Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!

[wiredlove]

I'm really relieved about this thread right now. I was actually able to go out and run some errands and not come back to 5 pages to catch up on.

Bronze killed it with all his popcorn crunching.

 

[englishmick]

Quite agree. We got a Smoker's Paradise in town. They sell cigarettes, beer, cigars, pipe tobacco, snuff, chaw and behold one display case of super crappy vape gear. They rather sell you the BT 808 kits from the tobacco section though. Gives them more money long run than dallying around with vapers at one crappy display case.

Yeah, that takes me back. In my case it was the local headshop with a vaping display case in one corner. They sold mainly Ego kits. They had kits with a battery, tank, and charger. And boxes containing 2 batteries. They broke everything down and sold each item separately. Quoted you the "official" price and then generously gave you a special cheap price. So I got a tank, pack of heads, charger, and 2 batteries, loose in a bag with no instructions. And a few bottles of horrible cheap juice. I had no idea you had to press the button 5 times to turn the batteries on so I had to go back to the shop where some hippie chuckled at my ignorance, after he finally broke off from a long conversation with one of his real customers.

Can't complain too much though. They were breaking new ground themselves when nobody else was doing it, and serving a tiny customer base.

 

[crxess]

Dal With absolutely NO science to back any claim and Kickbacks from Big Pharma. http://www.vaporized.co.uk/.../the-benefits-of... As always, Proper parenting is a must.
Like · Reply · 8 hrs · Edited

We Are Pediatricians Did you look for research? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/... And children drink the liquid, which is very dangerous. This stuff is definitely dangerous!

electronic cigarettes toxicity - PubMed - NCBI
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov|By pubmeddev
Like · Reply · 6 hrs

Dal Are you assuring people Chewing Cigarettes is Safer? Again Responsible Parenting. Products under sinks poison children every year by Magnitudes more. Poison control Call data. This is called Agenda driven propaganda. Simple warnings on product safety would be Responsible action. Now, how about the 1 Billion lives estimated to be lost this century from Combustible Tobacco? The mothers, the Fathers, the sisters and brothers.

 

[classwife]

I just Couldn't be More Disgusted with what has transpired in Indiana. It is WAY Beyond some Kneejerk Legislation. And is to me, Thinly Veiled Corruption and Abuse of Legislative Powers.

Thinly veiled ?




It's blatant corruption

 

[Lessifer]

Ok, let's go back to the beginning. Here is what I said, this time I'll add bold for emphasis:

Isn't that all the more reason for those shops to be doing everything they can to change things? What good does it do to keep customers in the dark? How much louder would our voice be if every shop encouraged every customer to get involved?

You see, that one word there, "those" makes all the difference. It takes what you call a generality, and makes it a specific statement. The shops that aren't doing all they can to educate their customers, they are the ones we are talking about, who should be doing more. No generalization to the industry at large, no comment as to the percentage of shops who are or are not doing something. BTW, if it's not apparent to every customer, meaning every employee is on board with the message, they're not doing everything they can.

We're either talking about anecdotal cases where someone here perceives something that may not actually be the case - it's not like those who "see" this, are in the stores 24/7. OR there is a built in bias against business, always thinking the worst case scenario - a bit like how some TV shows depict CEOs, managers, etc. based on a political belief where they are all murderers, polluters, embezzlers, sexist, racist, abusers, etc. etc. Something that has been actually studied to show that the number of such incidents are depicted on TV something like 150 times the actual occurances in reality.

I have my own 'anecdotal cases' where that is not the case - where they have letters to be signed, some CAASA cards, etc. Enlightening their customers along the way. Many times the owners aren't there but are doing stuff behind the scenes, etc. going to hearings, addressing local politicians, etc.

I'm sure there are both 'types', and neither represent a generality that has been made by many here. I don't claim that, but others feel perfectly safe to - mainly because of that built in bias futhered by a particular political view, reinforced by media and Hollywood, and unions and so-called "consumer groups'. They're basically in agreement with what seems to be driving the FDA - to put the industry out of business.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here in this response. At first it's as if you're saying that no business is guilty of not informing their customers, and that those of us who have witnessed it either have been there at the wrong time, or are just imposing our own bias. Not sure where this idea comes from. When I go in I actually ask the employees, the shop owner if available. The last shop I was in said everything was fine because they had a tobacco retailer license. That was the owner. Another shop that I've been in, I know they're actively involved, they bring their employees to the state capital to comment at hearings.

So, if your argument is, some vape shops are doing what they can, I don't think anyone disagrees with that. On the same note, some shops are not doing all they can. The political blah blah bias blah blah, just seems like another excuse to blow hot air.

 

[zoiDman]

Thinly veiled ?




It's blatant corruption

Yeah... And that Corruption appears to run all the way to the Attorney General and Governor's Office.

 

[Bronze]

Bronze killed it with all his popcorn crunching.

Seems lately it's usually me in the middle of the donnybrooks so it was kinda nice to sit back and enjoy watching others battle it out.

 

[zoiDman]

...

I need to have hope to keep fighting. It ain't over til it's over. And this is not over--not by a long shot!

Stay Strong Kat. This Isn't Over Yet. And I believe there is Still Much that is Winnable.

Winnable if We Don't Give Up.

 

[oplholik]

I'm with you Zoid, the fight is just beginning.

 

[WillyZee]

Canadian Gov leaked document ... separate Vaping Areas for Gov Buildings.

For Vapers looking to vape away from second hand smoke.

Sent via iPhone

 

[Coldrake]

Don't forget "An In-Depth Discussion with Aaron Biebert" starts in an hour.

Welcome! You are invited to join a webinar: An In-Depth Discussion with Aaron Biebert. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email about joining the event.

 

[Kent C]

Kent, I'm genuinely missing your angle here. It seems like, to Less' point in his first post in this exchange, that you're in defense-mode, and it's causing you to miss the point the other side is making.

This is Lessifer's first post in the exchange:

Isn't that all the more reason for those shops to be doing everything they can to change things? What good does it do to keep customers in the dark? How much louder would our voice be if every shop encouraged every customer to get involved?

Should shops do all they can to change things?? Yes. And I agree with Mazinny - wouldn't it be nice if just 50% of the shops would inform their customers - Yes.

But then Less says: "What good does it do to keep customers in the dark?"

Here is where the problem starts. Because it implies (stronger than implies - states outright) that the business has an intention to "keep customers uninformed".

An observation in reality is one thing. Assigning intent (which one never knows) is another. And this is mainly the problem.

I tried to explain it - albeit unsuccessfully to Lessifer (and evidently you) - here:

We're either talking about anecdotal cases where someone here perceives something that may not actually be the case - it's not like those who "see" this, are in the stores 24/7. OR there is a built in bias against business, always thinking the worst case scenario - .

And it's an either/or situation - the observation may be from a 5-15 minute visit to a shop (or later "many shops" and from you "dozens of shops") - this is basically the Anecdotal fallacy – using a personal experience or an isolated example instead of sound reasoning or compelling evidence.

OR the intentionally "keeping customers in the dark" is a conclusion based, not on an observation itself. From where does this "conclusion" come? Either there is more actual evidence that has not been stated - for example, say the person talked to the owner and the owner said - 'we're just keeping the customers in the dark on this, no need to involve them' which would tend to explain such a declaration... OR it is from a bias of the person making the observation and conclusion of intent.

I acknowledge there are 'anecdotals' on 'both sides' - some shops saying nothing, some shops saying and displaying CASAA stuff with letters to sign and informing their customers of the situation:

I'm sure there are both 'types', and neither represent a generality that has been made by many here. I don't claim that, but others feel perfectly safe to - mainly because of that built in bias furthered by a particular political view, reinforced by media and Hollywood, and unions and so-called "consumer groups'.

I have been in many discussion with Lessifer and while I know that we have some differences in views, we have 'liked' many of each others posts in the past. And while I don't claim to have read every post of his, I have read almost all of his in these types of forums. And I never recall him ever either misreading so badly or misrepresenting - by putting words in the mouths of those with whom he takes up a point, like he has multiple times in this exchange. Things I never said. Perhaps others who have similarly exchanged with him, could point me to such cases, but personally I have never seen it, prior to this. I expect it from some others and they usually comply :- ) ...but not from Lessifer, which is now a source of disappointment to put it mildly.

 

[WillyZee]

Sent via iPhone

 

[Kent C]

The political blah blah bias blah blah, just seems like another excuse to blow hot air.

You blew political/biased hot air from the start by asking ""What good does it do to keep customers in the dark?" implying a rather 'dark' intent, for which you had no evidence.

 

[DC2]

Two years ago I went to all the vape shops in a 30 mile radius...
What I did today, and maybe suggestions might help for next time...

I brought them CASAA cards to hand out to customers.
I brought them CASAA vendor display cases.

I gave them information on the FDA deeming regulations.
I gave them links to buy their own CASAA cards and vendor displays.

By the end of that weekend I was completely disillusioned.
The end.

 

[crxess]

Canadian Gov leaked document ... separate Vaping Areas for Gov Buildings.

For Vapers looking to vape away from second hand smoke.

Sent via iPhone

It is about Time someone somewhere understood Vaper do not want to be Forced to inhale second hand smoke. It in and of itself was a Criminal Action in my mind. I had been considering filing suit over the matter, until I became disabled and am no longer a good candidate for representation. That would be like suing over Hot coffee when you drink cold Tea.

 

[Lessifer]

You blew political/biased hot air from the start by asking ""What good does it do to keep customers in the dark?" implying a rather 'dark' intent, for which you had no evidence.

I did not imply intent. I even acknowledged, though I don't feel like finding the quote right now, that there is great possibility that the shops who aren't informing their customers are doing so because they themselves are mis/uninformed. You assumed I was implying dark intent. Some others have flat out stated that it was the intention of the shop to not inform their customers, as evidence by (yes) anecdotal accounts where they actively discouraged or contradicted someone trying to tell others about the deeming and what it means. By no means do I believe that is the case for the majority of the shops. From what I've seen, and yes this is another anecdote, the shop owners either don't know, or don't fully understand what is going on.

I will say one thing though, and you may consider this anti-business bias, at this point in the game if a shop owner is not aware of what is going on and actively seeking out information on how they can protect their business, that is their own fault.

 

[Kent C]

Interesting development here - Sen. Johnson's second more pointed request to the FDA:

Senator Ron Johnson sends letter to FDA Cmsnr Califf asking important questions about deeming ban

 

[Lessifer]

Let me put this another way, intent is only marginally important. If you are convicted of manslaughter as opposed to murder, your sentence may be less, but the victim is still dead.

If customers are not being informed, does it really matter if its due to ignorance or dark intent?

 

[GunMonkeyINTL]

You blew political/biased hot air from the start by asking ""What good does it do to keep customers in the dark?" implying a rather 'dark' intent, for which you had no evidence.

Kent, I think Less' question is a valid one to ask, understanding that it is in relation to a single incident, or set of instances.

I detailed an experience, previously, where a retailed appeared, at first, to be oblivious but who, when pressed, proved to be well aware of the regs and what they mean. In this case, the retailer still held the line that the regs were all posturing and nothing would actually happen.

Now, of course, one can't know, with any certainty, the owner's true intentions by taking that line, but it's not unreasonable or, at least not unexpected, for a witness, or someone hearing that story to assume that the shop owner was doing it to keep his customer from panicking and keep him "in the dark".

Whether in reference to that specific anecdote or not, at this point I don't recall, but that is what I read in Less' comment: not necessarily that that particular shop owner was doing that, and, certainly not that all shop owners are doing that, but, rather, that it seems that there are shop owners out there doing that, and that its both an outrage and proof that there are members of this industry who are not doing everything they can do to support it.

I'm confused as to why you seem to be so offended by his (and, by extension, my) line of reasoning.