I am heartbroken. Public E-Cig smoking has been banned in King Co (Seattle) Wa.

[Ansah]

Okay, that's where I thought you were going, which still leaves me confused...

Are you saying you can't support CASAA if they aren't fighting against baseless smoking bans too?
Or are you saying you can't support CASAA if they aren't fighting to right all of the wrongs in the world?

What approach would you support?

By the way, I'm not trying to start anything, or be a ............
I am honestly curious and interested.

Never occurred to me that you were trying to be a .......... LOL. You pose excellent questions that can help lead to clarity, thanks.

I don't "not support" CASAA, and certainly don't denounce what is a commendable organization. It's more that I don't know HOW to engage on the level they seem to be promoting, because in terms of awareness I'm not there. For instance, let's look at the standard petition/congressional letter paradigm, in which people write letters along the usual line of: I smoked for 20 years and couldn't quit until... so please allow us..., etc. I've tried to write these, and am, quite frankly, offended by the notion of cowering and begging for permission to do what is already my natural, God-given right to do. It feels somehow morally wrong almost, because by "asking permission" I'm implicitly acknowledging that they have a right to tell me what I may or may not do on this level, which they most certainly do not. I do not wish to acknowledge the legitimacy of the oppression by asking for mercy, nor do I believe on a strategic level that it's a wise approach, as it only serves to cement the current asymmetrical power relationships that allow us to be oppressed in the first place.

I would much rather see an approach similar to that which led to legalized abortion in the US, wherein the feminist movement, instead of arguing over nuanced moral and biological questions, challenged the nature of the power relationship itself, at its root: IT'S MY BODY. YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO GATHER EVIDENCE PRO/CON AND THEN MAKE THE DECISION FOR ME BASED ON THAT EVIDENCE. IT IS MY, NOT YOUR, DECISION TO MAKE.

I am, again, further disenchanted by the proactive, almost paranoiac disassociation from other groups targeted for persecution in areas that we are not allowed to talk about. While I don't expect CASAA or ECF to solve all of the problems of the world, I strongly believe that human rights struggles cannot be advanced in isolation from (or even in hostility towards?) the human rights struggles of others. How can this be discussed in isolation? What does a Provari with a Genesis tank remind many people of? Where, how and in what context are such perceptions to be examined and addressed?

The USA is far-and-away the world leader in the incarceration of its own citizens. Is it OK to point this out here? Like it or not, vaping struggles are inherently interconnected to this fact, as well as to the cultural sensibilities (in Seattle, the "social norms") and authoritarian dictates that allowed this to happen.

 

[Sirius]

Never occurred to me that you were trying to be a .......... LOL. You pose excellent questions that can help lead to clarity, thanks.

I don't "not support" CASAA, and certainly don't denounce what is a commendable organization. It's more that I don't know HOW to engage on the level they seem to be promoting, because in terms of awareness I'm not there. For instance, let's look at the standard petition/congressional letter paradigm, in which people write letters along the usual line of: I smoked for 20 years and couldn't quit until... so please allow us..., etc. I've tried to write these, and am, quite frankly, offended by the notion of cowering and begging for permission to do what is already my natural, God-given right to do. It feels somehow morally wrong almost, because by "asking permission" I'm implicitly acknowledging that they have a right to tell me what I may or may not do on this level, which they most certainly do not. I do not wish to acknowledge the legitimacy of the oppression by asking for mercy, nor do I believe on a strategic level that it's a wise approach, as it only serves to cement the current asymmetrical power relationships that allow us to be oppressed in the first place.

I would much rather see an approach similar to that which led to legalized abortion in the US, wherein the feminist movement, instead of arguing over nuanced moral and biological questions, challenged the nature of the power relationship itself, at its root: IT'S MY BODY. YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO GATHER EVIDENCE PRO/CON AND THEN MAKE THE DECISION FOR ME BASED ON THAT EVIDENCE. IT IS MY, NOT YOUR, DECISION TO MAKE.

I am, again, further disenchanted by the proactive, almost paranoiac disassociation from other groups targeted for persecution in areas that we are not allowed to talk about. While I don't expect CASAA or ECF to solve all of the problems of the world, I strongly believe that human rights struggles cannot be advanced in isolation from (or even in hostility towards?) the human rights struggles of others. How can this be discussed in isolation? What does a Provari with a Genesis tank remind many people of? Where, how and in what context are such perceptions to be examined and addressed?

The USA is far-and-away the world leader in the incarceration of its own citizens. Is it OK to point this out here? Like it or not, vaping struggles are inherently interconnected to this fact, as well as to the cultural sensibilities (in Seattle, the "social norms") and authoritarian dictates that allowed this to happen.

Ansah -- Damn well put!
I'll support CASAA but will NOT cower down about vaping..Us smokers were put out in the cold and treated like
vermin here in the USA when the nanny state mentality took over..I'll be damned if I'll be treated that way EVER again!
CASAA has posted this:

New study confirms that chemicals in electronic
cigarettes pose minimal health risk

E-cigarette users can breathe a little easier today. A study just released by Professor Igor
Burstyn, Drexel University School of Public
Health, confirms that chemicals in electronic
cigarettes (e-cigarettes) pose no health concern
for users or bystanders. This is the first
definitive study of e-cigarette chemistry and
finds that there are no health concerns based
on generally accepted exposure limits.
CASAA - The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association

....and if you go to this link you can find many more reviews on research:
E-cigarette research, studies and papers

 

[Caridwen]

Ansah -- Damn well put!
I'll support CASAA but will NOT cower down about vaping..Us smokers were put out in the cold and treated like
vermin here in the USA when the nanny state mentality took over..I'll be damned if I'll be treated that way EVER again!
CASAA has posted this:

New study confirms that chemicals in electronic
cigarettes pose minimal health risk

E-cigarette users can breathe a little easier today. A study just released by Professor Igor
Burstyn, Drexel University School of Public
Health, confirms that chemicals in electronic
cigarettes (e-cigarettes) pose no health concern
for users or bystanders. This is the first
definitive study of e-cigarette chemistry and
finds that there are no health concerns based
on generally accepted exposure limits.
CASAA - The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association

....and if you go to this link you can find many more reviews on research:
E-cigarette research, studies and papers

I despise the term 'nanny state' but I do agree with you.

 

[DC2]

Never occurred to me that you were trying to be a .......... LOL. You pose excellent questions that can help lead to clarity, thanks.

I don't "not support" CASAA, and certainly don't denounce what is a commendable organization. It's more that I don't know HOW to engage on the level they seem to be promoting, because in terms of awareness I'm not there. For instance, let's look at the standard petition/congressional letter paradigm, in which people write letters along the usual line of: I smoked for 20 years and couldn't quit until... so please allow us..., etc. I've tried to write these, and am, quite frankly, offended by the notion of cowering and begging for permission to do what is already my natural, God-given right to do. It feels somehow morally wrong almost, because by "asking permission" I'm implicitly acknowledging that they have a right to tell me what I may or may not do on this level, which they most certainly do not. I do not wish to acknowledge the legitimacy of the oppression by asking for mercy, nor do I believe on a strategic level that it's a wise approach, as it only serves to cement the current asymmetrical power relationships that allow us to be oppressed in the first place.

I would much rather see an approach similar to that which led to legalized abortion in the US, wherein the feminist movement, instead of arguing over nuanced moral and biological questions, challenged the nature of the power relationship itself, at its root: IT'S MY BODY. YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO GATHER EVIDENCE PRO/CON AND THEN MAKE THE DECISION FOR ME BASED ON THAT EVIDENCE. IT IS MY, NOT YOUR, DECISION TO MAKE.

I am, again, further disenchanted by the proactive, almost paranoiac disassociation from other groups targeted for persecution in areas that we are not allowed to talk about. While I don't expect CASAA or ECF to solve all of the problems of the world, I strongly believe that human rights struggles cannot be advanced in isolation from (or even in hostility towards?) the human rights struggles of others. How can this be discussed in isolation? What does a Provari with a Genesis tank remind many people of? Where, how and in what context are such perceptions to be examined and addressed?

The USA is far-and-away the world leader in the incarceration of its own citizens. Is it OK to point this out here? Like it or not, vaping struggles are inherently interconnected to this fact, as well as to the cultural sensibilities (in Seattle, the "social norms") and authoritarian dictates that allowed this to happen.

Thank you.


And I agree with you in that I often have a really hard time finding a conscionable way to write such letters.
Especially given that I don't think electronic cigarettes have saved my life to any significant extent, since I was such a light smoker.

But have you joined CASAA just so you can be counted in their number?

It costs you nothing in time or money, which I imagine does not concern you here.
But morally, theoretically, or politically, I would hope the pursuit of the greater fight has not stopped you.

 

[Rickajho]

Dang. The wet side strikes again I had a security guard at Quest field tell me to either put it away or he was going to take it from me. I put it my pocket and walked away. He's lucky I was so nice as my mood wasn't very good being that the Seahawks where kicking my Niners butts.

Private property or not, if a security guard put his hands on you under those circumstances I do believe that's called "assault."

 

[patkin]

The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits..... Einstein.

Serendipity... I've posted that a couple of other places on the forum today.

 

[Fulgurant]

For instance, let's look at the standard petition/congressional letter paradigm, in which people write letters along the usual line of: I smoked for 20 years and couldn't quit until... so please allow us..., etc. I've tried to write these, and am, quite frankly, offended by the notion of cowering and begging for permission to do what is already my natural, God-given right to do. It feels somehow morally wrong almost, because by "asking permission" I'm implicitly acknowledging that they have a right to tell me what I may or may not do on this level, which they most certainly do not. I do not wish to acknowledge the legitimacy of the oppression by asking for mercy, nor do I believe on a strategic level that it's a wise approach, as it only serves to cement the current asymmetrical power relationships that allow us to be oppressed in the first place.

Beautiful. You effortlessly summarize something that's been bothering me for a long time, but couldn't pinpoint or define. I guess your passage above explains why my letters to public-health officials or so-called journalists or over-reaching politicians invariably morph into strident, impersonal arguments rather than personal testimonials. My approach is probably less effective -- possibly even counter-productive -- but it makes me feel better.

 

[Ansah]

But have you joined CASAA just so you can be counted in their number?

Oh yeah, I'm definitely enrolled. Strength in numbers and all of that.... Hope I didn't come across as anti-CASAA, because I am most emphatically not. I consider myself both a member and an ally, just a member who questions some of the strategical aspects for attaining the goal with the concerns I've already spoken about above.

 

[ndnshift]

same thing was passed in pierce county and repealed by help from the vaporium in tacoma...

the funny thing about king county's version is it bans "electronic smoking devices" that resemble a "cigarette, cigar, or cigarillo". what i have makes no smoke and doesn't look like any tobacco product. they also ban anything containing tobacco (thats not a cig etc). my juice certainly has nicotine derived from tobacco, but there's no tobacco in it.

the best part is they mention nico-water. now im a nicotine addict and i had to look it up. hilarious. oh, nico lolly pops too.

on the other hand, virtually no law enforcement i've met know about the ban. only ones that really seem to are people that work in bars...

 

[Dave_in_OK]

Oh yeah, I'm definitely enrolled. Strength in numbers and all of that.... Hope I didn't come across as anti-CASAA, because I am most emphatically not. I consider myself both a member and an ally, just a member who questions some of the strategical aspects for attaining the goal with the concerns I've already spoken about above.

Really enjoyed reading your posts!

 

[kristin]

My alienation from CASAA and these forums discussion guidelines doesn't stem from the harm reduction idea argument per se, which I suppose I agree with as far as it goes. Rather, my alienation is this: The notion that we as vapors are somehow "different" and more "respectable" than other target groups who have already been successfully persecuted by oligarchic, top-down power, and therefore deserve preferential treatment because what we do "isn't as bad" as what those other people do. This presumes both the moral and legal legitimacy of the coercive power relationships as they currently exist. In other words, the message is: "We acknowledge your right to oppress x, y and z, but we want a "special dispensation" and plead for the grace of your kind permission to have one." That there are whole, vast areas of recent American history and current policy that we are not even allowed to allude to on these forums speaks to this strategy.

You won't find CASAA throwing other groups under the bus. We consciously avoid supporting smoking bans and anything else that would further discrimination or the vilification of smokers. Many times I have warned members of sounding like ANTZ as an attempt to ingratiate ourselves with them. You will never hear a CASAA director saying "ban smoking not vaping" or "don't throw us outside with the smokers."

It's not our mission to stop smoking bans, but we won't support them, either. It's not our mission to get people to quit smoking, either. Our job is getting truthful information to smokers and letting them know they have options, not to judge or change their behavior.

 

[meanckz]

To be clear....

The measure is not a complete ban on e-cigarettes. Rather, it prohibits e-cigarette smoking in the same places where real smoking is forbidden by the state, such as restaurants, bars and workplaces.


So, not banned outright. You can still vape there, just not anywhere tabacco smoking is prohibited. It is the same thing many cities have done, that we need to keep fighting against.


The article goes on to say...

Nick Licata said the public-use ban appears to be based on slim evidence and may set up the county for legal challenges.

I don't know if the CASAA is funded well enough to take on these kinds of legal cases, but we need to find an organization that will.

we'll prolly need the ACLU for that

 

[nicetucu]

The mindset of Washington and California boggles my mind. Thank goodness I live in Oregon. Oregonians tend to voice their disgust with governments with large groups lol. Now that I've said this watch our state fall to the wayside.

 

[bussdriver]

One thing I have learned here on ECF, in a very short time, is that I DON'T know. The social liberals (ie. socialists) know far better as to what is good for society and my life than I do. They are going to decide that what I am doing is no better or different than smoking, it should be hidden from view and treated like smoking, no matter what my own personal opinions are. The powers have decided that it is against the "social norm" to be vaping, and I must, as a good comrade, comply. It is against my own opinions that vaping should be relegated to such status, but for the good of society, the masses, we must obey. Many have differing views, but you have to agree that this is not the best thing for our society. Therefore, be good citizens, and bow to the powers and obey.

 

[Ansah]

You won't find CASAA throwing other groups under the bus. We consciously avoid supporting smoking bans and anything else that would further discrimination or the vilification of smokers. Many times I have warned members of sounding like ANTZ as an attempt to ingratiate ourselves with them. You will never hear a CASAA director saying "ban smoking not vaping" or "don't throw us outside with the smokers."

It's not our mission to stop smoking bans, but we won't support them, either. It's not our mission to get people to quit smoking, either. Our job is getting truthful information to smokers and letting them know they have options, not to judge or change their behavior.

Reasonable and clear response, thanks. It does make sense to have a singleness of purpose, to avoid taking stances on other issues for any number of reasons, not the least of which is to have as broad of a support base as possible. Were CASAA to be associated as either in favor of or against the Affordable Care Act, same-sex marriage, gun control, etc., it would lose the people who have another or contrary opinion about that particular subject. Regarding vapors' rights, we want to unify people, so I get that. And I am particularly gratified to hear that CASAA specifically avoids advocating vapers' rights by jumping on the wider anti-tobacco bandwagon.

 

[Robino1]

Reasonable and clear response, thanks. It does make sense to have a singleness of purpose, to avoid taking stances on other issues for any number of reasons, not the least of which is to have as broad of a support base as possible. Were CASAA to be associated as either in favor of or against the Affordable Care Act, same-sex marriage, gun control, etc., it would lose the people who have another or contrary opinion about that particular subject. Regarding vapors' rights, we want to unify people, so I get that. And I am particularly gratified to hear that CASAA specifically avoids advocating vapers' rights by jumping on the wider anti-tobacco bandwagon.

I, for one, am totally ...... that the ANTZ have lied for decades about second hand smoke. It is not nearly as harmful as they've portrayed. This I have learned from CASAA. CASAA is totally about the truth and revealing the lies put out there by the ANTZ.

I did not fight when they were banning smoking because I believed the BS they were spoon feeding the public and me. I will fight them on the vaping!

 

[EddardinWinter]

I, for one, am totally ...... that the ANTZ have lied for decades about second hand smoke. It is not nearly as harmful as they've portrayed. This I have learned from CASAA. CASAA is totally about the truth and revealing the lies put out there by the ANTZ.

I did not fight when they were banning smoking because I believed the BS they were spoon feeding the public and me. I will fight them on the vaping!

You're so sexy when you get all fired up, Robin.

Well said.



Tapped out

 

[Recycled Roadkill]

It's not that often I'll take the time to read all the posts in a thread such as this, but I have and I'm surprised that this hasn't been mentioned in this thread.

People fear what they don't understand.
People will make no effort to understand what they don't wish to.

That said, it's my belief that the term "e cig" does more harm to what we do than most believe.
It's also my belief that a forum named ECF "Electronic Cigarette Forum" does nothing to promote the alternative to smoking cigarettes that we have chosen and while that may have been fine at it's inception, it's now outdated. That's my anyway.

 

[Robino1]

It's not that often I'll take the time to read all the posts in a thread such as this, but I have and I'm surprised that this hasn't been mentioned in this thread.

People fear what they don't understand.
People will make no effort to understand what they don't wish to.

That said, it's my belief that the term "e cig" does more harm to what we do than most believe.
It's also my belief that a forum named ECF "Electronic Cigarette Forum" does nothing to promote the alternative to smoking cigarettes that we have chosen and while that may have been fine at it's inception, it's now outdated. That's my anyway.

And you found the forum how? If it was anything like me, every time I tried to google ecigs, this forum was always at the top of the search list. That is why it will continue to have the name it has. Not to mention the largest active vaping community on the net. It just might have something to do with being called the E-cigarette-forum. People buy Blu's, get disatisfied with them, google ecigs to find something better and wind up here. I think it's brilliant actually

 

[Fulgurant]

It's not that often I'll take the time to read all the posts in a thread such as this, but I have and I'm surprised that this hasn't been mentioned in this thread.

People fear what they don't understand.
People will make no effort to understand what they don't wish to.

That said, it's my belief that the term "e cig" does more harm to what we do than most believe.
It's also my belief that a forum named ECF "Electronic Cigarette Forum" does nothing to promote the alternative to smoking cigarettes that we have chosen and while that may have been fine at it's inception, it's now outdated. That's my anyway.

E-cigarettes are a tobacco product, so please stop wasting time arguing otherwise | Anti-THR Lies and related topics
http://wivapers.blogspot.com/2013/07/are-nicotine-e-cigarettes-tobacco.html

Yours is a noble thought, but whenever anyone argues that e-cigs shouldn't be called e-cigs, he implicitly (and understandably) rubber stamps the fallacious notion that tobacco or tobacco use is a bad thing per se. "If only we could get those irrational, tyrannical busybodies in the public-health industry to see that what we're using isn't as bad as the evil tobacco!"

The thing is, our opponents are the ones who put forth that notion to begin with. The very reason they oppose e-cigs now is that they're afraid that the smoke-like appearance of vaping will ruin all of their hard work to demonize cigarettes. They don't care whether e-cigs themselves are harmless; they don't want us to indulge in anything that is made from tobacco and/or resembles tobacco use. They oppose anything that might allow the tobacco industry to continue to exist, or worse yet, to thrive even in a world without cigarettes or widespread cigarette-caused disease.

The tyrannical busybodies won't be appeased. Their entire industry is based on a corrupt and anti-rational ideology. The proper approach to take, then, is not to appeal to that ideology, but rather to oppose and ultimately to refute it. There is nothing wrong with tobacco use except for the associated health risks. Therefore, when the associated health risks are practically eliminated, opposition to tobacco use should cease. And yet hundreds of so-called experts and billions of dollars do oppose near-risk-free tobacco use. After all, simply handing tobacco addicts a harmless replacement is so so simple that the process wouldn't require a bloated ersatz-science and lobbying establishment to craft and oversee it.

The bottom line is that smokers are the most obvious audience for e-cigs. The more abstruse and exotic the name you choose to give to e-cigs (personal vaporizers or whatever), the less likely it is that a given smoker will regard the e-cig as a viable alternative. There is no second chance at a first impression. For what it's worth, I sure as hell wouldn't be here if e-cigarettes had a different name.