Call to Action for Madison, Wisconsin

[JustJulie]

Since Madison is the 2nd largest city in Wisconsin, CASAA has issued a Call to Action on an ordinance that would ban e-cigarette use wherever smoking is prohibited. First reading was November 18, 2014, and the matter was referred to the Board of Parks Commissioners.

The ordinance is expected to be considered at the next Board of Parks Commissioners meeting, December 10, 2014 at 6:30 P.M. at the Warner Park Community Recreation Center: 1625 Northport Dr, Madison, WI 53704

Please see the Call to Action for more details on what is at stake and how you can become involved: CASAA: Call to Action! Madison Wisconsin E-cigarette Use Ban

 

[kristin]

IMPORTANT:

The ordinance was referred to both the Parks Commmissioners AND the Madison-Dane County Board of Health.

The ordinance IS on the Parks Commissioners agenda for December 10th and public comments are strongly encouraged. Please see the Call to Action for talking points and contact information. If you cannot attend the meeting, please be sure to call and/or email both the Commissioners and BOH members!

 

[JayQC]

It's actually a good decision.

Vapor has a smell.

People vape huge clouds in movie theaters, restaurants, cash lines, wherever they please and it IS annoying.

Just because the vapor is safer than cig smoke doesn't mean it's not annoying.

"Yeah but it's not EVERY vaper that does it."
"The majority pays for a stupid minority"
"I blame cloud chasers"

It doesn't change anything about the fact that plumes of vapor in your face are irritating when it's not your vapor.


To 99% of people, E-cig and real cigs share the same stigma and it's a reality that will not go away. The vaper's job to accept it and deal with it or find another hobby.

Good move WI. I support it.

 

[Sundodger]

It's actually a good decision.

Vapor has a smell.

People vape huge clouds in movie theaters, restaurants, cash lines, wherever they please and it IS annoying.

Just because the vapor is safer than cig smoke doesn't mean it's not annoying.

"Yeah but it's not EVERY vaper that does it."
"The majority pays for a stupid minority"
"I blame cloud chasers"

It doesn't change anything about the fact that plumes of vapor in your face are irritating when it's not your vapor.


To 99% of people, E-cig and real cigs share the same stigma and it's a reality that will not go away. The vaper's job to accept it and deal with it or find another hobby.

Good move WI. I support it.

Everything you posted is what's wrong with this world. Thank god that you don't have a vote in the United States, let alone Wisconsin. We already have enough people that are ready to give up every right they have just not to offended someone else. I do hope I offended you since you offended me with your post. And I can assure you, it's not Wisconsin, only the crazy libs in Moskow west (Madison) that are what the CTA is about.

 

[JohnnyDill]

It's actually a good decision.

Vapor has a smell.

People vape huge clouds in movie theaters, restaurants, cash lines, wherever they please and it IS annoying.

Just because the vapor is safer than cig smoke doesn't mean it's not annoying.

"Yeah but it's not EVERY vaper that does it."
"The majority pays for a stupid minority"
"I blame cloud chasers"

It doesn't change anything about the fact that plumes of vapor in your face are irritating when it's not your vapor.


To 99% of people, E-cig and real cigs share the same stigma and it's a reality that will not go away. The vaper's job to accept it and deal with it or find another hobby.

Good move WI. I support it.

.....I wonder..... why in the HELL are you on ECF if you support big government regulation of vaping????? {Head on desk}

 

[pennysmalls]

It's actually a good decision.

Vapor has a smell.

People vape huge clouds in movie theaters, restaurants, cash lines, wherever they please and it IS annoying.

Just because the vapor is safer than cig smoke doesn't mean it's not annoying.

"Yeah but it's not EVERY vaper that does it."
"The majority pays for a stupid minority"
"I blame cloud chasers"

It doesn't change anything about the fact that plumes of vapor in your face are irritating when it's not your vapor.


To 99% of people, E-cig and real cigs share the same stigma and it's a reality that will not go away. The vaper's job to accept it and deal with it or find another hobby.

Good move WI. I support it.

The vapers job is to educate others so that the association between tobacco cigarettes and electronic cigarettes is seen for the misconception that it is. It's a false reality that will go away once the general public is educated. Your attitude is very negative and supports giving up, it's a good thing most vapers know a thing or two about perseverance

 

[Sundodger]

And it sure as heck isn't a "hobby" for me. It's a life changing, if not life saving part of my life. I know many feel the same, being able to finally fight smoking with something that works.

 

[JayQC]

You are not entitled to anything just because you are vaping instead of smoking guys.

Vaping should not be allowed in restaurants, bars, movie theaters, etc because it's annoying.

Abstaining from blowing out vapor in a restaurant is not akin to "giving up a right", it's a question of respect. If the police knocks at your door because you are vaping in your home then yeah, you are losing rights, until then, calm down or up your nic level.


To answer JohnnyDill : I'm on ECF because it's an information hub for vaping in general. The legislative aspect of ECF does not interest me in the least because it's mostly made up of people who think vaping is like drinking water.

I've been called a government infiltrator here, I've been called a spy, a liberal, a conservative, a republican, a frothing democrat, a redneck, a hipster, a survivalist, a fatalist, disinforer, I've been accused of sabotage and of course, since I've been here for a while and no one is abstained from Godwin's law, a nazi.

Mostly in the legislative and legal sections of the forum though, in other sections of ECF, it's all good.

All because when I'm in a restaurant I hate to smell things apart from my food. Especially when it comes in the form of clouds of anything coming out of someone else's face who is not even sitting at my table. When I'm at the movies I ....ing hate it when some ...... blows up a cloud that obscures the screen.

So yeah, it's a good decision to ban vaping in public places, and you're gonna have to deal with it because if you're the kind of person who thinks vaping should not be regulated in any way shape or form and should be allowed anywhere at anytime, you are part of the reason why the antz want it banned in the first place. Have you ever thought about it that way?

This sort of shortsightedness is why I scoff at 80% of the vaping paranoia that I see in this sort of thread. The fact that I have to point this out to you as a brand new perspective is worrying to say the least. 90% of people are non smokers/non-vapers, they don't care what it is, and they don't HAVE to care either. If you talk to the proverbial antz you'll realize that they think e-cigs are actually pretty awesome, but that they are just as annoying as stinkers when it comes to public places. Antz don't HAVE to educate themselves on a subject they don't care about, and if you think otherwise let me bring you back to earth. Vaping is YOUR thing, not the World's thing. You are someone else's ant by the way, just so you know. We're all someone else's antz.

Our job is not to educate antz, our job is to enjoy our vape respectfully and responsibly so non-smokers/non-vapers have NOTHING on us. At the moment we are not doing that. At the moment we are arguing that because vaping is safer than cigs, it should be allowed to happen in places where plumes of airborne chemicals are not welcome. No one is debating the health aspct of vaping here, we are debating why it is disrespectful to do it in many many public places, and the safety of it has nothing do to with it. Keep your perspectives in check son, jeez.

Here's a fun experiment : Get out of the house every once in a while, go into a restaurant and blow your vape in someone's face while they eat. Then when they look at you like you have no respect, just whip out your smart phone and read them "Peering through the mist" aloud and see if they like you better.

Have a nice day regardless.

 

[pennysmalls]

No one is saying that non smokers/vapers have to care or even need to understand. Vaping exists and someone either understanding it or not understanding it is irrelevant. I don't need to understand or even care why electrical engineering exists and my understanding or lack there of is irrelevant because it exists despite my lack of interest or care. So vaping exists despite support or demonization of it, so lets start there and move forward.

I have not once, anywhere, seen a vaper do the things you mention. I can't help but wonder if you exaggerate, no offense intended. Maybe you live somewhere where vaping is prolific. I don't know, but I've never seen it like you describe. But cutting off the nose to spite the face is not the answer. Banning vaping wherever smoking is not allowed lumps vaping into the same category as smoking and certainly doesn't help educate the general public as to the differences between the two, so it's a gigantic step backwards for this town as far as education goes. The world is not perfect and not all vapers are going to co-operate in the respect area but purposely voting to lump vaping in with smoking just to spite these vapers you don't like is rather selfish. There are much larger issues here and your personal preferences may need to take a back seat until these larger issues are resolved.

 

[Sundodger]

"where plumes of airborne chemicals are not welcome"

I think this says it all, you are the one that needs to be educated. This is about PRIVATE property rights. Our U.S. Constitution protects those rights.

 

[roosterado]

You are not entitled to anything just because you are vaping instead of smoking guys.

Vaping should not be allowed in restaurants, bars, movie theaters, etc because it's annoying.

Abstaining from blowing out vapor in a restaurant is not akin to "giving up a right", it's a question of respect. If the police knocks at your door because you are vaping in your home then yeah, you are losing rights, until then, calm down or up your nic level.


To answer JohnnyDill : I'm on ECF because it's an information hub for vaping in general. The legislative aspect of ECF does not interest me in the least because it's mostly made up of people who think vaping is like drinking water.

I've been called a government infiltrator here, I've been called a spy, a liberal, a conservative, a republican, a frothing democrat, a redneck, a hipster, a survivalist, a fatalist, disinforer, I've been accused of sabotage and of course, since I've been here for a while and no one is abstained from Godwin's law, a nazi.

Mostly in the legislative and legal sections of the forum though, in other sections of ECF, it's all good.

All because when I'm in a restaurant I hate to smell things apart from my food. Especially when it comes in the form of clouds of anything coming out of someone else's face who is not even sitting at my table. When I'm at the movies I ....ing hate it when some ...... blows up a cloud that obscures the screen.

So yeah, it's a good decision to ban vaping in public places, and you're gonna have to deal with it because if you're the kind of person who thinks vaping should not be regulated in any way shape or form and should be allowed anywhere at anytime, you are part of the reason why the antz want it banned in the first place. Have you ever thought about it that way?

This sort of shortsightedness is why I scoff at 80% of the vaping paranoia that I see in this sort of thread. The fact that I have to point this out to you as a brand new perspective is worrying to say the least. 90% of people are non smokers/non-vapers, they don't care what it is, and they don't HAVE to care either. If you talk to the proverbial antz you'll realize that they think e-cigs are actually pretty awesome, but that they are just as annoying as stinkers when it comes to public places. Antz don't HAVE to educate themselves on a subject they don't care about, and if you think otherwise let me bring you back to earth. Vaping is YOUR thing, not the World's thing. You are someone else's ant by the way, just so you know. We're all someone else's antz.

Our job is not to educate antz, our job is to enjoy our vape respectfully and responsibly so non-smokers/non-vapers have NOTHING on us. At the moment we are not doing that. At the moment we are arguing that because vaping is safer than cigs, it should be allowed to happen in places where plumes of airborne chemicals are not welcome. No one is debating the health aspct of vaping here, we are debating why it is disrespectful to do it in many many public places, and the safety of it has nothing do to with it. Keep your perspectives in check son, jeez.

Here's a fun experiment : Get out of the house every once in a while, go into a restaurant and blow your vape in someone's face while they eat. Then when they look at you like you have no respect, just whip out your smart phone and read them "Peering through the mist" aloud and see if they like you better.

Have a nice day regardless.

Here in the US many of our citizens believe Private Business[Bar,Restaurants,workplace should have the Right to decide whether or not to allow Vaping on their property.A private business owner can decide if Vaping is right for his business,his Patrons /employees. These indoor Electronic Cigarette use bans often classifying Electronic Cigarettes as Tobacco Products. That return the Stigma of being a smoker back to the Vaper that has stopped Smoker. Stigma is a powerful foe for groups that are consider less then,like people with a mental illness so they hesitate to seek medical treatment because of the Stigma attached to that group. The list goes on.
Also Classifying Electronic Cigarettes as Tobacco Products open the door for Sin taxes to be levied. Small or large at first,they always end up Large . So the person who is smoking but wants a way to quit using Electronic Cigarettes may be discouraged to try, because they will have the stimga burden still that they now have as a smoker. High Taxes on E-Liquid added to that result in more smokers remaining smokers!

 

[JayQC]

"where plumes of airborne chemicals are not welcome"

I think this says it all, you are the one that needs to be educated.

Why do I need to be educated?

Because I used the word "chemicals" to describe vaporized e-juice and that rubbed you the wrong way?

Here in the US many of our citizens believe Private Business[Bar,Restaurants,workplace should have the Right to decide whether or not to allow Vaping on their property.A private business owner can decide if Vaping is right for his business,his Patrons /employees. These indoor Electronic Cigarette use bans often classifying Electronic Cigarettes as Tobacco Products. That return the Stigma of being a smoker back to the Vaper that has stopped Smoker. Stigma is a powerful foe for groups that are consider less then,like people with a mental illness so they hesitate to seek medical treatment because of the Stigma attached to that group. The list goes on.

Also Classifying Electronic Cigarettes as Tobacco Products open the door for Sin taxes to be levied. Small or large at first,they always end up Large . So the person who is smoking but wants a way to quit using Electronic Cigarettes may be discouraged to try, because they will have the stimga burden still that they now have as a smoker. High Taxes on E-Liquid added to that result in more smokers remaining smokers!

I agree with your post 100%.

Thing is, for a legislative body, the toxicity of vaping is not relevant because they are mainly looking to ban it on the basis of hindering other people's enjoyment of a public place.

It's way easier to consider it as a tobacco product because the point of vaping is that it mimicks smoking. Otherwise we'd drinking e-juice straight. We love vaping because it so closely mimicks smoking that the transition is near effortless when we drop cigs, right down to the exhalation of what looks like smoke but isn't, but still has a smell that can bother other people.

On the basis of public respect I agree with a ban, it's just normal. However, cramming vaping in the same bag as tobacco use in order to facilitate this process is wrong.

My problem is the attitude of entitled vapers who will try to vehemently fight a valid public and legal argument on the wrong basis.

The right way to put it would be : Ban vaping in public places all you want, but don't say it's because it's a tobacco product, because that's a damn lie and you all know it.

The wrong way to put it is : Vaping is safer than cigs, therefore it should be legal to do it everywhere at anytime. That attitude will fuel a confrontation more than it will take it further.


Even though private business owners should have the right to decide what they want or not, it is to be expected that a majority of them would not accept vaping in their premises for the simple reason that it will put off a lot of non-smokers/non-vapers and from a business standpoint, vaping and smoking these days is a niche market that carries a stigma that is repulsive to most people. Vapers need to understand and accept this if they want to move their case further.

How many times have you read "E-juice only has 4 chemicals in it and cigarettes have like millions"?

Then you start discussing Diketones with them and their eyes widen.

Uninformed vapers are just as bad as uninformed Johnny Pinklungs to their own causes.

As I said, we are all someone else's Antz. Legislation will always side with the majority.

I'm a huge metalhead. I have been called a future mass murderer more times than I can count.

I have a classic impala from the 60's, I have been held responsible for global warming.

I enjoy video games too, so I'm a greasy haired no gooder.

I know what stigma is, I just don't really care because I live my life in a way that makes me immune to it.

My job is to stand in front of a classroom full of police officers and train them to use emergency response software. Being challenged to my face and judged publicly on bull.... basis simply makes me laugh nowadays. As you become older and hopefully smarter, you start seeing things differently.

I avoid having to discuss the various stigmas attached to my awesome hobbies with people who don't know me because it's a waste of time.

Some people call this coping out? I call this directing my energy towards things that really matter, and picking arguments with antz over a subject that they don't care about is a waste of my time and energy.

They don't want my vapor in their faces? I get that, I feel the same. The safety aspect of it does not change a single thing, it's totally besides the point, but the legislative body just want to move fast in damage control because vaping is kicking them in the ... right now.

They'll go "Okay, it looks like smoking so we'll put it in there with tobacco for now because we need to do something right now."

I can't blame them, from their point of view the end result is the same : No more vaping where it might bother Johnny Pinklungs.

Some of the things they do or say will come off wrong, our job is to STAY on point, not use safety as leverage when the discussion is about public respect. And especially not try to justify vaping as something that should be allowed in public places and anywhere at any time, that's just disrespectful to others, and it makes US look like c**ts and indirectly you are not helping your own cause, and eventually if I get a ticket because I'm vaping while walking down the street I'll know vapers nailed their own coffin by being too confrontational, completely unreasonable, and deceptively irresponsible.

Look at things objectively guys, it will help you in the long run.

 

[pennysmalls]

How do you keep safety out of the equation while at the same time not "cramming vaping in the same bag as tobacco use"? The two are inseparable, each supports the other. The main issue is not respect. Focusing on the moral side opens the flood gates to every single opinion and belief that anyone anywhere has or will have. When that happens total chaos ensues. Personal beliefs, opinions and emotions need to be kept out of this. Let the facts speak.

 

[JayQC]

Here's a fact : Smelling vapor or smoke while eating bothers a lot of people, me included.

Just because the vapor is mostly harmless doesn't mean it's a smart thing to vape where people might be bothered by it, especially when your habit is being scrutinized so intensely as vaping.

A lot of harmless things are prohibited from some places because of the disturbance they cause. Walking shirtless in a mall, listening to loud music in a library, installing stupidly loud exhaust systems on peasant cars, list goes on.

When you speak of personal beliefs, opinions and emotions, what do you make of these examples?


Vaping should not be permitted in indoor public spaces because the smell might be bothersome to others. Me included.

It's a question of respect.

With attitudes like that, vaping will NEVER make it to mainstream acceptance or respect, it will always be a struggle. Too many vapers are 12 years old in their heads, they are destroying the culture from within and pointing fingers at the state, at antz, at everyone but themselves.

Mark my words, it will always be a struggle.

 

[NorthOfAtlanta]

Here's a fact : Smelling vapor or smoke while eating bothers a lot of people, me included.

Here's another fact: If the business allows vaping DO NOT patronize it. It's called choice.

 

[Lessifer]

Here's a fact : Smelling vapor or smoke while eating bothers a lot of people, me included.

Just because the vapor is mostly harmless doesn't mean it's a smart thing to vape where people might be bothered by it, especially when your habit is being scrutinized so intensely as vaping.

A lot of harmless things are prohibited from some places because of the disturbance they cause. Walking shirtless in a mall, listening to loud music in a library, installing stupidly loud exhaust systems on peasant cars, list goes on.

When you speak of personal beliefs, opinions and emotions, what do you make of these examples?


Vaping should not be permitted in indoor public spaces because the smell might be bothersome to others. Me included.

It's a question of respect.

With attitudes like that, vaping will NEVER make it to mainstream acceptance or respect, it will always be a struggle. Too many vapers are 12 years old in their heads, they are destroying the culture from within and pointing fingers at the state, at antz, at everyone but themselves.

Mark my words, it will always be a struggle.

The government cannot and should not ban things based solely on the fact that some people find it annoying, if they did, Axe body spray would be out of business.

In your example:
Walking shirtless through a mall - that's a business owner's restriction, not a government ban
Loud music in a library - again, rules of the establishment, not the government
Stupidly loud exhaust system - In the areas where these are banned, they are actually under the guise of "clean air" and/or "noise pollution," and there's plenty of "science" to say that high decibels can damage hearing.

So again, if a business owner wants to restrict vaping in their own establishment, because it may annoy their other customers, more power to them. Leave the government ban out of it though.

 

[pennysmalls]

In regards to your examples about harmless things being banned in public places....you can ask one hundred people and depending on their age, where they are from, their religion, their general disposition and their political leaning you will get one hundred different answers. You simply cannot create laws based on personal preference, opinion and belief, you just can't. By the by you forgot to mention body odor and bad breath, should we ban those as well?

I want facts, and so far the facts are not pointing to a need to ban. Misinformation, myth, greed and out right ignorance are the fuel behind these bans. Your distaste of vapers vaping around you is a personal problem the same way I very much dislike alchohol being served outside of the home is my personal problem. I would never, ever try to impose a ban on alcohol consumption in public places though because others peoples choices are none of my business. I do what I can to protect myself from inebriated individuals and that's all I can do.

But back to the main point, how does one go about keeping e cigs classed as different than tobacco while keeping safety out of the discussion?

 

[JayQC]

Stupidly loud exhaust system - In the areas where these are banned, they are actually under the guise of "clean air" and/or "noise pollution," and there's plenty of "science" to say that high decibels can damage hearing.

This is if you attend a concert that has an unreasonable volume level your hearing will be damaged for sure. It will not be damaged because a hot rodded hyundai drove by your house at 30mph in first gear, it will just annoy you for a few seconds but it's enough to warrant a ticket.

Keep things in perspective.

I wish business owners would have full power there, but vaping is still experimental in the sense that long term studies will just START to emerge in the upcoming years, and I'm sure will solidify even more vaping as the #1 smoking alternative in the world. Until then, the state will be tip toeing around it's laws to mitigate the social impact of vaping. It was to be expected.

Vapers then take it upon themselves to shove their habit in everyone's face and act like cornered cats when there is merely a hint of public mitigation on the subject. That only adds fuel to the fire.

We all need to calm down. It's a transitional phase for everyone. We need to stand our ground, but we also need to understand that we are a minority.

When TRUE long term studies (peering through the mist comes to mind, but we need more) start coming out and it is made clear without any shadow of a doubt that vaping is safe for bystanders, then maybe business owners will have some control over it when the state steps out of the safety debate, but it will be through respect and understanding and not through obnoxious revolt.

No doubt some business owners would LOVE to allow vaping in their establishment, but right now they can't take that decision for themselves until the safety debate dies down, and it's gonna take a while. Most people know by now (vapers or not) that vaping is mostly harmless, but governments are held accountable for EVERYTHING that happens in a country, the slightest mistakes can ruin lots of things down the road.

I'm sure the ban is aimed at public disturbance more than safety concerns, everybody knows that, but it was quicker to put vaping and tobacco together to pass bans and avoid it getting outta hand too quickly.

When you ask them where the true risk of vaping are, they fumble a bit before saying "Well we believe the young crowd might be attracted to it." That's a bull....e answer and we all know it, but so far that's all they have besides the assumption that a flood of public complaints might be right around the corner. Governments won't take that chance again after the demonization of tobacco. And from their point of view I can understand that.

Things will be different when they arrest me for vaping at home. That will never happen.

If we act like frustrated kids we will kill our cause.

 

[Lessifer]

This is if you attend a concert that has an unreasonable volume level your hearing will be damaged for sure. It will not be damaged because a hot rodded hyundai drove by your house at 30mph in first gear, it will just annoy you for a few seconds but it's enough to warrant a ticket.

Keep things in perspective.

Yes, that's why I put science in quotes, the justification for that ticket is as absurd as a ban on indoor vaping. Perhaps things are different up in Canada, here, once something becomes law, it's near impossible for it to get taken off the books. So the idea of ban it now until we know it's safe, even though we really think it's safe anyway, doesn't fly.

 

[JayQC]

In regards to your examples about harmless things being banned in public places....you can ask one hundred people and depending on their age, where they are from, their religion, their general disposition and their political leaning you will get one hundred different answers. You simply cannot create laws based on personal preference, opinion and belief, you just can't. By the by you forgot to mention body odor and bad breath, should we ban those as well?

Body odor is only a problem when you are close to that person. I won't smell your armpits from across the room the same way vapor travels to my seat. If someone smells so ....ing terrible that you can't enjoy your time in an establishment, you have every right to ring in a waiter and have that person thrown out.

You will hear a loud car repeatedly drive by your house at 3am from inside your house, waking up your kids, but someone walking on the sidewalk will not smell your vape from there.

Again, perspective is everything. That's why you can get a ticket for having a stupidly loud exhaust and that's why you could very well be ticketed for vaping indoors in a public place in the future. Is this a good thing? I think so.

I never said I disliked people vaping around me, but when I'm eating for example yes it bothers me and I've told people before and I've gotten the classic "But it's not smoke it's vapor lol" to which I simply pulled out my gear out of my pocket and said "Yeah I know, that's what I'm saying, blow it down your shirt instead or go outside, I'm eating and it bothers me."

But back to the main point, how does one go about keeping e cigs classed as different than tobacco while keeping safety out of the discussion?

That's the discrepancy, and this is what vapers will need to address with the state WITHOUT unreasonably confronting the general public about it. If we act so stupid as to stir up a witchunt out of a smoking cessation tool turned great hobby, we will be the sore losers in the end.

Everybody pretty much knows by now that vaping is mostly harmless, but the state cannot act on these suppositions or should we call them "strong assumptions", they need paper. Sucks ..., that's a government for you.

At the moment I still think we need more long term studies to back our point. By long term I mean 10-15 years, unfortunately. I'd say we're pretty much halfway there. Vaping has been blowing way up for what? 5 years? In 5 more years we're gonna start seeing some real data and I can't effing wait.

In the meantime we gotta just stand our ground respectfully.

They use tobacco law to regulate vaping in the meantime because that's all they got even though everybody knows it's quite safe to bystanders? Let's deal with it for what it is : Public opinion, not public safety.

It will change eventually but it'll take a while that's all I'm saying.