Does this seem right to you?

[Lessifer]

So what would be the guidelines of responsible labeling?

Let's take the cookie juice in the OP.

No Cartoon Cookie, got it.
Can you have a real cookie? Or do kids like cookies too much?
Can you have bright colors?
Does it need to just be a plain white label?
Can you have a company logo? If so, what are you not allowed to have in your logo?
What about on your website? Can you put any pics you want or does it need to be a white space with just the word "Cookie"?
Can you use the word Cookie? Do you need to call it something that wouldn't appeal to kids, like Biscotti?

 

[zoiDman]

So what would be the guidelines of responsible labeling?

Let's take the cookie juice in the OP.

No Cartoon Cookie, got it.
Can you have a real cookie? Or do kids like cookies too much?
Can you have bright colors?
Does it need to just be a plain white label?
Can you have a company logo? If so, what are you not allowed to have in your logo?
What about on your website? Can you put any pics you want or does it need to be a white space with just the word "Cookie"?
Can you use the word Cookie? Do you need to call it something that wouldn't appeal to kids, like Biscotti?

Why does all this need to be a Fight?

 

[KattMamma]

Why does all this need to be a Fight?

I wish it didn't have to be a fight.

But there are many of us who realize that siding with the ANTZ on any portion of the issue just gives them more credibility.

Also, the "marketing to children" and "flavors for children" are just tactics being used against us -- they really don't care about the children, and if they had NO ammo in these areas, it would just be something else. So giving in to their demands here does nothing other than strengthen their cause.

 

[Lessifer]

Why does all this need to be a Fight?

Because when you advocate for unnecessary and arbitrary legislation, you need to consider ALL of its consequences.

And yes I know you didn't say it should be legislated, but that's where it's heading, and supporting "voluntary" industry bans(if you don't, you can't join our organization) IS supporting mandatory bans.

 

[zoiDman]

I wish it didn't have to be a fight.

But there are many of us who realize that siding with the ANTZ on any portion of the issue just gives them more credibility.

Also, the "marketing to children" and "flavors for children" are just tactics being used against us -- they really don't care about the children, and if they had NO ammo in these areas, it would just be something else. So giving in to their demands here does nothing other than strengthen their cause.

Because when you advocate for unnecessary and arbitrary legislation, you need to consider ALL of its consequences.

And yes I know you didn't say it should be legislated, but that's where it's heading, and supporting "voluntary" industry bans(if you don't, you can't join our organization) IS supporting mandatory bans.

I think People need to Start Thinking about what Type of e-Cigarette Market they want in the Future. And what is Going to be Possible. And What Isn't.

What Isn't going to be Possible is...

No Age Limits to buy e-liquids that Contain Nicotine
Any type of Labeling that a Company Wants
No CRP

Understanding this Isn't Siding with ANTZ. It's called being a Realist.

If People want to Fight for those Issues, Great. Go For It. But they Are Not Winnable. Sorry to be the One to Say this. And I know I'll get Flamed (again) for it. But it is what it Is.

I would Rather Concede these 3 Items and Move Forward with something that will Actually Effect Vaper's.

 

[Lessifer]

What Isn't going to be Possible is...

No Age Limits to buy e-Liquids that Contain Nicotine
Any type of Labeling that a Company Wants
No CRP

I know we disagree on this, but I will never stop fighting these BECAUSE the only reason why these would be necessary is if we need to "protect the children" from vaping. As long as people believe that the children need to be protected, they can justify anything. If there is nothing to protect the children from, there's no argument. I will never say that the government needs to protect the children from vaping, Parents should be responsible and protect their own children from anything they deem potentially harmful.

 

[hashtag]

I think all bottles should be given the parental advisory sticker they used to put on CD's in the 90's

 

[Lessifer]

I think all bottles should be given the parental advisory sticker they used to put on CD's in the 90's

And then Walmart can sell special "clean" editions?

 

[zoiDman]

I know we disagree on this, but I will never stop fighting these BECAUSE the only reason why these would be necessary is if we need to "protect the children" from vaping. As long as people believe that the children need to be protected, they can justify anything. If there is nothing to protect the children from, there's no argument. I will never say that the government needs to protect the children from vaping, Parents should be responsible and protect their own children from anything they deem potentially harmful.

That's Cool Lessifer.

And I know that you are Passionate about those 3 Particular Items. Especially having No Age Limits to purchase e-Liquids that contain Nicotine.

 

[Rule62]

What is being lost on this whole 17 page discussion is this. Are labels with cartoon characters, pictures of smiling cookies, etc. more attractive to children, than labels that don't depict these things? I don't know the answer; I'm not a kid. But if the answer is yes, maybe, or probably, is the additional risk worth it? Everybody seems to be talking about regulation and legislation; but it somewhat misses the point.

 

[KattMamma]

What is being lost on this whole 17 page discussion is this. Are labels with cartoon characters, pictures of smiling cookies, etc. more attractive to children, than labels that don't depict these things? I don't know the answer; I'm not a kid. But if the answer is yes, maybe, or probably, is the additional risk worth it? Everybody seems to be talking about regulation and legislation; but it somewhat misses the point.

So if you take regulation and legislation out of this argument -

do certain pictures/colors/shapes appeal to children? probably.

What to do about it? Don't buy those if you have children. Easy.

 

[Tansi]

ohhhh...and the first one would be a Strawberry / Marshmallow flavor !!



...I think I'll go do some mixing - that sounds good !!!

I wouldn't mind some of that myself [emoji2]

I understand both sides of this argument, cute characters on labels are just one thing they will target, next will be bright colors or fancy lettering, at this rare well end up with generic labels with block print. May still be wonderful juice but I resent the fact that anything perceived as even slightly childish is going to be a target due to it.

 

[Rule62]

When I was taking the safety course, many years ago, for my CWP, one topic the instructor discussed stuck with me. He said: If you have a firearm in your house, and you hide it, thinking your child won't find it, you're wrong. Your child will find it, eventually. If you believe your child won't go near, or touch your firearms, because you've told them not to, you're a fool. Your child knows where your firearms are, and it's very likely they have handled or played with them, at least once.
When I was a kid, I knew the entire contents of my mom's and dad's top dresser drawers, my dad's tool cabinet, and my mom's jewelry box. It's what kids do. They explore, snoop, and they're sneaky.
Now granted, the danger of ejuice doesn't equal the danger of a firearm, in the hands of a child. But ejuice is still a deadly poison. As adults, does the fact that we like cartoons and colorful labels too, trump the possibility that those colorful, cartoon labels might be an attraction to kids? Not to me it doesn't.
I've been vaping for quite a while, and I haven't vaped a label yet.

 

[mattiem]

If a parent likes the flavor in those bottles with colorful labels and fear that their children will see it and be tempted then simply remove the offending label and replace with something you are comfortable with. That should remove all the danger---NOT. Put it behind locked doors if it can't be kept out of their hands.

round and round and round we go.....We should not have to child proof the whole world and cannot no matter what we do.

 

[beckdg]

I just came across this in one of my groups.

Sent from my HTC One M8 Harman/Kardon edition

He goes from hilarious to very realistic in one sentence...

"Fair and balanced" (referring to deeming regs)

To...

"Movement to eliminate" (how accurate! )

Tapatyped

 

[NoStringz]

Since I started vaping, I've only bought juice with a design that might cause my granddaughters to get into. But since you brought it up, yes I agree. Products that have things that attract a childs attention doesn't help us. Plus I always keep my juice up out of reach when kids are here.

 

[beckdg]

So if you take regulation and legislation out of this argument -

do certain pictures/colors/shapes appeal to children? probably.

What to do about it? Don't buy those if you have children. Easy.

Oh I dunno...

I have some pretty alluring dangerous items.

I have 3 children.

I have no worries at all.

My kids know better, can't reach it or don't know it's there.

Simple
Responsible
Parenting

Allows me to make these choices despite the fact I'm not celibate.

We also have a large in ground pool that's magnitudes more dangerous than joose.

I have no fear of leaving the patio door open with my 3 yr old running around loose.

He knows better... simple.

I wonder how these senators' children react to strangers with candy... or candy flavored vodka.

Dumb like a fox... The whole money grubbing lot of them.

Tapatyped

 

[beckdg]

When bottles like these are brought before a session of Congress is what matters...

It is.

But we are Fighting for our e-Cigarette Lives here. And are Under Attack on Every Level. This type of Label does Nothing but Hurt our Cause.

I ask myself... "Why does a Retailer/Vendor need to use this Label in the First Place?". They are Not going to Sell any Less or any More e-Liquid if they just used a Picture of a Cookie.

And if they Did, there Wouldn't be the Spector of trying to Entice Under Aged use of e-Cigarettes.

Thank you 2 for being responsible adults and champions to our cause.



This one's too easy for them. Wonder what we'll give up next. Certainly won't be our freedom. They already pretty much own the majority of that.

Tapatyped

 

[beckdg]

I think People need to Start Thinking about what Type of e-Cigarette Market they want in the Future. And what is Going to be Possible. And What Isn't.

What Isn't going to be Possible is...

No Age Limits to buy e-Liquids that Contain Nicotine
Any type of Labeling that a Company Wants
No CRP

Understanding this Isn't Siding with ANTZ. It's called being a Realist.

If People want to Fight for those Issues, Great. Go For It. But they Are Not Winnable. Sorry to be the One to Say this. And I know I'll get Flamed (again) for it. But it is what it Is.

I would Rather Concede these 3 Items and Move Forward with something that will Actually Effect Vaper's.

In mother Russia, government no regulate joose. Joose regulate itself for fear of KGB.

Tapatyped

 

[beckdg]

What is being lost on this whole 17 page discussion is this. Are labels with cartoon characters, pictures of smiling cookies, etc. more attractive to children, than labels that don't depict these things? I don't know the answer; I'm not a kid. But if the answer is yes, maybe, or probably, is the additional risk worth it? Everybody seems to be talking about regulation and legislation; but it somewhat misses the point.

I see your point very clearly.

But i reject it as fallacy. A false profit. An open door for legislation to take the next step.

Horrible parents will have their children drinking beer with bald eagles holding hops on the ugly labels before they turn 7 regardless what joose looks like.

your argument is invalid...

ETA; Look at that enticing label.

Tapatyped