Establishments Banning E-Cigs - 2 reasons

[Uma]

I lived right behind a bar/cafe/store combo in the country. I'd spend my funds on chips & cola, while swiping cigs from Mom, until I was old enough to make my own money too.
I became addicted to cigarettes before I got bored with them.
Today's youth can choose zero nic eCigs/hookah pens, experiment, blow those rings, breathe like a dragon, get bored and walk away for life if they choose. No addiction. That is what upsets the career ANTZ so much.

 

[Uma]

Still available at Internet Archive.

Thank you!!
I do hope all those out there with printers and flash drives are busy...

 

[Fulgurant]

If one side says medicare and medicaid and insurance premiums costs too much and they don't want to "pay" for those things, then it kinda follows that they should also be supportive of lifestyle changes that lead to better, not worse, health????

But that doesn't seem to be the case.

I think it is fine for people to eat and drink and not exercise and take terrible care of themselves, and practice unhealthy lifestyles......that is their right. It is their body.

BUT is it okay to ask the rest of the society to pay for their chronic illnesses brought on by those choices?

People who do the "work" to take good care of themselves probably should get a bonus or reduction in their health premiums. Otherwise, aren't we are sending a message that discipline, hard work, and self-control are not valued in the society? That if people want to just *do whatever feels good* and put themselves at risk for a myriad of serious chronic health problems, that other people who choose smarter and more disciplined lifestyles should have to help pay for your consequences?

That reasoning could be extended to everything we do in our lives, and none of us would be pleased with the end result. Rock climbing is far more dangerous than eating greasy cheeseburgers. Should people who engage in reckless behaviors like rock climbing get a free pass simply because they look cute in tight outfits?

Or how about people who ride a bike to work in rush hour traffic? Whatever health benefits the biker derives from the physical exercise are outweighed by the risk of sudden injury -- and hey, I'm subsidizing them with my car insurance, because they're not required to carry their own coverage; frankly, bikers aren't even expected to follow any traffic laws, despite that they've now been given privileged status within fully half of the useful traffic lanes in midtown Philadelphia. Ironically, that concession to bikers makes life twice as difficult for bus drivers, who provide the only truly substantial "green" transportation to commuters.

If I ever saw a bicycle rider in Center City actually wait out a red light, I'd die of shock.

On that self-indulgent and ranty note, I think we're getting a little far afield here. The woman in the article I cited is flatly obnoxious, as you've acknowledged. Whether you agree with her viewpoint or not, she chose the wrong time and the wrong way to express it. My point was simply that her attitude is similar to what we're fighting. And by that I don't mean to slam the aspects of her philosophy with which you're sympathetic; I mean simply to indict the woman's outrageous gall.

And just to clarify, I have never complained about paying for insurance or Medicare. Incidentally, nor do I support government or health-insurance-flavored scrutiny on what occurs in the bedroom, even if unrestrained promiscuity results in higher overall health care and social-service costs. You are correct to observe that there are glaring inconsistencies within establishment-political-party agendas; happily, I am not the author of those inconsistencies. Thus I am not obliged to defend them.

 

[Mark Anthony]

This thread is still popular.... Going to voop and read it all....... 8-o8-o8-o

 

[Racehorse]

Should people who engage in reckless behaviors like rock climbing get a free pass simply because they look cute in tight outfits?

The woman in the article I cited is flatly obnoxious, as you've acknowledged.

Indeed, I did and do. I'm surprised nobody tackled her. Send her over and one of my (slightly obese) 75 pound dogs may want to tackle her, then lick her into submission.

On the other hand, she probably hates dogs. They are much too sloppy in general, esp. in their emotional makeup. And of course, they WILL overeat when they feel like it.

I have never complained about paying for insurance or Medicare. Incidentally, nor do I support government or health-insurance-flavored scrutiny on what occurs in the bedroom, even if unrestrained promiscuity results in higher overall health care and social-service costs. You are correct to observe that there are glaring inconsistencies within establishment-political-party agendas; happily, I am not the author of those inconsistencies. Thus I am not obliged to defend them.

Thank you for saying this.......so perfectly. The glaring inconsistencies do amaze....and are plentiful on both sides of the political dividing lines and landscape.

 

[Racehorse]

All of my parents smoked.
I was 16 when I started smoking. I bought cigarettes with money I earned babysitting. I never had to show any ID

I was trying to find out if your parents gave you permission to smoke at 16.

While discussing the marketing of soda/candy inside schools, you wrote that you taught your kids early and they only get what you say they can have. You asked "Where is the parental responsibility?"

So I began reflecting if many of our parents did not exercise the proper modicum of parental responsibility (since a lot of ECFers started smoking in their teens) or if most started smoking with their parents' blessings.

If not the latter, I'm not sure anyone can claim that if there is the proper amount of "parental responsibility" that children won't buy items marketed to them, and that 'what you allow' does not neatly correspond to the actual behaviors of children when their parents aren't present, nor does responsible parenting preclude certain temptations.

Hence, while children are in school, my "preference" is that they not be marketed items that most parents restrict in the interest of their children's good health. Let them bring it in their knapsacks if they wish, but schools probably shouldn't be marketing grounds, for any products, safe or unsafe anyway, IMHO. Just not the place to do it.

But here's a fun question: Were they do re-allow candy and soda vending machines, and based on both your preference that they should, and this

Today's youth can choose zero nic eCigs/hookah pens, experiment, blow those rings, breathe like a dragon, get bored and walk away for life if they choose. No addiction. That is what upsets the career ANTZ so much.

Given that vaping is pretty safe, how would you feel about vending machines in schools with vaping gear w/Zero Nic juice, then?

Kids often start on cigs at around 14 and 18......so why not give them a safe alternative to smoking---right there on school grounds----if marketing inside schools via vending machines is okay with you?

Would there (hypothetically) be any reason to oppose this?

How about opening some vaping shops as close to schools and along the walking and bike routes that children take in order to get to and from schools?

(and as robin says, parents who don't want their kids vaping (or injesting soda or candy) should, of course, just make sure they give them money that they might spend there. )

 

[EddardinWinter]

This thread is ridiculously off course. Let me join into the rambling tornado....

I actually don't have a problem with the parenting I got as a teen. I smoked at 16. It was legal. There was a smoking section in my High School in 1986-87.

Today many folks seem to think our kids are entitled to a risk free school, neighborhood, and existence. They aren't. There is no such place. They better learn to deal with risk and danger, the world is full of it.

So if zero nicotine e-cigs were available, it isn't ideal. However, it's better than smoking, which is what I did. I can't get but so worked up about any of it.




Tapped out

 

[Fulgurant]

Indeed, I did and do. I'm surprised nobody tackled her. Send her over and one of my (slightly obese) 75 pound dogs may want to tackle her, then lick her into submission.

On the other hand, she probably hates dogs. They are much too sloppy in general, esp. in their emotional makeup. And of course, they WILL overeat when they feel like it.

Heh, yeah. My cocker spaniel is a staunch supporter of overeating.

Thank you for saying this.......so perfectly. The glaring inconsistencies do amaze....and are plentiful on both sides of the political dividing lines and landscape.

Sad but true. The worst part is that those inconsistencies add even more acrimony to an already contentious arena.

 

[Racehorse]

Anyone else see all of the restaurants, colleges, stores, etc. banning e-cigs?

Speaking of vaping openly indoors....Here is a shot from the Ballroom at VaperCon.

Since this topic is about establishments banning vaping, I may as well bring this up since somebody will: it looks a little smoggy/humid/vapor-cloudy in there?

Here, too:

Now, I fully realize this is because a lot of people were all vaping inside a ballroom.

But realistically, can anyone besides me understand why a restaurant or even a landlord of a small apartment might not want a lot of vaping going on in their private property, esp. if they are not vapers themselves?

The air quality, despite that vapor is "harmless", is still not ideal in these photos, is it? (I'm suprised a hotel of this magnitude didn't have some kind of smoke eaters or other filtering device to clear the room a little better.)

Would a non vaper and/or non smoker want to be in there? Dining out? Inside a classroom? Inside a store? etc?

I hope I don't get flamed for stating the obvious.......

 

[stevegmu]

I'm shocked! I've read time and time again vapor immediately drops to the floor, dissipates and looks nothing like cigarette smoke...

Oh, guys with flabby arms really need to wear sleeves...

 

[Racehorse]

And nicotine is a "dependence", not an "addiction".

You bring up a very good point, Anjaffm, I amend my previous post to use more suitable language. I think you are correct about this. I will refer to this as a dependence henceforth, too. Thanks!

(I still don't feel that anyone can, thru their actions, compel me to go back to cigarettes though, as that is still a choice that is entirely up to me, and entirely within my own power to choose. )

I am not "sure" I agree with the way you phased this?

I won't be going "back into addiction"dependence because I am still vaping nicotine, so I am still an addict in dependence.

I am also not sure I want to "blame" anybody else for my addiction dependence. Whether they be antagonists or not. I mean, I do have a choice (I support PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY) in this. Right? I can choose to not go back to stinkies. I can choose to start lowering my nic with vaping so that I can lose my addiction. I can even stop vaping altogether, which many ECF members have already done, including one of my pals here.

So I really am not in favor of stating that anyone else is compelling me back to anything...as I believe m own destiny is in my own hands. Always was, and always will be. I CHOSE to vape. Just like I CHOSE to smoke cigarettes. These are both choices I maade and I take responsbility for my actions and lifetstyle choices.

So how do we meet up on that part?

I am a member of CASAA because I believe solidary helps and I do want to continue vaping, at least until I myself decide to stop or not stop

 

[Ramjet]

Racehorse...those pictures do show a lot of vapor, but probably most everyone, and there are a lot of people in there, they are all vaping from all sorts of various devices. For sure a few pretty big hitters as well

 

[Vocalek]

Racehorse...those pictures do show a lot of vapor, but probably most everyone, and there are a lot of people in there, they are all vaping from all sorts of various devices. For sure a few pretty big hitters as well

The ballroom was well over the posted "maximum occupancy" limit. At the two previous VaperCons held in the same ballroom, the only time the room got that foggy-looking was when one of the vendors was running a theatrical fog machine.

The attendance at the two prior VaperCons was not nearly as high as the total attendance at VaperCon3 (nearly 1,400), and there were probably not more than a dozen people in the room who were NOT vaping. So when you put hundreds and hundreds of people into a small space and all of them are vaping, and many of them are the type that love to make huge, billowing clouds of vapor (as Ramjet said), you get a foggy room.

I have been in restaurants where local vaping clubs were meeting, and the room never got foggy looking.

 

[Vocalek]

Thanks! Any one know why it was taken off the original site?

Yes. I emailed Dr. Burstyn to ask about it. He told me that it accidentally disappeared when Drexel was migrating the site. He has been assured that this glitch will be fixed on Monday (tomorrow).

 

[MacTechVpr]

I am not "sure" I agree with the way you phased this?

I won't be going "back into addiction" because I am still vaping nicotine, so I am still an addict.

I am also not sure I want to "blame" anybody else for my addiction. Whether they be antagonists or not. I mean, I do have a choice (I support PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY) in this. Right? I can choose to not go back to stinkies. I can choose to start lowering my nic with vaping so that I can lose my addiction. I can even stop vaping altogether, which many ECF members have already done, including one of my pals here.

So I really am not in favor of stating that anyone else is compelling me back to anything...as I believe m own destiny is in my own hands. Always was, and always will be. I CHOSE to vape. Just like I CHOSE to smoke cigarettes. These are both choices I maade and I take responsbility for my actions and lifetstyle choices.

So how do we meet up on that part?

I am a member of CASAA because I believe solidary helps and I do want to continue vaping, at least until I myself decide to stop or not stop

Very well, that's your prerogative racehorse. But I would argue that you're ignoring the obvious past and present dangers. A great many vapers are grateful for the opportunity vaping affords precisely because no other alternatives were effective and/or practicable. This is not just a pleasant hobby to many of us. And who says that this addiction is purely a matter of personal responsibility. Yes, NOW. In pragmatic terms. However, when I began smoking it was a virtually a social imperative. And "addiction" was little commonly understood or discussed. Nor how destructive and inescapable this "mere" addiction is for some but exponentially more so for others. Not an excuse but accurate observation.

So Race, for many former smokers it would be practically impossible for health, financial and a multitude of other reasons not to resume smoking. I am one. And I won't explain my risks here. Yet vaping under the guise of government administration [protection] is about to become radically different and in all likelihood prohibitively expensive. Many will see no choice but to resume smoking or continue vaping in a configuration which shall be equivalent to and as deleterious, if not more, so than cigarettes. And we are living the government's propensity to "deem" a medical classification and requirement today, directly or indirectly. How can you deny it? And how will you down-nic then? Will you pull a hat trick for your doctor for the equivalent of that extra disabled parking sticker? You can't say that you'll succeed with any certainty whatsoever. It won't be that easy. Because the government will see to it. I know there will be skeptics to my prediction. That would be unfortunate for them if they ignore the factual indicators of present and past which I, being a mature person, and likewise others have had the misfortune to witness. Things tend to go in the direction they are sent.

So yes for me and a great many other vapers in similar situations, we will be compelled. And our health and yes, lives, materially compromised. Perhaps you too. I'm sorry if this answer smacks of appeal from authority but take it as personal anecdotal testimony from a technologist with long interactions with government/s. I know from first hand experience and objective observation that government has little interest in our health. As one judge once put it to me, the law is not about justice, it is about process [ensuring it]. Don't entrust your health or future to politicians and autocratic bureaucrats. They perpetuate and expand it. And your health and "process" are not likely to be mutually compatible. My strongest advice would be not to apply suspension of disbelief here.

That's my story and I'm stickin' to it Race. Plenty of support in regulatory history to validate the position. Including how addictive and harmful cigarettes have become since regulatory controls began.

Good luck!

 

[Jman8]

Now, I fully realize this is because a lot of people were all vaping inside a ballroom.

But realistically, can anyone besides me understand why a restaurant or even a landlord of a small apartment might not want a lot of vaping going on in their private property, esp. if they are not vapers themselves?

The air quality, despite that vapor is "harmless", is still not ideal in these photos, is it? (I'm suprised a hotel of this magnitude didn't have some kind of smoke eaters or other filtering device to clear the room a little better.)

Would a non vaper and/or non smoker want to be in there? Dining out? Inside a classroom? Inside a store? etc?

I hope I don't get flamed for stating the obvious.......

*Bold emphasis mine.

These are great points you make, and has convinced me that we need to pass laws, hopefully at the worldwide level of government, whereby any person who is a non-smoker/non-vaper, especially a child (will anyone think about the children) that says if it is foggy in your region, you must never ever leave your house. I could post pics to show people what that drastic scene looks like. And despite the vapor being "harmless," it is not ideal. I just can't believe anyone would disagree with this obvious point and subject our fellow humans to those sort of conditions.

If I am ever a landlord, I hope I get into a position to ban smartphones from anywhere on my property, and hopefully within a 10 block radius of my property. Why would I do this? Well, I'm not a smartphone user/owner, and therefore neither should any of my residents be users, at least on my property. And my position makes great sense cause I'm sure if we probe deep enough, we'll see that smartphones are emitting trace amounts of something bad, and who knows what that residue would do to my property. I long for a world where these evil devices will be banned from all public places (indoor and outdoor) out of respect for those who don't use these devices, and who clearly have no legal right to be using them anyway. Most importantly, we have to stop marketing these evil devices to the kids amongst us. They'll get hooked and it'll be a gateway to other things like GTA and/or pulling levers/pushing buttons in voting booths which could lead to serious harm on any given society. Please help save the children. Won't any of you strangers think about the children??

 

[MacTechVpr]

Hillarious...I want to be on the committee for those "laws". Do unto others, no? Before they do unto you. Fabulous premise. /SARC

 

[madqatter]

it looks a little smoggy/humid/vapor-cloudy in there?

It was very hot in the room; I don't think the hotel modified the thermostat to account for the sheer number of people in the crowd. And, yes, humid and cloudy. In person, it sometimes seemed cloudier than these photos. It felt good to go outdoors.

a lot of people were all vaping inside a ballroom.

Most of us, I would assume, off and on.

I'm suprised a hotel of this magnitude didn't have some kind of smoke eaters or other filtering device to clear the room a little better.

I was surprised they didn't turn the thermostat down a little.

This ballroom is too interior to the building be able to get good air circulation going.

 

[Racehorse]

Very well, that's your prerogative racehorse. But I would argue that you're ignoring the obvious past and present dangers.

I appreciate you sharing your story.

If you read my post again, I specifically used the pronoun *I* when writing it. So it's not a matter of a prerogative but my actual experience. I was not ignoring any past or present dangers because my experience is exactly as I wrote it.

I can only speak about my own experience. When I really decide to do something, I put my entire psychology, mind, spirit and body into it, and then I promise myself. For whatever reason, it works and i accomplish what I told myself I would.

I wanted to quit smoking, I got my vape kit, even though it was scary, I chose never to buy cigarettes again. And I didn't. Whether or not I was going to be successful with vaping, I was fully prepared to stick with the promise I made to myself. That is just the way I am.

I did not mean to imply that that is true for everyone. All of our stories have similarities, but are not the same.

Anyway, to me, this is really what these topics are about......sharing perspectives, not about being right nor agreeing on every minute detail. If that were a requirement the topic would have died the first day.

I read thru many posts and although I do not agree with every idea all of it is enlightening.....and there is something to be learned from each and every opinion here.

As for commenting on the photos, as a vaper OF COURSE I realize that a room packed like a can of tuna filled with vapers, some of whom are big vapor producers, is going to generate some clouds. Modern ventillation systems should be able to cope with that, and I guess looking at the photos I did not exactly find the idea of spending many hours in there to be a pleasant anticipation....just being honest. It is just not my idea of a visually appealing air quality situation. Some people feel similarly about saunas and steam rooms and over-chlorinated swimming pools, and eschew them.

 

[Anjaffm]

You bring up a very good point, Anjaffm, I amend my previous post to use more suitable language. I think you are correct about this. I will refer to this as a dependence henceforth, too. Thanks!

Thank you.

I wanted to quit smoking, I got my vape kit, even though it was scary, I chose never to buy cigarettes again. And I didn't. Whether or not I was going to be successful with vaping, I was fully prepared to stick with the promise I made to myself. That is just the way I am.

I did not mean to imply that that is true for everyone. All of our stories have similarities, but are not the same.

My story is the exact opposite.
I was a heavy smoker for 35 years. Never had any intention of quitting smoking. Never once attempted to quit smoking, why should I? It gave me something. Smoked a little too much in the end, especially in the evenings, and it was not doing me good. Thought "Anja, you should not smoke as much in the evenings. It is not doing you good". Saw an e-cig in my colleague's hand, tried it, liked it. Bought an eGo T kit to use in the evenings, so I would smoke less in the evenings.

Started using my new eGo T kit on 4 November 2011, thought "hey, this rocks!" - and made the switch from smoking to vaping immediately, effortlessly and to my own surprise. Have not touched tobacco cigarettes since - and have no intention of doing so. I have something that is so much better, something that gives me everything that I used to get from smoking, but without the harmful and nasty smoke itself. - And yes, there ARE benefits to nicotine consumption, at least in some individuals -

As of today - 4 November 2013 - I have been smoke-free for exactly two years
I never intended to quit smoking. It just happened. - And I know exactly what would happen in my case if vaping became unavailable / banned / forbidden. I want no part of such a future.

- - And just in case anybody now recommends that I should go through some "FDA approved" quit-smoking program: Uhm.... I almost starved myself to death, to be skinny, to be fashionable, like all the media said, as a young girl and a young woman. Had an eating disorder for 16 years. I will never subject myself to cravings and intense suffering again. Ever. - -