- Status
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 67
It could prove helpful to obtain the full text of that Newsday article, as it appears Long Island Railroad's policy decision (that their 2003 smoking ban also now applies to e-cigarettes even though nobody heard of e-cigs in 2003 and even though e-cigs emit no smoke) could be successfully challenged in court (if someone is cited for using an e-cig).
Also, its possible that the LI Railroad's new policy may have been changed unlawfully (e.g. was public notice provided, input accepted, etc.?)
Here's a news summary I received about the Newsday article.
Also, its possible that the LI Railroad's new policy may have been changed unlawfully (e.g. was public notice provided, input accepted, etc.?)
Here's a news summary I received about the Newsday article.
Last edited:
When I checked the rules of conduct last week it said you cannot BURN a lit cigarette cigar pipe etc.
They changed this to:
"smoke or carry an open flame or lighted match, cigar, cigarette, pipe or torch;"
Doesn't mention vaping or ecigs...
http://www.mta.info/nyct/rules/rules.htm
They changed this to:
"smoke or carry an open flame or lighted match, cigar, cigarette, pipe or torch;"
Doesn't mention vaping or ecigs...
http://www.mta.info/nyct/rules/rules.htm
Last edited:
Please don't unless you have written permission from the publisher to do so. Let's not get the site into trouble over copyright issues.
Please be careful when quoting sources outside of ECF.
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/ecf-forum-rules/51178-forum-rules.html
6. Copyright
You must not post material on this Website that you do not own the copyright to, unless it is done so under a Fair Use agreement. Only one paragraph or 300 words may be posted, whichever is the greater, and a link should be given to the original source.
As a Long Islander, I havent smoked on the train, so I wouldnt vape on the train. Its that easy for me.
I may be in the minority, but if they dont want me to vape there, its not my god-given right to vape there. Its their property, so like a bar, restaurant, car, subway, airplane, walmart, movie theater, or any public place that doesnt allow it, I refrain until I am somewhere that I can do it.
I may be in the minority, but if they dont want me to vape there, its not my god-given right to vape there. Its their property, so like a bar, restaurant, car, subway, airplane, walmart, movie theater, or any public place that doesnt allow it, I refrain until I am somewhere that I can do it.
The primary problem wehave with e-smoking bans
is those wishing to include e-cigs in smoking bans
LIE proclaiming the reasoning is health concerns ...
When actually what they are saying is
No Smoking AND they don't want to even see
the "Appearance" of smoking ... either !!
is those wishing to include e-cigs in smoking bans
LIE proclaiming the reasoning is health concerns ...
When actually what they are saying is
No Smoking AND they don't want to even see
the "Appearance" of smoking ... either !!
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 67
Can somebody please send a copy of the full text of the Newsday article to me at smokefree@compuserve.com
The issue here isn't whether or not vaping should or should not be banned on trains (or anywhere else).
Rather, the two issues here include whether or not a governmental agency (or anyone else) can falsely claim that vaping is the same as smoking in a deceitful attempt to ban vaping, and whether or not the LIRR went through the legally required rulemaking process to change its rules of "Disorderly conduct" (i.e. providing public notice, and allowing for public comment before making changes).
If the LIRR can get away with banning vaping by simply claiming that vaping is the same as smoking, then any and all government agencies, employers and managements can do the same.
And if governments can get away with that, they can get away with reinterpreting any law or regulation to ban anything else they don't like (regardless of what the law's words actually say or mean).
The issue here isn't whether or not vaping should or should not be banned on trains (or anywhere else).
Rather, the two issues here include whether or not a governmental agency (or anyone else) can falsely claim that vaping is the same as smoking in a deceitful attempt to ban vaping, and whether or not the LIRR went through the legally required rulemaking process to change its rules of "Disorderly conduct" (i.e. providing public notice, and allowing for public comment before making changes).
If the LIRR can get away with banning vaping by simply claiming that vaping is the same as smoking, then any and all government agencies, employers and managements can do the same.
And if governments can get away with that, they can get away with reinterpreting any law or regulation to ban anything else they don't like (regardless of what the law's words actually say or mean).
Last edited:
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 67
Anyone who is cited for vaping on the LIRR should plead "not guilty", and should challenge the citation in court.
What we need is for some vapers to challenge, and for courts to strike down vaping bans that falsely define vaping as "smoking" and smoking bans that a government agency is deceitfully misinterpreting to include vaping.
What we need is for some vapers to challenge, and for courts to strike down vaping bans that falsely define vaping as "smoking" and smoking bans that a government agency is deceitfully misinterpreting to include vaping.
Exactly this. If I lived in the LIRR area, I wouldn't be that fussed about not being able to vape on LIRR trains, if this was an isolated ban. The trouble is that independent thinking on this kind of subject, in corporations and government agencies, is rarer than rocking-horse s**t, and as soon as one organisation sets a precedent, the others just follow like sheep. "Look! LIRR has banned it - it MUST be harmful!" And the next thing you know, you're not allowed to vape on the street; or you get chucked out of your rented property for vaping.
Remember back when e-smoking bans first started to pop-up ??
No vaping in government buildings.
Oh, so acceptable to most of us ... but of course we all know ...
Once the Easily Offended and Nanny State lovers get a foot-hold
then it's like a snow-ball rolling downhill.
No vaping in government buildings.
Oh, so acceptable to most of us ... but of course we all know ...
Once the Easily Offended and Nanny State lovers get a foot-hold
then it's like a snow-ball rolling downhill.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
