Being a contrary and passionate advocate for vaping i often ask establishments who have banned the use of vapourisers why they feel the need for a ban. For the usual answers (they look like cigarettes, we don't know what's in them etc) i will always (politely) try and educate. Often i will point out the flaws in their reasoning before excepting their rules. I know i sound like a zealot but that's just me...
I was out on a building site today and i asked why vapourisers were not allowed. The answer i received dumbfounded me. ' We don't allow them because non users could become addicted to the vapour'. . . How in hells name can i respond to that ?
I was out on a building site today and i asked why vapourisers were not allowed. The answer i received dumbfounded me. ' We don't allow them because non users could become addicted to the vapour'. . . How in hells name can i respond to that ?