Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!

[LoveVanilla]

Found the Rosetta Stone for translating Kellyanne Conway's comments. Cross-link to subject post.

So, if this is what our government is going on about, then yes. Go ahead and ban all e-cigarette flavors, and leave us vapers alone. This is indeed a big part of the teen vaping issue. The other piece of this issue is the mass-market advertising and media campaigns. These should be strictly controlled as well and only targeted for current smokers.

My $02.

 

[AttyPops]

Found the Rosetta Stone for translating Kellyanne Conway's comments. Cross-link to subject post.

So, if this is what our government is going on about, then yes. Go ahead and ban all e-cigarette flavors, and leave us vapers alone. This is indeed a big part of the teen vaping issue. The other piece of this issue is the mass-market advertising and media campaigns. These should be strictly controlled as well and only targeted for current smokers.

My $02.

Oooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Idiots still can't use the right terms. But OK......

Ban cigalikes!!!!!!!!!!! Fine with me too! Winner.
The cigalikes are probably worse for ya anyway (there were posts/threads about them producing more acrolein or whatever).

 

[Don29palms]

Found the Rosetta Stone for translating Kellyanne Conway's comments. Cross-link to subject post.

So, if this is what our government is going on about, then yes. Go ahead and ban all e-cigarette flavors, and leave us vapers alone. This is indeed a big part of the teen vaping issue. The other piece of this issue is the mass-market advertising and media campaigns. These should be strictly controlled as well and only targeted for current smokers.

My $02.

How about just enforcing the laws that already exist.

 

[AttyPops]

How about just enforcing the laws that already exist.

How does that solve it?

The cigalikes were the first on the market, and probably pass the PMTA crap. Hell, they might be all we're stuck with except for BT gadgets. Maybe if they ban them, they'll allow the mods instead.

 

[mikepetro]

How about just enforcing the laws that already exist.

The laws we currently have include the Deeming regulations. Strict enforcement "could" wipe out the whole category depending on how a given agency interprets the regs.

I.e. nothing post 2006 without a PMTA, and how hard are those going to be to obtain?

 

[Don29palms]

The laws we currently have include the Deeming regulations. Strict enforcement "could" wipe out the whole category depending on how a given agency interprets the regs.

I.e. nothing post 2006 without a PMTA, and how hard are those going to be to obtain?

Unless it's changed it will be extremely expensive and probably impossible. It will have to be challenged in court after May 2020. Fighting the FDA is a long drawn out process. To change law it will have to go through congress. Good luck with that.

 

[Rossum]

How about just enforcing the laws that already exist.

You mean like the Tobacco Control Act and the Deeming Regulations that it spawned?

Be careful what you ask for. You might just get it. Good and hard.

 

[Rossum]

Ban Cigalikes!!!!!!!!!!! Fine with me too! Winner.

The cigalikes were the first on the market, and probably pass the PMTA crap. Hell, they might be all we're stuck with except for BT gadgets. Maybe if they ban them, they'll allow the mods instead.

So you're OK with banning stuff as long as it's something that you personally don't care to use?

 

[AttyPops]

So you're OK with banning stuff as long as it's something that you personally don't care to use?

No. I'm not in favor of bans in general, but if they DO HAVE TO ban something, I'm saying fine with cigalikes. Not that I prefer bans at all.

I care that we ban stuff that's unsafe to use compared to other stuff that's safER though. Think Takata air bags (yeah I know that's a recall, but banning stuff built like that recalled product sure).

I know it's a slippery slope. But if they're banning cigalikes, it might actually be beneficial and logical. From a certain perspective.

 

[Don29palms]

You mean like the Tobacco Control Act and the Deeming Regulations that it spawned?

Be careful what you ask for. You might just get it. Good and hard.

This whole child vaping epidemic thing is a distraction but banning anything for adults that is illegal for children is not the answer. How about enforcing and penalizing point of purchases. They do stings for cigarettes and alcohol.

 

[Rossum]

No. I'm not in favor of bans in general, but if they DO HAVE TO ban something, I'm saying fine with cigalikes. Not that I prefer bans at all.

I care that we ban stuff that's unsafe to use compared to other stuff that's safER though. Think Takata air bags (yeah I know that's a recall, but banning stuff built like that recalled product sure).

I know it's a slippery slope. But if they're banning cigalikes, it might actually be beneficial and logical. From a certain perspective.

Don't ban you, don't ban me, ban that fellow behind the tree.

 

[Rossum]

This whole child vaping epidemic thing is a distraction but banning anything for adults that is illegal for children is not the answer. How about enforcing and penalizing point of purchases. They do stings for cigarettes and alcohol.

Indeed, they do. Yet there's a greater number of under-age drinkers than vapers, and under-age smokers are still able to get smokes somehow. There is no magic wand you can wave to keep teens from doing what teens want to do.

 

[Don29palms]

Indeed, they do. Yet there's a greater number of under-age drinkers than vapers, and under-age smokers are still able to get smokes somehow. There is no magic wand you can wave to keep teens from doing what teens want to do.

I absolutely agree and have said the same thing many times. It's one of those things that if they can't and don't enforce existing laws and regulations then new laws and regulations won't do any good either. I also understand being careful what you wish for. I agree with that also.

 

[englishmick]

I absolutely agree and have said the same thing many times. It's one of those things that if they can't and don't enforce existing laws and regulations then new laws and regulations won't do any good either. I also understand being careful what you wish for. I agree with that also.

I guess they tried age limits and that didn't work. But they will go on trying. Let's ban some stuff the kids don't use anyway like open system vape gear, that won't work. So let's ban everything. That won't work because the kids will just move on to black market stuff or some other stupid trend.

In the end it will fade away and just be accepted as an unwinnable fight like smoking and drinking. They will declare victory and say that teen vaping has been mostly eliminated. Then they will move on to the next politically advantageous crisis without having achieved anything other than making it much harder for smokers to quit.

What would we do without politicians?

 

[Bronze]

Indeed, they do. Yet there's a greater number of under-age drinkers than vapers, and under-age smokers are still able to get smokes somehow. There is no magic wand you can wave to keep teens from doing what teens want to do.

There are parents of teens who have and will purchase vaping products for their kids who smoke cigarettes in hopes of getting them off combustible tobacco products or chew. I'm not so sure I wouldn't do the same thing if I had teenage kids who smoked cigarettes.

 

[Rossum]

What would we do without politicians?

 

[Bronze]

I personally have known several alcoholics and drug addicts over the course of my life who were able to kick their habits (I'm guessing most of us have). All of their habits except smoking cigarettes.

 

[stols001]

BAN NOTHING.

LOVE EVERYYTHING.

LET PEOPLE EVEN YOUNG PEOPLE OR DIUMB PEOPLE DO WHAT THEY WANT AND LIVE WITH THE CONSEQUNCES!!!!!!!!!!!!!


CONSEQUENCES ARE A LIFE THING AND HOW YOU LEARN.

YES PEOPLE DIE! 365/24-7. IS THIS NEWS TO ANYONE.

SAFE SPACES DON'T EXIST WE COULD ALL BE WIPED OFF THE PLANET AT ANY SECOND. I DON'T NEED A PLUSH TOY AND TISSUES DURING THAT EXPERIENCE.

ECIGS ARE SO INFFEENSIVE COMPARED TO SO MANY THINGS.

MY LUNGS FEEL GREAT BY THE WAY STEROIDS ARE WORKING!!!!!!!!!

Lol, Anna

 

[AvaOrchid]

Found the Rosetta Stone for translating Kellyanne Conway's comments. Cross-link to subject post.

So, if this is what our government is going on about, then yes. Go ahead and ban all e-cigarette flavors, and leave us vapers alone. This is indeed a big part of the teen vaping issue. The other piece of this issue is the mass-market advertising and media campaigns. These should be strictly controlled as well and only targeted for current smokers.

My $02.

Thanks for the translation I was assuming that when they said vape they meant marijuana or cannabis related and e-cigarette was anything nic. That definition certainly does benefit me. And it's better than an all-around ban certainly. However I do think that any ban is a bad thing. Unless it's relative to items and chemicals that should not be in a vapable substance in the first place. I'm certainly not going to argue that someone should be able to put arsenic in their juice... I have no problem with age limits, I have no real issue with designing the laws around how alcohol is sold. I think it would be reasonable and it would keep an online Market open though probably more expensive. You can't sell gin at the local convenience store or in the grocery aisle of most areas do I have a problem if they do e-cigarettes that way? no not really. I do think that if they're going to do e-cigarettes that way that they need to also mandate the same safeguards for cigarettes but we all know that's not happening. I guess I'm rambling on just to say I don't like the idea of banning or making a product that just about everyone agrees is safer than the alternative jump through more hoops and be better vetted then the proven killer cigarettes but I'll take it. That being said this is all really a temporary thing anyway it doesn't matter all that much because come May unless there's a drastic shift in policy with the FDA none of this is going to be available anyway. In fact this might create a bigger total ban because the only companies that I can really see that are going to be able to survive the FDA if they so choose to even try is the makers of things like juul. But I would appreciate a few more months to prep that would be really nice. The only time that I really have an issue is when there's no feasible way that people could do a little research and understand the risks of what they're doing so if a company is purposefully and knowingly lying to you about a benefit or a lack of risk then I believe that needs to be stopped however if a person can do a little research and find out what risks they're taking by using a substance and they still choose to use the substance that's on them

 

[Rossum]

I personally have known several alcoholics and drug addicts over the course of my life who were able to kick their habits (I'm guessing most of us have). All of their habits except smoking cigarettes.

That's why tobacco/nicotine has the reputation that it's the "most addictive substance" around. But I wonder how much the low success rate in giving it up is not that it's intrinsic more addictive, but rather the facts that it doesn't cause impairment or an inability to function, that it's unlikely to kill a person in the foreseeable future, and that it's readily, legally and relatively affordably available just about everywhere?