacco-death. That is the debate and that is what they need to defend come re-election. DO NOT let your opponent define the argument!

Which is exactly what I'm getting at here. In Washington State, and I understand it's a minority, we have Initiatives that the people can bring into law by a majority vote. In fact, just recently we restricted our state legislature to a 2/3 majority on tax increases (whether that's a good thing or not remains to be seen) but it is a huge restriction.

One of the rules of having an initiative is that it can only address one thing at a time - or else, after 2 years, the state legislature can repeal it. No initiative banning the sales of ecigs to adults - I believe - would ever pass. One banning sales to minors would surely pass. One banning both would be unconstitutional by Washington law.

Once the law was in place, however, I think the antis would find it very tough going to sell their garbage in the state congress - without the provision of barring sales to minors, I believe there would be no support.

 

[t9c]

Very well said Thulium!

If we could have a pro-active campaign slogan, it would surely be "Follow The Money".

All of these bans and attempted bans are about GREED. Shame on them.

 

[warbdan]

I don't agree that any new law needs to be passed regarding electronic cigarettes. The FDA needs to do it's job and regulate them as tobacco products. PERIOD. Current laws already ban the sale of tobacco products to minors, which INCLUDES e-cigs. No new laws are needed. Over 700 regulations were passed last year alone. God only knows what everyday thing they've made illegal already. It's all bull.... and it needs to stop. We've got 450+ legislators passing stupid laws to make it look like they're earning their inflated income. Some are doing good work, others are just passing laws to stay busy. What we need is to wipe the slate clean.. Go back to the original Constitution and start over. Our checks and balances are wayyy off. That is why the FDA has so much control as it is. Their powers are UNCONSTITUTIONAL. What we have is 300 million Americans being told what they can/can't do by a few hundred Know- It- Alls. Until we do something about it, we're feeding into their false sense of righteousness.

We(Americans, not just vapers) MUST stand together and in ONE VOICE, show them that we aren't going to take it. I propose a march to the steps of court the next time the FDA takes this issue to the courts. There are over a million vapers by this point. We need a million there, outside and inside with signs and give these .......s the fight of their lives(words, not violence). We CAN stop the travesties that are happening in this country. We just have to show these pompous politicians that we give a .....

/rant off

 

[Demarko]

It's strange, you always hear about the guy who has his jaw rot off because of a mouth full of chewing tobacco. But I don't actually know anyone. It's always been "an accepted fact". Granted, chew is gross - at least, if you've ever worked in retail, and picked up someones chew can that got left carelessly behind. But it's gross in the same way a lot of things are - Clean up after yourself, and it's fine.

So, are ALL forms of non-smoking tobacco better? is the chew "myth" just that?

 

[Desert Willow]

It's strange, you always hear about the guy who has his jaw rot off because of a mouth full of chewing tobacco. But I don't actually know anyone. It's always been "an accepted fact". Granted, chew is gross - at least, if you've ever worked in retail, and picked up someones chew can that got left carelessly behind. But it's gross in the same way a lot of things are - Clean up after yourself, and it's fine.

So, are ALL forms of non-smoking tobacco better? is the chew "myth" just that?

As a retired RN, I can tell you that I have cared for many patients who have had to have their lower jaw and cheek partially removed due to oral cancer. It is a very disfiguring surgery. The 20 or so patients that had this done yearly were tobacco chewers.
I have no idea of the statistics re' the % of tobacco chewers who develop oral cancer.
My grandpa and my great-uncles all chewed, non of them developed cancer.
Not much, but I hope it helps.

Brightest Blessings!