eLiquid Bans and such.

[kristin]

Josh Harris of Deadliest Catch was/is a spokesperson for InLife electronic cigarettes...
Josh Harris, Son of Captain Phil Harris, Joins the inLife Team to Help Bring Awareness to the Benefits of the Electronic Cigarette

That didn't last long. He's been smoking again the past 2 seasons.

I'm not surprised - I can't imagine fussing with an inLife e-cig on a crab boat! In the wheelhouse yes, but not if you work on deck.

 

[swoop_g]

Yea on a boat the e-cig isn't likely to perform well. Even an Ego on a lanyard prolly would not last very long in salt water spray for an 18+ hour shift. Maybe its time for someone to build a rugged "4 wheel drive" e-cig!

 

[EddardinWinter]

That didn't last long. He's been smoking again the past 2 seasons.

I'm not surprised - I can't imagine fussing with an inLife e-cig on a crab boat! In the wheelhouse yes, but not if you work on deck.

You don't worry about Cancer while fighting the Bering Sea in a storm after being awake 20 hours straight.

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

 

[Unforeseen]

Moved to General e-liquid Discussion

 

[wv2win]

I don't get how your example supports your point that they could not inact & enforce a regulation that states for electronic cigarettes, sealed carts will be the only delivery option. Smokeable nicotine products (cigs, etc) as well as smokeless are in a physical encasement that could be easly argued makes it more "safe" for accidental use. Buying a 50ml bottle of 36mg eliquid could be viewed by the powers to be, as a different animal.

As far as the tobacco companies supporting legislation (state level) that would restrict how eliquid is provided the average consumer, they have already done that.

You are definitely more versed in the political arena than I am. Therefore, I hope you are right.

But I don't want to be on here a year from now reading a post from you that says "mea culpa", how did I miss that loop hole. So I don't think we should ignore Big Pharm, Big Tobacco or the FDA as if they can't or won't do great harm to the vaping community. And although I would not mind reasonable oversight for purely safety of content, I do not believe that the FDA is capable of doing that given that they are filled with people who would much rather have vaping banned completely.

The problem with that approach is that it violates the equal protection clause and probably runs afoul of due process as well. Distributors of the "banned" packaging/labeling system would claim that the ban denies them the same protection as distributors of the allowed products even though they both contain the same substance and both are used for the same purpose. They would be successful, as the equal protection clause has been litigated too many times to count and there is a wealth of precedent on their side.



Equal protection again. In fact, the 14th Amendment expressly forbids states from enacting laws that treat entities or people differently for being or doing essentially the same thing.



I don't trust FDA any more than you do. And I also hope that they never try to pull it off. In order to be successful, they'd have to ignore or try to circumvent the Constitution and those that are harmed by their actions would have to let it happen. Even the deeming regulation would have to affect all electronic cigarettes the same way, which means that they run afoul of the tobacco companies and their own armies of lawyers and lobbyists.

I may be naive or overly optimistic, but I remain convinced that as long as cigs, dip and chew are available, so will nicotine solutions derived from the same plants.

Based on this most recent action of Homeland Security, which included at least one well known vaping supply site, I am afraid their are ways the federal government (FDA), with the encouragement of BP and BT could take the action we all fear. Here are two posts on ECF, one by our noted expert and supporter, Bill Godshaw:


http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...regulation-proposed-approved.html#post9950587

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...meland-security-busting-nicotine-vendors.html

 

[Myk]

Based on this most recent action of Homeland Security, which included at least one well known vaping supply site, I am afraid their are ways the federal government (FDA), with the encouragement of BP and BT could take the action we all fear. Here are two posts on ECF, one by our noted expert and supporter, Bill Godshaw:


http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...regulation-proposed-approved.html#post9950587

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...meland-security-busting-nicotine-vendors.html

I don't really see what connection there is to the FDA going after illegal pharmaceutical sites has to do with ecigs other than to say that is what they could do if they do _____. Going after illegal pharmaceuticals is their job.

However the RTS thing is downright scary (when you read the actual thread and not what you linked). Why is that their job to do that? Why were they even doing that? Why are they trying to trump up charges? It has no innocent "doing our job" excuse like the FDA would have for what they could do if they did do.