Fight for your Right to Vape - Daily Action Plan Wed. Aug. 7th 2013

[thew92]

Fight for your Right to vape - Daily Action Plan Wed. Aug. 7th 2013


Currently in California S.B. No. 648 is pending in the Governmental Organization Committee in the CA state assembly. This bill would ban indoor ecig use wherever there is a smoking ban. Lets reach out to the members of the committee and ask them to STOP SB 648 via twitter. Just click on the links below and there will be a prefilled and fully editable tweet ready to go for 2 State Assembly members on the committee. Feel free to edit the tweet to make them more personable.


http://spredd.it/MedDqbb3
@FrankBigelowCA The vapor I exhale from my #ecig is cleaner than the air they breathe in L.A. #SB648 promotes #cigarettes and #cancer.


http://spredd.it/8k79GeLe
@BrianNestande The vapor I exhale from my #ecig is cleaner than the air they breathe in L.A. #SB648 promotes #cigarettes and #cancer.


Tell you Ecig story to this State Assembly member here.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...529754530392111.127546.519741888060042&type=1


Reply with done to bump this thread so more vapors see it.

 

[thew92]

Fight for your Right to Vape - Daily Action Plan Wed. Aug. 7th 2013


Currently in California S.B. No. 648 is pending in the Governmental Organization Committee in the CA state assembly. This bill would ban indoor Ecig use wherever there is a smoking ban. Lets reach out to the members of the committee and ask them to STOP SB 648 via twitter. Just click on the links below and there will be a prefilled and fully editable tweet ready to go for 2 State Assembly members on the committee. Feel free to edit the tweet to make them more personable.


http://spredd.it/MedDqbb3
@FrankBigelowCA The vapor I exhale from my #ecig is cleaner than the air they breathe in L.A. #SB648 promotes #cigarettes and #cancer.


http://spredd.it/8k79GeLe
@BrianNestande The vapor I exhale from my #ecig is cleaner than the air they breathe in L.A. #SB648 promotes #cigarettes and #cancer.


Tell you Ecig story to this State Assembly member here.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...529754530392111.127546.519741888060042&type=1

 

[thew92]

This may be an unpopular point of view, but I would venture a different take on this...

When you vape, you blow out an extreme amount of vapor over an hour or so. Although admittedly it is not cigarette smoke (who in the hell would ever smoke indoors anyway?), it is still a pollutant to those who do not vape. That is, it still clouds their air space with something foreign. Sure it's not toxic, but no one should be forced to breathe in anything they are not comfortable with. And let's remember that vaping is still new and misunderstood. When people see clouds of vapor in the air, they are reminded of cigarettes.

Why not just step outside when you vape? Not at home obv (although as I understand that VG juices may be toxic to cats), but certainly in public places? Why not be respectful of others who either do not understand the mists of vapor in their air space, or simply don't want to be around anything that detracts from a "normal" place to breathe?

I know we are on a mission to educate and I agree with that. But I think it's a mistake to insist on blowing clouds of vapor on others as we educate. It reminds me a little of proselytizing. It doesn't do the cause any good to force it. Wait till they come to you seeking information. Then you can enlighten them.

Now if they are removing your right to vape, or your right to purchase vaping equipment, then yes - by all means - stand up and fight. But if they are simply asking us not to vape indoors in public areas, should we protest?

By all means Vapors should be polite while vaping and try not to offened anyone. If a place of busniess don't all vapping that is their choise and your choice to do business there. This is a bout a state wide ban that would most likley ban vaping in Vape shops and shut them down.

 

[stevegmu]

If a vape shop has fewer than 5 employees, does not allow minors to enter, all the employees consent to vaping indoors and has some sort of ventilation- air-conditioning, they would be exempt- at least under California's current tobacco laws.

 

[Vwls]

By all means Vapors should be polite while vaping and try not to offened anyone. If a place of busniess don't all vapping that is their choise and your choice to do business there. This is a bout a state wide ban that would most likley ban vaping in Vape shops and shut them down.

Would it ban the sale of vape equipment? Or ban the act of vaping indoors?

 

[thew92]

Would it ban the sale of vape equipment? Or ban the act of vaping indoors?

I am not a legal expert in this matter these where just my assumptions about the law.

 

[stevegmu]

I am not a legal expert in this matter these where just my assumptions about the law.

So you haven't read the law. Why promote a call to action for against something you haven't actually read? Had you read it, you would know there is nothing about banning e-nic equipment in it- except for sales to minors. I read the bill.

Here's a link to the current version of the bill so you can read it-

Bill Text: CA SB648 | 2013-2014 | Regular Session | Amended | LegiScan

 

[Vwls]

So you haven't read the law. Why promote a call to action for against something you haven't actually read? Had you read it, you would know there is nothing about banning e-nic equipment in it- except for sales to minors. I read the bill.

Here's a link to the current version of the bill so you can read it-

Bill Text: CA SB648 | 2013-2014 | Regular Session | Amended | LegiScan

I'm afraid I have to agree with steve here, although I admire the passion of thew92. The thing to keep in mind is that vaping is still new to the community at large, and it's good practice to vape outdoors where you are not forcing your habit on others. If they come out there with you and ask questions, you have found your opportunity to share and educate.

 

[thew92]

So you haven't read the law. Why promote a call to action for against something you haven't actually read? Had you read it, you would know there is nothing about banning e-nic equipment in it- except for sales to minors. I read the bill.

Here's a link to the current version of the bill so you can read it-

Bill Text: CA SB648 | 2013-2014 | Regular Session | Amended | LegiScan

Because I don't like this:

If enacted, this bill would:
Ban the use of vapor products wherever smoking is banned. Among those provisions most likely to impact users are those that would:

Ban e-cigarette use in virtually all workplaces in California, including in hospitals. Violations would be punishable by fines of $100, $200, and $500. (Section 12)
Ban e-cigarette use inside or within 20 feet of any public building or in a vehicle owned by the state. (Section 4)
Declares that the use of electronic cigarettes “may be a hazard to the health of the general public,” and would include e-cigarettes in all future smoking bans passed in California. (Section 11)
Ban e-cigarette use in railroads and air carriers. (Section 13)


CASAA: Call to Action! California E-Cigarette Usage Ban -- SB 648 (UPDATED -- Hearing on August 14th)

 

[stevegmu]

In places like California and other nanny states, e-nic will be treated the same as cigarettes. Even with AD campaigns by BLU, most people see e-nic as as a type of smoking. It is what it is.
I would be fine with any of those regulations if passed in the state I live. I didn't start vaping so I could get my nic fix where smoking is prohibited.

 

[thew92]

Part of the goal of SB648 is to demonize Ecig users. I myself live in Texas so this bill won't effect me yet. But I do see this type of demonizing spreading from state to state.

Proud to Vape.

 

[theinlawjosie]

If a vape shop has fewer than 5 employees, does not allow minors to enter, all the employees consent to vaping indoors and has some sort of ventilation- air-conditioning, they would be exempt- at least under California's current tobacco laws.

So what if a vape shop is quite successful and has more than 5 employees? I have absolutely no problem with stepping outside to have a vape in most situations - I don't need the government to tell me what to do. If a business wants to allow vaping (or even smoking), it should not be the business of anyone but the business-owner and his/her customer base.

A lot of people find a lot of things offensive. Why aren't there any bans on perfume or cologne? These can also be considered pollutants and most certainly have an adverse effect on people with sensitivities being exposed to them. I have seen more than one person be taken from my place of employment by ambulance because someone was a little trigger happy with their perfume. The ONLY reason people are concerned about vaping is because it resembles smoking.

Again - I have no problem with stepping outside to have a vape - I do have a problem with the nanny state and its attempts at removing the rights of business owners to allow a perfectly legal act to take place at their establishment. The business owner should be allowed to decide if they will suffer a big enough loss, by allowing vapers to vape on THEIR property, before they decide whether they want to prohibit it or not.

 

[stevegmu]

Guess they are out of luck. The people of California voted in their representatives. What, did they expect them to turn into Republicans, rather than liberal socialists?

 

[theinlawjosie]

You have me there - I'm not a fan of straight up democracy (mob rule) - just one of the many reasons I would never live in California.

 

[UntamedRose]

You have me there - I'm not a fan of straight up democracy (mob rule) - just one of the many reasons I would never live in California.

This is amusing coming from someone in a state with a whole lotta Dry counties.

 

[theinlawjosie]

This is amusing coming from someone in a state with a whole lotta Dry counties.

Yeah, there are a lot of dry counties in Kentucky (I'm not in one of them). I'll still take it over California - my freaking weed eater would be illegal in California!

 

[theinlawjosie]

Just to be clear - I don't have a problem with the people of California (any more than I have a problem with people in general) - I'm not attacking any member of this board who happens to live there. I'm all about freedom of choice and I try my best not to judge - I just don't like having a nanny state tell me what I can and can't do.

 

[thew92]

Guess they are out of luck. The people of California voted in their representatives. What, did they expect them to turn into Republicans, rather than liberal socialists?

What we need to do is contact these representatives and give the Vapors side of the story. Big Pharma and Big Tobacco already know how to do this and they don't speak for you but they will claim to. So reach out to these guys wither it be In person, Phone, Fax, Email, Twitter or Facebook. Reach out with all forms of contact. What I am giving you here is an easy why to reach out via social media.

Remember If you don't speak up for yourself someone else will speak for you. Stan Glanze is more than happy to speak for you.

 

[stevegmu]

What we need to do is contact these representatives and give the Vapors side of the story. Big Pharma and Big Tobacco already know how to do this and they don't speak for you but they will claim to. So reach out to these guys wither it be In person, Phone, Fax, Email, Twitter or Facebook. Reach out with all forms of contact. What I am giving you here is an easy why to reach out via social media.

Remember If you don't speak up for yourself someone else will speak for you. Stan Glanze is more than happy to speak for you.

You can't reason with these types of people; they live in their own world. California is a lost cause. It is a prime example of how voting has consequences.

 

[thew92]

You can't reason with these types of people; they live in their own world. California is a lost cause. It is a prime example of how voting has consequences.

You won't change anyone's mind or reason with them if you don't speak out yourself.