Could forthcoming / new legislation in provinces stand up in court?

[Ilikecoffee]

Was wondering if the forthcoming legislation in BC (which, via almost complete ignorance, MLAs are all set to pass) putting vaping in the Tobacco Act even stand a fight in the courts? Ditto for Vancouver City Council vaping bans. Ditto for Ontario. And Manitoba.

At the end of the day, this is not a tobacco product. It's a tobacco cessation product. In my case, it's not even a nicotine delivery system product (I don't use nicotine for the most part). They put a non tobacco, sometimes-non nicotine product that in many cases doesn't even look like a cigarette (check my mods) into the Tobacco Act.

Or how about my case - all the protests and legislation are "about the children" (with no statistical proof to show the wild claims are true about youth adoption of e-cigs, then moving on to analogs) and the nicotine. What about people like me who don't use nicotine. Am I not even covered (or under the rule of law) of this legislation?

Would this legislation as a whole even stand up in court? I don't have the means or finances to do the fight, but I wonder. To me, these provincial and municipal legislative acts are just complete knee-jerk reactions not based on science and study, but based on perception, "would have could haves" and lobbying from pro-pharma companies and organization who don't have any stake in the development of vaping as a positive cessation method and potentially harm free "hobby". After vaping for 4 years, I know for a fact vaping is safer than smoking (or toking for that matter). It's also probably a lot safer than drinking alcohol. I'd argue it's as harmful to your body as drinking coffee is (but I don't have the science or research to back that up).

Yet knee jerk reactions and perceptions and wild, unbacked claims (like my MLA saying "the majority of e-cigarette users are doing it just for recreational purposes) is getting these things restricted and banned.

Thoughts? Hoping there's a lawyer or two in our vaping community who might proffer an opinion.

- M

 

[ToonTwnVapr]

I think this needs to be combated by the community they were elected to represent....

Get as many people to call and email their MLAs, provide links to studies and informational sites.

Let them know that we do not re-elect people who make uninformed decisions. That is their job, which we pay them very handsomely to do !

If no one calls or emails, they assume nothing is wrong.

Lawyers would be needed after the fact, for trying to strike something down as unconstitutional or violating civil liberties :/

 

[Hitmetwice]

Anyone know what type of lawyer might take a case like this? I'm no lawyer but there is definitely something to the argument imo.
Not family, criminal or estate obviously
but......? Constitutional? probably not.
Class action lawyer, is there such a thing? Not applicable in this case?

As you can see I'm not big on, or into litigation, it just bungs everything up and makes life more difficult for too many. Often leading to more laws, restrictions and costs, with poor outcomes/results at the end of it all. Us canucks only need to look to the south to see what excessive litigation and bureaucracy(lawyers) can lead to.

But "in principle" it appears the legislation could be argued successfully.(to me, the uninformed, at least)

If the only outcome is, we can vape in open public spaces for example, would the fight be worth taking?

Probably should have hit cancel again,(been doing a lot of that lately, dam children)
please excuse my ignorance. Cheers.

 

[EBates]

I find a large group carrying torches chanting lynch the bast***s and a rope tend to get folks attention and in some cases has been effective in causing reconsideration of a decision.

 

[Vatigu]

Ontario actually created a schedule specifically for ecigs - it's a copy and paste but it is unique legislation that calls them what they are so Ontario's would hold up. I'm unsure of others.