Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!
- Thread starter Oliver
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
Can anything be done on a state level like was done with certain legalization here? The feds aren't enforcing anything, so far even though a conflict with federal law. Just wondering for future reference if we can't get anywhere with other avenues. I am optimistic that we can but it will take a lot of time and money.
Obama's overriding interest in everything he does is to stick it to the Republicans. In fairness, There are Republicans who do everything they can do to stick it to Obama. However, Obama is the president and I expect more from him. He's supposed to be a leader and he fails this assignment miserably.
Those would be some mighty difficult 180s. The damage already done by them has caused plenty of future deaths and destruction of lives, and their despicable dishonesty in their mission is well documented, even in just the articles I've saved.
Anti-vaping kills.
I Don't think in this Case that Sates would have much Wiggle Room. Even if they Wanted to.
And the Way things have been going, it seems Hard to find a Pro e-Cigarette State Legislation.
That would be funny as hell if it weren't too close to truth.
These regs MIGHT get pulled back, because they are SO incredibly over-reaching. But I agree, we aren't seeing what I'd consider a response that's powerful enough to be effective. It seems almost as it the organized groups are hinting that they have a plan - but if there's some secret plan, you're going to need MASSIVE SUPPORT and that means publicizing it now.
The people who like these regs and want them to stand?
They DO POLITICS ALL DAY LONG. Year after year. They have tested and professional (not ethical - but professional) methods of influencing legislation. They win in court against NATIONS and intimidate government bodies.
Someone needs to pay what it takes to play the Billion Lives movie in DC.
Someone needs to start "viral" campaigns disseminating the truth about the regs - ONE message passed around by a million people. We need POSITIVE vaping stories to dominate the news for a change.
I don't really know what else could win except massive public outcry, or dumb luck being tacked onto an Agriculture bill. Tobacco has billions of dollars at stake - do you think they're going to let that happen?
In this case, he'd be sticking it to about 25% of the adult population - those who smoke and could benefit from ecigs now or later and all current vapers. That's a big voting block if they'd ever get it together. They'd sway every election, federal, state and local.
For those who are Standing at Public Pulpits spew the Lies about e-Cigarettes that are, I don't think for them doing a 180 would be Hard at All.
Perhaps Not someone like Slantz couldn't do a Complete 180? But I can see the FDA and the CDC doing a 180.
Look at what is going on in the UK today. Then set the Way-Back Machine to 2013 or 2014.
I always think the population is made up of those who smoke and those who depend on the smoker (e.g., their families) who wish their loved one would quit.
Among the support for vaping in the UK, by the end of 2014:
Royal College of Physicians
Cancer Research UK
National Centre for Smoking Cessation and Training
Plus, many leading anti-smoking pros
I was thinking along those lines. If upcoming candidates knew how many votes they might get if they supported vaping, that should even the field a little bit. I remember a few years ago, someone running for office came to a local vape meet and stated his support. It was clearly for the votes but I bet he got a lot from that. I can't even remember who it was (I'm getting old, lol).
I think most of them are focused on how many votes they'd lose, and even more how much funding they'd lose.
Dang, I had *never* really thought along those lines! If a politician just came out and declared his/her support of vaping, surely they would gain some votes. How many votes would they lose? Not nearly enough to negate the gain I suspect.
Then again, there's the money. <sigh>
Some fringe candidate ought to try it as an experiment.
this is all so surreal ... do they think people will forget today's Vape devices existed?
some of these proven cigarette killers will still be working in 20 years.
some of these proven cigarette killers will still be working in 20 years.
I added the figures quoted in that article
Adds up to about a three quarters of a million bucks.
Less than a dollar for a vaper's life.
Didnt realize it's that cheap already. Didn't realize they were that cheap already. Didn't realize WE are that worthless already to them.
Friggin' bargain bin ...
Well CASAA, don't bother with litigation then. Just buy 'em.
This is so utterly disgusting.
That might be something to consider, much later. Right now we want to try to save the national industry. Also, there will likely be some e-cigarettes available, just not anything we would want.
The anti-vaping politicians have hit us below the belt by saying that vapers hurt children. "Think of the children!" isn't that their motto?
I say we retaliate by hitting them low with the most explosive accusation. What is the most explosive topic in the USA? RACE. Yes, I say we use the race card. I just did a quick google search for the racial demographics of smokers in the USA and came upon the CDC's website. Cigarette Smoking in the United States - Tips From Former Smokers
From the CDC on the breakdown of cigarette smokers by race and/or ethnicity:
-American Indian/Alaska Natives: 29.2%
-Asians: 9.5%
-Blacks: 17.5%
-Hispanics: 11.2%
-Multiple races: 27.9%
-Whites: 18.2%
-A bonus Fact: 24% of US military members smoke cigarettes.
-Another bonus Fact: 23.9% of the LGBT community smokes cigarettes.
As we can see clearly, American Indians, Blacks, people with multiple racial backgrounds, along with many members of the US military, and LGBT community have more cigarette smokers than they are as a total population percentage in the US.
So what does this mean? We use the race, anti-military, and homophobic cards to say that the anti-vaping politicians don't care about those groups. Because vaping has the potential to get those groups to stop smoking. And since most of these anti-vaping politicians are white liberal Democrats, using those cards would be apropos for the situation. One of the worst things a white liberal/Democrat hates more than anything in this world is to be called a racist. I live in California and have been around them all my life, that's one of the worst things you can call them, since they consider themselves to be so liberal and open minded.
In order to win this war, we have to go with public opinion and win their hearts and minds. What better way to win their hearts and minds by calling the opponents racists, homophobic, and anti-military? What better way to win this war than to paint them as wanting to kill off our minority population by having them still continue smoking? We'll just make up a few stuff that Democrats don't see these minority groups as real Americans and want them to die off. We'll say these Democrats already have a history of being anti-US military by saying that they not only want our service men and women to get a bullet on the field of war but also lung cancer through continue smoking of cigs. We'll also say that they're homophobic and wish the LGBT community not only to die of AIDS but lung cancer.
If the anti-vaping politicians want to get down and dirty. I say we take the fight to them. We'll get down and nasty with these accusations. They got down and dirty when they accused us of hurting children.
I say we retaliate by hitting them low with the most explosive accusation. What is the most explosive topic in the USA? RACE. Yes, I say we use the race card. I just did a quick google search for the racial demographics of smokers in the USA and came upon the CDC's website. Cigarette Smoking in the United States - Tips From Former Smokers
From the CDC on the breakdown of cigarette smokers by race and/or ethnicity:
-American Indian/Alaska Natives: 29.2%
-Asians: 9.5%
-Blacks: 17.5%
-Hispanics: 11.2%
-Multiple races: 27.9%
-Whites: 18.2%
-A bonus Fact: 24% of US military members smoke cigarettes.
-Another bonus Fact: 23.9% of the LGBT community smokes cigarettes.
As we can see clearly, American Indians, Blacks, people with multiple racial backgrounds, along with many members of the US military, and LGBT community have more cigarette smokers than they are as a total population percentage in the US.
So what does this mean? We use the race, anti-military, and homophobic cards to say that the anti-vaping politicians don't care about those groups. Because vaping has the potential to get those groups to stop smoking. And since most of these anti-vaping politicians are white liberal Democrats, using those cards would be apropos for the situation. One of the worst things a white liberal/Democrat hates more than anything in this world is to be called a racist. I live in California and have been around them all my life, that's one of the worst things you can call them, since they consider themselves to be so liberal and open minded.
In order to win this war, we have to go with public opinion and win their hearts and minds. What better way to win their hearts and minds by calling the opponents racists, homophobic, and anti-military? What better way to win this war than to paint them as wanting to kill off our minority population by having them still continue smoking? We'll just make up a few stuff that Democrats don't see these minority groups as real Americans and want them to die off. We'll say these Democrats already have a history of being anti-US military by saying that they not only want our service men and women to get a bullet on the field of war but also lung cancer through continue smoking of cigs. We'll also say that they're homophobic and wish the LGBT community not only to die of AIDS but lung cancer.
If the anti-vaping politicians want to get down and dirty. I say we take the fight to them. We'll get down and nasty with these accusations. They got down and dirty when they accused us of hurting children.
Similar threads
- Locked
