Disrespectful Little Punk

[zoiDman]

You postulated that vaping bans are due to how people vape in public. I asked you to prove it, period. You didn't. Since I never stated that vaping in public everywhere has stopped any bans, I have nothing to prove.

You can misdirect and try to put words in others mouths all you want. It won't work. Either prove your statement, retract it or be viewed for what you are.

I'm done with you little trollish game.

Don't go away Mad wv2win. Feel free to PM me if you would like to continue this.

 

[e-pipeman]

Everyone can get a bit heated sometimes - I know I do (or so I'm told). But this has been a pretty civilised debate about a complex issue. If we keep it that way then we don't have to dive off into pm's but can still discuss our differences in full view. If we keep at it we might revise our views or agree to differ, but at least we'll have tried to deal with a very knotty issue. What do I know - but it's just a thought.

 

[wv2win]

Don't go away Mad wv2win. Feel free to PM me if you would like to continue this.

I'm not mad at all. I'm quite pleased. I and Jman have allowed you to demonstrate what you are and that you make statements that you can't support. You are always reliable for a good laugh.

 

[crxess]

You already proved MY point for me that vaping bans are not due to how people vape. There are no bans initiated or enacted due to how people vape. If there were you would have listed them.

Your post is the classic example of "misdirection", your consistent tactic when one of your many comments is proven to be unsupportable. Similar to the weak minded question: "when did you stop beating your wife?".

Can I stop this back and forth BS? It is getting old.
Explanation Would be much simpler.

No, I cannot find(didn't expect to) any Bans enacted due to public Vaping.
Why? Because it would be a violation of ones rights to Ban something because - IT LOOKS LIKE -

I would think we are all smart enough to know - THE LOOK - does play a role. there are Far more tax paying Non-Smokers, Ex-Smoker Zealots, ANTZ with no life than there are Vapers. I also think we do realize many of them live pitiful lives that cannot be fulfilled without treading on others.
***Don't get lost here - We are talking Local Level, Not State wide or Federal {They have their own agendas}***
We also know Politicians want the Majority of their constituents to see them as caring. (who is the majority? not us)
Back to the Bans - No matter what brings it forward, it has to be something that can withstand challenge(in their eyes) So Health Concerns is the target of choice. This is not proof that something else did not influence the Ban. It is simply Proof they thought out the Process of creating the Ban.

__________________________________________________________________________________________-

Now, if we could calmly turn our attention to our problem - Freedom To Vape - and discuss things rather than Getting almost violently radical over a short comment that may or may not reflect the true and full views of the one making said comment, we Might start to get something accomplished.
Why get stuck on the shape of the letter (L) and forget the rest of the alphabet? Everything has to work together.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Lastly - Before anyone else comments on their rights.
how about - Do so in a polite or at least respectable manor. Your rights do NOT include Denying any other person Their right, whether you agree or not.

Pissing contest accomplish nothing.
Human nature is to stand fast against anyone that infuriates you - even if they prove themselves correct.(stupid but true)
Finding a common point on which to agree starts to build a foundation for success.

 

[zoiDman]

I'm not mad at all. I'm quite pleased. I and Jman have allowed you to demonstrate what you are and that you make statements that you can't support. You are always reliable for a good laugh.

Yeah... I believe in Asking and also Respect the Wishes Business Owners to set their Own e-Cigarette Policies.

A Real Fringe View.

LOL

 

[Jman8]

Once again you Are.

If you go to a Hospital and Ask if Vaping is Allowed, and they tell you Yes, I think it is Great that you can Vape in a Hospital either as a Visitor or as a Patient.

Where you and I Clash Jman is I would like to see People Ask. And then Honor the Wishes of the Business Owner.

And I wonder if you either ask yourself or advocate for asking in all outdoor venues. For asking, IMO, doesn't equal respect. Maybe in the 1950's, that would've been true, but here in 2010's, where ANTZ have stronghold on the perceptions we are up against, then in the very large places (like a hospital or megastore), I don't expect it to be 'fully permissible.'

I've told you before that I was once in a mega grocery store and asked and was told "of course we allow those, why wouldn't we." Then chose to ask again another day when I was in there, and was told, "no we would never allow that." I said I was told differently by a different manager, and this staff member said, "we've never had a policy that would allow that." Hence, I think it would depend on who's asked, when it comes to the larger places. And I fully believe it would be the same with outdoor places. Ask a person unsure of outdoor policy, and they may just go with "we don't allow that." Which I reckon most vapers would simply ignore, seeing that they are outside and think it is non-issue.

If I am in a place where I can essentially see all 4 walls of the building no matter where I stand, I'm likely to ask and proceed accordingly (likely respecting their decision, possibly discussing it with them). If I'm in a place where I can't see all the walls in the establishment, I expect the answer to be no, and so proceed with the idea of "vape everywhere with respect." If I am outdoors, I don't ask cause I wouldn't really know who to ask, or think there is a 20% chance that an ANTZ-like staff member with pseudo authority would say it is disallowed. So, I just go with the "vape everywhere with respect" attitude when I'm in outdoors public space, unless it is crowded with people who are neither smoking, nor vaping.

Vape-Everwhere Isn't about Asking. It's about Vaping Everywhere.

And here is where you'd be mistaken which I just showed. You mischaracterize the "vape everywhere" position routinely, and then go onto say it is the reason for public usage bans.

I think your disrespect of the actual vape everywhere position is imbued with desire to shame vapers. I've seen you do this (shame vapers), but not actually certain it is a desire you have. I may never know this, regardless of what you may say here on open forum. Yet, the number one indication of this desire is your continuing to insist that "vape everywhere" is the cause of public usage bans when you've been told umpteen times this is not the case and you know that ANTZ lead these charges citing junk science. Yet, give this issue a week or two, and another thread, and you'll be saying something along lines of "vape everywhere advocacy is why public bans are happening."

And some believe the Reason that Many Do Not Ask is because they are Afraid they will be Told No.

I expect no in a world that is sold on ANTZ logic. I would expect "no" in many outdoor locations in major cities, but wouldn't ask because I know how to vape openly, everywhere, with respect which often means you wouldn't know I was vaping there, even if you were a vaping guru.

 

[e-pipeman]

If we all chill we can all be reasonable. I know that the more heated I get the more unreasonable I become. It doesn't mean that we can't argue - but if we can argue in a calm way then the issues get dealt with in a considered rather than a heated way. Just a thought, and I know it's hard.

 

[Jman8]

Then why does he Demand that Others do what he Can Not Do Himself?

Cause he's not making the claim that "vaping openly in public leads to usage bans."

It would be like saying, "vaping openly in public leads to romance."

And another person saying, "can you provide any proof of what you are saying."

And the original person saying, "first provide your proof that not vaping in public leads to romance. If you cannot, then my position is 100% accurate. I win!!!!"

 

[zoiDman]

And I wonder if you either ask yourself or advocate for asking in all outdoor venues. ...

I was wondering when this would shift to Outdoor Venues. LOL

Outdoor Open Areas is to me a Completely Different Topic. I don't see how views about Vaping Indoors are the Same as Vaping Outdoors.

If an Outdoor Area has been Posted as No Vaping, it would be Nice if someone could Abide by the Policy. But if a Person used a Level of Respect, and vaped away from People, I Don't have any Real Problem with that.

 

[zoiDman]

Cause he's not making the claim that "vaping openly in public leads to usage bans."

It would be like saying, "vaping openly in public leads to romance."

And another person saying, "can you provide any proof of what you are saying."

And the original person saying, "first provide your proof that not vaping in public leads to romance. If you cannot, then my position is 100% accurate. I win!!!!"

It doesn't Matter if you are Inside a Building. O if you Outside in the Open Air.

If you act Dis-Respectful while Vaping, it does Nothing but Harm the Image of ALL Vapers. And makes, In My Opinion, Drafting and Passing Bans Much Easier to the Powers that Be.

Please tell me how this Guy Vaping in a Check Out Line inside a Store Helped Us?

 

[Bobbilly]

YOU are the one who stated that vaping bans are due to how people vape. YOU are the one who can't back up your statement.

There are plenty of proposed and enacted vaping bans across the country by public officials. Yet you can not find any that was initiated by these public officials due to how someone was vaping. That speaks volumes about your statement and your veracity.

Is say some bans are proposed without even knowing or having seen anyone vape.

 

[wv2win]

Cause he's not making the claim that "vaping openly in public leads to usage bans."

It would be like saying, "vaping openly in public leads to romance."

And another person saying, "can you provide any proof of what you are saying."

And the original person saying, "first provide your proof that not vaping in public leads to romance. If you cannot, then my position is 100% accurate. I win!!!!"

Good example. The twisted logic of the weak minded.

 

[Jman8]

No, I cannot find(didn't expect to) any Bans enacted due to public Vaping.
Why? Because it would be a violation of ones rights to Ban something because - IT LOOKS LIKE -

This isn't why. The reason why is more obvious.

I would think we are all smart enough to know - THE LOOK - does play a role. there are Far more tax paying Non-Smokers, Ex-Smoker Zealots, ANTZ with no life than there are Vapers. I also think we do realize many of them live pitiful lives that cannot be fulfilled without treading on others.
***Don't get lost here - We are talking Local Level, Not State wide or Federal {They have their own agendas}***
We also know Politicians want the Majority of their constituents to see them as caring. (who is the majority? not us)
Back to the Bans - No matter what brings it forward, it has to be something that can withstand challenge(in their eyes) So Health Concerns is the target of choice. This is not proof that something else did not influence the Ban. It is simply Proof they thought out the Process of creating the Ban.

And I would I say go to any hearing on public usage ban. Perhaps you have, and if so, please report what you witnessed to. In the one I witnessed (and in all others I've heard about), it was 2 to 5 people from opposition (clearly ANTZ) who were citing 'scientific data' that shows the dangers of SHV. In the hearing I witnessed, there wasn't a single non-vaping citizen who showed up, nor one that was even referenced in a specific way, i.e. reading a letter from said constituent, that showed a general concern among non-vaping citizens. Instead, it is mostly to entirely our opposition finding governmental bodies (of a particular political persuasion) that are open to idea of full scale ban. N.Y. would be prime example of this. Instead, it is even spun by our side as those shameful vapers who decided to openly vape at that hearing didn't help the cause and/or were the reason why that ban went into effect. This would be example of one I heard about and looked into all available data on that hearing and subsequent ban.

Now, if we could calmly turn our attention to our problem - Freedom To Vape - and discuss things rather than Getting almost violently radical over a short comment that may or may not reflect the true and full views of the one making said comment, we Might start to get something accomplished.
Why get stuck on the shape of the letter (L) and forget the rest of the alphabet? Everything has to work together.

Agree with the sentiment, though not sure I can agree with how this is generally applied.

I take the vape everywhere with respect position because I think it is most reasonable given our opposition's tactics as demonstrated in media articles (go see that section of ECF if unsure of what I speak), and demonstrated in legislative hearings (go see that section of ECF or visit local hearing if unsure of what I speak).

It becomes challenging when fellow vapers mischaracterize the "vape everywhere with respect" position by leaving of the "with respect" aspect and then claiming a falsehood of "vape everywhere leads to public usage bans." Never feeling any need to back that up, and if asked to, turning the tables and insisting that the 'vape everywhere position prove something' they didn't claim with false authority.

Lastly - Before anyone else comments on their rights.
how about - Do so in a polite or at least respectable manor. Your rights do NOT include Denying any other person Their right, whether you agree or not.

Pissing contest accomplish nothing.
Human nature is to stand fast against anyone that infuriates you - even if they prove themselves correct.(stupid but true)
Finding a common point on which to agree starts to build a foundation for success.

I think the "with respect" part is the common ground. Yet, if there are places that are inherently bad for vaping, then the "with respect" part will be ignored or downplayed to delegitimatize the vape everywhere position. And then from there, it is a matter of chipping away at the places that can allow vaping, so that like smoking, there comes a point where zero places indoors (includes own home, own car) is seen as 'respectful.' Then suddenly, outdoors banning is on the table because the activity has become that shameful.

 

[Myk]

Vaping was never banned nationwide.

The FDA illegally seized some shipments and destroyed them putting smaller e-cig retailers out of business.

This was later ruled on by Judge Leon in N.Y who stated that the FDA was attempting to overextend their authority.

This was by no means a ban.

For every shipment that was seized 5 or more got through. Most of us vaping at the time were barely inconvenienced.

That had NOTHING to do with where people vaped to start with.

I dont clean my teeth, scratch my crotch, or pick my nose in the checkout line for risk of offending someone.

Same rules should apply to vapers.

A little common sense and courtesy goes a LONG way in life.

If im standing well away from someone enjoying a vape in public and someone wants to make a stink about it, thats another story.

Freedom HAS to be tempered with intelligence and respect for others...or youre just giving them cause to hate you and ammunition for them to use against you.

So in your mind Prohibition never took place because people still drank during Prohibition?
If ecigs are banned they won't really be banned because there will still be a black market? If ecigs are handed over to big corporations they won't really be handed over because there will still be people like me with lathes at home making their own mods?

For the judge to rule required the FDA to have their rule to rule on. That rule was banning ecigs as medical devices. There was an injunction, which there can't be if there wasn't a ban to put the injunction on, "hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and/or Injunctive relief". A law may have not been passed but a ban rule was being enforced.

It's just like now, nobody can sue the FDA for their proposed rules. Only after they become rules will the lawsuits start.

It had nothing to do with where people vaped then, it has nothing to do with where people vape now.
Yes people should be respectful but the lack of that isn't why bans are being proposed and it's not why smoking was banned. ANTZ with friends in high places are pushing for bans just like the FDA tried to have a ban. Ecigs existing is enough for them to act.

Now the op "accosted" the guy. Wow....remember that game called "telephone"? He TALKED to him.

He "talked"? Remember that game called "telephone"? You're just as guilty.

 

[Jman8]

I was wondering when this would shift to Outdoor Venues. LOL

Outdoor Open Areas is to me a Completely Different Topic. I don't see how views about Vaping Indoors are the Same as Vaping Outdoors.

And to me, it is not a completely different topic.

The problem with public vaping is there may be times when the vapor could fly directly into the face of another person. If you can think of another problem that needs to be considered, let it be known.

This problem that I just noted applies to indoor and outdoor vaping. And is arguably worse with outdoors because of wind. Indoors, I pretty much know a) how fast my vapor will dissipate into invisible substance and b) the direction of where my exhaled visible vapor will be. With outdoor vaping in mildly crowded to heavily crowded space, I think it will dissipate quickly, but before that happens, I really have no idea where the visible stuff will be blown to.

I like to think that it is far less an issue outdoors because of the wide wide open space, but again I think it is arguably worse than indoor especially comparing it to large establishment (i.e. hospital, mall, megastore).

If an Outdoor Area has been Posted as No Vaping, it would be Nice if someone could Abide by the Policy. But if a Person used a Level of Respect, and vaped away from People, I Don't have any Real Problem with that.

And if same thing happens indoors, I have tough time understanding why you or any person (vaper or not) would have problem with the respectful kind of vaping you just cited. If saying it is just a matter of asking, then I do think this applies to outdoors. At same time, I think there are enough vapers who are aware of both science and politics to do something that is hard for some people to understand. To ignore the 'no vaping' request, while also practicing same level of respect you just cited. I understand it and agree with it. But I feel empowered with awareness of the science (of SHV) and with awareness of politics (that vaping hatred is pushed mostly by ANTZ). Of all my non-vaping friends and family, I do not see this hatred. Hence, I don't have impression that general non-vaping citizens find open vaping to be inherently disrespectful, and with these people I am constantly vaping in enclosed spaces.

 

[Jman8]

It doesn't Matter if you are Inside a Building. O if you Outside in the Open Air.

If you act Dis-Respectful while Vaping, it does Nothing but Harm the Image of ALL Vapers. And makes, In My Opinion, Drafting and Passing Bans Much Easier to the Powers that Be.

Please tell me how this Guy Vaping in a Check Out Line inside a Store Helped Us?

For me, it would matter where the guy was exhaling. If I am standing right in front of you indoors vaping, and I exhale to my left, I think you'll see the vapor, but the visible stuff will not end up in your face. Hence, I showed respect to you as a person. In OP of this thread, it isn't noted where the guy was blowing the vaper, and treated as inherently disrespectful to vape in front of other people indoors.

I likely wouldn't vape in that situation unless I knew the person which is possible for all we know in the OP situation. But, it is challenging to see it as inherently disrespectful unless vaper is exhaling huge ol' cloud directly at person in public (indoors or outdoors).

 

[e-pipeman]

My eyes are getting tired, so - vape. Try not to annoy other people when doing it. If other people get annoyed irrationally then ignore them and carry on. If, however, you have got in their face and are being a bit of a nit then you have done no-one any favours, least of all yourself.

 

[AndriaD]

And I wonder if you either ask yourself or advocate for asking in all outdoor venues. For asking, IMO, doesn't equal respect. Maybe in the 1950's, that would've been true, but here in 2010's, where ANTZ have stronghold on the perceptions we are up against, then in the very large places (like a hospital or megastore), I don't expect it to be 'fully permissible.'

I've told you before that I was once in a mega grocery store and asked and was told "of course we allow those, why wouldn't we." Then chose to ask again another day when I was in there, and was told, "no we would never allow that." I said I was told differently by a different manager, and this staff member said, "we've never had a policy that would allow that." Hence, I think it would depend on who's asked, when it comes to the larger places. And I fully believe it would be the same with outdoor places. Ask a person unsure of outdoor policy, and they may just go with "we don't allow that." Which I reckon most vapers would simply ignore, seeing that they are outside and think it is non-issue.

If I am in a place where I can essentially see all 4 walls of the building no matter where I stand, I'm likely to ask and proceed accordingly (likely respecting their decision, possibly discussing it with them). If I'm in a place where I can't see all the walls in the establishment, I expect the answer to be no, and so proceed with the idea of "vape everywhere with respect." If I am outdoors, I don't ask cause I wouldn't really know who to ask, or think there is a 20% chance that an ANTZ-like staff member with pseudo authority would say it is disallowed. So, I just go with the "vape everywhere with respect" attitude when I'm in outdoors public space, unless it is crowded with people who are neither smoking, nor vaping.



And here is where you'd be mistaken which I just showed. You mischaracterize the "vape everywhere" position routinely, and then go onto say it is the reason for public usage bans.

I think your disrespect of the actual vape everywhere position is imbued with desire to shame vapers. I've seen you do this (shame vapers), but not actually certain it is a desire you have. I may never know this, regardless of what you may say here on open forum. Yet, the number one indication of this desire is your continuing to insist that "vape everywhere" is the cause of public usage bans when you've been told umpteen times this is not the case and you know that ANTZ lead these charges citing junk science. Yet, give this issue a week or two, and another thread, and you'll be saying something along lines of "vape everywhere advocacy is why public bans are happening."



I expect no in a world that is sold on ANTZ logic. I would expect "no" in many outdoor locations in major cities, but wouldn't ask because I know how to vape openly, everywhere, with respect which often means you wouldn't know I was vaping there, even if you were a vaping guru.

I have to go along with everything you said. When I went to get my car's exhaust inspected, the waiting area was empty, but it *was* a "public space," so I just casually asked the guy ringing me up "ok if it do this in here?" pointing to the PV hanging around my neck on a lanyard. He shrugged. "Doesn't stink, does it?" I said I don't think so, but see for yourself... took a puff, exhaled it, and again he shrugged, "doesn't smell like anything to me, so sure, go right ahead." That was respect, courtesy, me to him, him to me, everybody's happy. Now if some ANTZ had walked in and made a big damn deal out of it, I could either say "they told me I could do it here, so nyah." Or I could just say, oh sorry, I didn't think it would be a problem, and calmly take it outdoors. Which is more courteous, more grownup, more respectful? Neither the ANTZ making a big damn deal, nor me "standing on my rights" would be either respectful or mature. Being a mature adult is often about simply being courteous to others, regardless of your personal feelings or "rights." Nobody seems to get that at all anymore.

Andria

 

[zoiDman]

And to me, it is not a completely different topic.

The problem with public vaping is there may be times when the vapor could fly directly into the face of another person. If you can think of another problem that needs to be considered, let it be known.

This problem that I just noted applies to indoor and outdoor vaping. And is arguably worse with outdoors because of wind. Indoors, I pretty much know a) how fast my vapor will dissipate into invisible substance and b) the direction of where my exhaled visible vapor will be. With outdoor vaping in mildly crowded to heavily crowded space, I think it will dissipate quickly, but before that happens, I really have no idea where the visible stuff will be blown to.

I like to think that it is far less an issue outdoors because of the wide wide open space, but again I think it is arguably worse than indoor especially comparing it to large establishment (i.e. hospital, mall, megastore).



And if same thing happens indoors, I have tough time understanding why you or any person (vaper or not) would have problem with the respectful kind of vaping you just cited. If saying it is just a matter of asking, then I do think this applies to outdoors. At same time, I think there are enough vapers who are aware of both science and politics to do something that is hard for some people to understand. To ignore the 'no vaping' request, while also practicing same level of respect you just cited. I understand it and agree with it. But I feel empowered with awareness of the science (of SHV) and with awareness of politics (that vaping hatred is pushed mostly by ANTZ). Of all my non-vaping friends and family, I do not see this hatred. Hence, I don't have impression that general non-vaping citizens find open vaping to be inherently disrespectful, and with these people I am constantly vaping in enclosed spaces.

For me, it would matter where the guy was exhaling. If I am standing right in front of you indoors vaping, and I exhale to my left, I think you'll see the vapor, but the visible stuff will not end up in your face. Hence, I showed respect to you as a person. In OP of this thread, it isn't noted where the guy was blowing the vaper, and treated as inherently disrespectful to vape in front of other people indoors.

I likely wouldn't vape in that situation unless I knew the person which is possible for all we know in the OP situation. But, it is challenging to see it as inherently disrespectful unless vaper is exhaling huge ol' cloud directly at person in public (indoors or outdoors).

You and I have Hashed all this out Many Times. Don't think we need to keep Re-Visting it again.

I can see Valid points in your Position. Just like I can see Valid Points in Most People's Position. But I believe that the Indoor Vape-Everywhere Attitude does Much More Harm than Good. Much More.

And I Can't think of a Worse Time for People to be Vaping Indoors in Non-Smoking Areas without Asking FIRST than Now. At a time when the FDA is Asking the Public to Comment on e-Cigarettes.

 

[Asbestos4004]

He "talked"? Remember that game called "telephone"? You're just as guilty.

Yes, exactly...he TALKED to the guy. Re-read the opening post. He "politely informed him" . Now read post #154 where AndriaD accuses him of "accosting" the guy. I'm guilty of what?