Businesses banning vape inside. For instance, I use to be able to vape in a pub (this is already in the thread several times over) but irresponsible vapers caused the owner to ban vape inside.
Big tobacco did not make him ban vape inside nor did any politician or law. Irresponsible vapers caused this to happen and nothing else.
So yes, they have already cost me something.
Anyway, now we are rehashing what's already been discussed several times over but since you asked nicely, I figured I'd respond.
Given your perspective on this, that's a rational point. But not a reasonable one. Irresponsible vapers didn't cause the ban. The owner made a (downright silly) choice, and that is why the ban is in place.
To not see how (big) tobacco plays a role in all this is IMO, to be ignoring a whole lot of the story. Cause 40 years ago, same bar owner would've allowed smoking in the bar. And it wasn't irresponsible smokers that have lead to this world where you can now no longer smoke in any place, let alone outside in some outdoor locations. That be the work of ANTZ. Thus it takes an anti (big) tobacco and nicotine zealot to realize where we are in this discussion and why it makes sense to even consider banning vaping indoors.
As I said in my first post on this thread, ANTZ are 90% of the reason these sort of bans are put into place. Even if a bar owner today has zero idea what the acronym ANTZ stands for, doesn't fully realize what ANTZ like entities are up to, they are still 100% likely to be influenced by them in making certain business decisions. Not maybe, or sort of influenced, but 100% likely.
To me, this type of thread is both interesting and seemingly without a suitable resolution because of how ingrained ANTZ rhetoric is within our culture, and how much vaping has turned that on its ear. As smokers, we kind of rolled over and allowed our desires to get trampled on for a whole bunch of reasons, but near the top of that is because there was no such thing as social media and ANTZ had a good 20 years of painting a very clear picture (albeit laced with oodles of propaganda) about just how evil big tobacco is, and how utterly addictive nicotine is (it will hook your Sue and Johnny).
Now, if you are politically aware vaper, and have done research of all of 1 day's worth of work, you would see that not only are they being highly deceptive about vaping harms and practices, but were very much doing the same thing with smoking harms and practices. I write that sentence, and I think there are about 20 people on ECF who don't dispute this, but then realize there are perhaps fellow vapers, and perhaps a majority (even on ECF) who fully believe propaganda around smoking, i.e. smoking kills.
For me, personally, what makes the thread interesting is because I see ANTZ within me. Not the first time I've stated that. It is that ingrained in the culture, and so I don't deny that there is some of it in me. But as I am one who really really really wants to publicly debate (anytime, anyplace) on the smoking front, then the vaping stuff seems like child's play to me. Thus, the ANTZ stuff isn't so well ingrained with me, as it once was, when I was more ig'nant.
I think people on ECF who argue for bans in public places as a result of 'irresponsible vapers' are being unreasonable and are carrying the torch for ANTZ. I don't think they are ANTZ shills (though could be, but I doubt it), but do think it is that ingrained and some of us (vapers) only want to see the ANTZ hole as only coming about with vaping, and kinda sorta refuse to look deeper. If you truly believe 'smoking kills' then chances are good that I am referencing you when I say 'refuse to look deeper.'
If you say things like "only vape where you can smoke" chances are you are refusing to look deeper. That argument is easy to poke holes in. Easiest one to me is, then if you vape in your house, you must allow smoking there? You don't? Then why do you vape there? Another easy one is what if outdoor place doesn't allow smoking, you going to not vape there?
Anyway, these threads go on and on for various reasons, but I believe it is mostly due to ANTZ rhetoric, and then partially due to the common courtesy/respect tangent. One side, what I'm calling ANTZ rhetoric, is constantly presenting a picture of all people that vape indoors (or in public spaces) are blowing big clouds, are addicts (can't wait 10 to 30 minutes), are selfish, are willing to cause harm to innocent passerby's and so on and so forth. All ANTZ rhetoric in my book.
So if cloud chasers are giving us all a bad rep, wouldn't it make sense for the rest of us to step up and show the public how we vape? And I don't mean going to the smoking area - I mean vaping in public places but keeping your plume to yourself (smaller clouds, blown down or up to avoid it going into people's faces). This way the public actually gets to see how most of us vape, instead of only being exposed to the giant cloud blowers.
Of the last 15 pages, this is one of a handful of posts that makes the most sense to me. It's the antithesis of the ANTZ rhetoric I just wrote about. The idea that one can vape in public and do so respectfully, and the idea that we really ought to be doing this more, now.
Furthermore, we could be the ambassadors who speak directly with cloud chasers. Hopefully not scolding them outright and coming off like hypocrites, but confronting them with sense of respect and a reminder of time and place for everything. At same time I write this, I feel my ANTZ side creeping up, cause in my neck of the woods, and of the umpteen hundred times I've been in public in the last 4 years (vaping in many places), I am yet to see a cloud chaser. But if I did, I'd be hopefully accepting of them, even if I found their behavior to run about against my ANTZ (lack of) sensibilities.
They won't be sticking ME with their crummy cigalikes, no matter what the FDA decides. They can kiss it.
