CASAA New York State SALES BAN Call to Action!

Status
Not open for further replies.

ABeautifulDisaster

Full Member
Mar 23, 2011
24
7
NY
I just saw this: APNewsBreak: No NY law seen soon for e-cigarettes - WSJ.com

I think that's good news, but not a reason to stop writing/calling. Gives more time though.

ETA: oh never mind. I think that's a different bill. Maybe not good news.

Actually the end of the article does reference this bill (unless Hannon proposed a different bill that also bans?)-

'On Friday, with two weeks left in the legislative session, Hannon introduced his own bill that called for a total ban.

Even Hannon doesn't think his bill, nor the Rosenthal-Johnson bill, will become law before the June 21 end of the Legislature's regular session.

Why submit the late bill?

"To get some discussion going, to get some reaction by people for and against it and get information that would provide a rational basis for action or inaction," Hannon said.

"We're gathering information," Hannon said, noting the FDA has extensive staffing for the task.

With 600 Health Committee bills to pass in the last five days of session, e-cigarettes isn't likely to be one of them.

"Of all the things we have to do this does not rank very high," Hannon said.'

If that is truly his motivation behind the bill, and he feels it doesn't rank high given other pending bills, then that is good news. But who knows.... :/
 

the_vape_nerd

Ultra Member
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 20, 2011
2,623
2,152
New Orleans, LA
13. "ELECTRONIC CIGARETTE" MEANS A BATTERY-OPERATED device THAT
CONTAINS CARTRIDGES FILLED WITH A COMBINATION OF NICOTINE, FLAVOR AND
CHEMICALS THAT ARE TURNED INTO VAPOR WHICH IS INHALED BY THE USER.

The way I read it, if you purchase your batteries separately from your cartridges or if your cartridges are not "filled," you are not buying an "electronic cigarette," according to this Bill's definition.

It seems more designed to prevent the sale of "njoy" type ecigs.

I just made that point it another thread.

If you power the device via passthrough or other direct current, it's not illegal is it? Because theres no battery required and in order for it to be illegal it must be battery powered. So sale of a cartomizer isn't necessarily for use with an illegal device because it can be powered via passthrough.

Liquid vendors have nothing to worry about as they don't even sell devices.

If you sell unflavored nicotine either bottles or in cartomizers, it's perfectly fine, the law says they must have flavoring in them. So unflavored 500mg concentrated juice, is just fine and not illegal. 2mg pineapple flavor though, jail.

If you sell someone 500 atmoziers and no batteries, it's not illegal as it fails to meet the definition of what is an e-cig under the law.
 

Vocalek

CASAA Activist
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Actually the end of the article does reference this bill (unless Hannon proposed a different bill that also bans?)-

'On Friday, with two weeks left in the legislative session, Hannon introduced his own bill that called for a total ban.

Even Hannon doesn't think his bill, nor the Rosenthal-Johnson bill, will become law before the June 21 end of the Legislature's regular session.

Why submit the late bill?

"To get some discussion going, to get some reaction by people for and against it and get information that would provide a rational basis for action or inaction," Hannon said.

"We're gathering information," Hannon said, noting the FDA has extensive staffing for the task.

With 600 Health Committee bills to pass in the last five days of session, e-cigarettes isn't likely to be one of them.

"Of all the things we have to do this does not rank very high," Hannon said.'

If that is truly his motivation behind the bill, and he feels it doesn't rank high given other pending bills, then that is good news. But who knows.... :/

Well, thanks to all who have answered the Call to Action, Hannon is getting plenty of information.

CASAA: New York State Call to Action
 

Bill Godshall

Executive Director<br/> Smokefree Pennsylvania
ECF Veteran
Apr 2, 2009
5,171
13,288
67
The AP article is also at
APNewsBreak: No NY law to ban e-cigarettes for minors expected this year; bills at odds

An article on CASAA's Call To Action is at
New York may ban the sale of electronic cigarettes - Wilmington Civil Rights | Examiner.com

In the past three years, at least a half dozen news headlines have inaccurately stated that NY may ban e-cigarettes.

But no news articles have been written pointing out that we've defeated every bill introduced in 7 different states that would have banned the sale of e-cigarettes.
 

Poeia

Bird Brain
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 6, 2009
9,789
14,368
NYC
13. "ELECTRONIC CIGARETTE" MEANS A BATTERY-OPERATED DEVICE THAT
CONTAINS CARTRIDGES
FILLED WITH A COMBINATION OF NICOTINE, FLAVOR AND
CHEMICALS THAT ARE TURNED INTO VAPOR WHICH IS INHALED BY THE USER.

The way I read it, if you purchase your batteries separately from your cartridges or if your cartridges are not "filled," you are not buying an "electronic cigarette," according to this Bill's definition.

It seems more designed to prevent the sale of "NJoy" type ecigs.

I don't use cartridges, but I'm not counting on a loophole. We have to stop these people from "saving us from ourselves."

I sent them each an e-mail rather than use the delimited lists on the "Call to Action" page. It's still a form letter, but it looks more personalized. (And I added a P.S. for Senator Duane who is my senator.)

With all the extra information on this thread, I'm getting a little confused as to which bills to support (but I know I'm against S07635.) By the way, the call to action page and the delimited lists contain Senator Skelos twice so he's going to get spammed.
 

Poeia

Bird Brain
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 6, 2009
9,789
14,368
NYC
That is my favorite House avatar I've seen so far.
:)

House, sitting directly under a No Smoking sign, puffing on a cigar.
Yes indeed, we need more Houses and less nannies.
Technically it's Hugh, not House. It's a screencap I did from the pre-final-episode special.

And, to get back on target, here's my letter:

Dear Senator (fill in the blank):

Before I tell you my story, I want to make it clear that I oppose the sale to minors of any product that delivers nicotine. For that reason, I support Bill S02926B. As an adult who has been addicted to nicotine for decades, however, I strongly oppose Bill S07635, which would deprive me of a product that saved my life.

When I say that PVs (personal vaporizers aka electronic cigarettes) saved my life, I am not using hyperbole. During the 40 years I smoked I tried everything from A to Z (acupuncture to Zyban) to quit smoking, with stops along the way for hypnosis and professional programs. I’ve donated hundreds of dollars to GlaxoSmithKline for gum that didn’t work for me.

In the autumn of 2009 I decided that I was tired of feeling like a failure and was going to “quit trying to quit.” I smoked over three packs a day at the time. Then I came across a picture of someone using a PV and something clicked. After a little research, I ordered one. Five days after it arrived, I had my last cigarette. That was two and a half years ago. Along the way I’ve lowered the nicotine content I “vape” to less than one-quarter what it was when I started.

Most vapers I know use them the way I do — as a vastly safer alternative to cigarettes. In 2010, after a short hospitalization, I decided to go nicotine-free. That was the only time I was almost started smoking again. At the end of a month I knew my alternatives were adding a little nicotine to my e-liquid or buying a pack of cigarettes. Being a rational person, I chose the former. Bill S07635 would take that option away from me and from hundreds of thousands of fellow New York vapers.

As I don’t possess a time machine that would enable me to prevent my teenage self from having that first cigarette, I must opt for the solution that will do me the least harm. E-liquid has a similar level of carcinogens as the patch or nicotine gum and it eliminates most of the other harmful chemicals in cigarettes such as carbon monoxide, arsenic, formaldehyde…

As with any technology, there is a risk of people misusing it. Lighters explode (causing over 1,000 injuries a year according to the Consumer Product Safety Commission) and cigarettes can cause fires. The solution to problems with lithium-ion batteries is to require protection circuitry and to teach the public the difference between rechargeable and non-rechargeable batteries rather than to ban products that use them (such as PVs, flashlights, cell phones, and laptop computers.)

Thank you for taking the time to read my story. I urge you to visit The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives Association website (CASAA.org) for more information on the benefits of electronic cigarettes.

Sincerely,
 

WCSR

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 26, 2012
511
576
Earth
No matter what state where in, we need to be a voice. It is now NY. If they get NY then who will be next. And there well be a next.
You're absolutely correct. And as for who would be next... California is already trying to legislate e-cigs/liquid as well. Cali and New York are the political "trend" setters in this country, for their respective coasts. Where one goes, the other typically follows....and then it seems to spread from there. It's crazy to think that two states can have a much louder political voice than the 46 other states (in the continental US).
 

WCSR

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 26, 2012
511
576
Earth
I live in NY & will be calling tomorrow.. who exactly do these politicians represent? not me
They represent the demographic that will serve their political agenda. The ones that have the most voting power...and the most money. Sadly, as e-cig users, we're probably on the bottom rung of that ladder.
 

JENerationX

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 25, 2011
2,227
3,114
Rochester, NY
You're absolutely correct. And as for who would be next... California is already trying to legislate e-cigs/liquid as well. Cali and New York are the political "trend" setters in this country, for their respective coasts. Where one goes, the other typically follows....and then it seems to spread from there. It's crazy to think that two states can have a much louder political voice than the 46 other states (in the continental US).

Good point, and absolutely true. Why the other states look to California and New York is beyond me, but that tends to be the way it goes. Hopefully if enough people call and they have enough testimonials of positive effects this will go away, but I wouldn't doubt they'll keep bringing it up.
 

Poeia

Bird Brain
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 6, 2009
9,789
14,368
NYC
Good point, and absolutely true. Why the other states look to California and New York is beyond me, but that tends to be the way it goes. Hopefully if enough people call and they have enough testimonials of positive effects this will go away, but I wouldn't doubt they'll keep bringing it up.
We've got the bodies. The largest states are CA, TX, NY and FL. But I think it's more about the cities -- New York and Los Angeles are the two largest cities in the country (8 million and 3.7 million, respectively.) Third place is Chicago but it "only" has 2.6 million people. As a result, we make the most noise and the other cities and states notice.
 

JENerationX

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 25, 2011
2,227
3,114
Rochester, NY
We've got the bodies. The largest states are CA, TX, NY and FL. But I think it's more about the cities -- New York and Los Angeles are the two largest cities in the country (8 million and 3.7 million, respectively.) Third place is Chicago but it "only" has 2.6 million people. As a result, we make the most noise and the other cities and states notice.

We've got the bodies, but the problem is most people here don't have the brains.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread