Michigan Legislation
- Thread starter VapieDan
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I wish more people were honest and realistic about this. If a kids wants to, they're going to. I started smoking as a minor because it was the only way to get breaks at work, and this was when I was working ft through high school. I took up smoking because otherwise I'd work on a kitchen line for 8 hours straight.
Should O'douls be removed from the market because it's a gateway beer? what about margarita flavored candy? Jelly Bellies are going to turn your kids into alcoholics!
Now, the argument that the disposable ecigs with tasty flavors can get children hooked, I get that! It's the same reason sparks/four loco and a bunch of other candy alcoholic drinks disappeared for a bit awhile ago, same with REAL Clove Kretek cigarettes, like Djarums.
But aside from an age restriction, there is absolutely no reason vaping should be controlled past an under the counter item.
At the absolute WORST, logic would, to me, dictate they control NICOTINE sales. Then they're taxing tobacco. The unfortunate part in my opinion of the ongoing legal debate is that it's not a debate of logic.
We're not fighting a difference of opinion, we're fighting a difference mostly in a perceived view of fact. Given their faculties, and a TRUE AND HONEST representation of the facts, few people, I believe, would have a negative outlook on ecigs and vaping in general.
I don't want to fight the politicians, I want to fight the misinformation. As long as bogus and stretched news reports and political statements are made about the negative effects, legal aspects will continually decline from OUR point of view.
Most people I've met think vaping is worse than cigarettes. This notion HAS to stop.
Last edited:
To me the government is usurping parental control with age regulations. Non smokers just assume it is smoking. Any attempt at education will be thwarted by the media with false claims.
I'm a step more cynical.
I think it's tobacco companies getting ...... at someone finally taking a chunk of their profits. They've been pretty dominant for a few generations.
The tobacco companies saw the writing on the wall and started buying ecig companies. The ones behind the mess is primarily Big Pharma - they are losing profits, and unable to do anything about it who fund all the public health organizations (ALA, ACA, etc.). The lower income on cigarettes affect the taxes brought in to the government, as well as the profit percentage paid into the Master Settlement Agreement when Big Tobacco was sued many years ago by the government.
Have you noticed the latest advertising for the patch? You can now smoke while using them. Gee I wonder what brought that on? hehehe
They sure rushed to get the FDA to allow them to change the rule on the NRT's didn't they? lol
I've done the patch, I wouldn't smoke or vape on it unless I went really low. The patch was awful for me. Vaping is more organic, this gives smokers the option to do both or ween off. There is a lot of pyshology in smoking, it's not just nic for some. For others it's about getting the nic fast. I'm not knocking the patch, it works for some, I've never mown anyone it worked for but I'm sure it does. I like the control factor of vaping, I can vape a little or a lot, I can go up and down in mg and truly find what works. That doesn't work with the patch. For me, too much made me sick, too little made me crazy.
Tobacco and pharma have reasons to push the ban and sadly they will win. Money talks and with Detroit, our largest city being bankrupt, it's safe to say the money will speak. Side note further proof money talks you can smoke at the casino. Apparently non smokers who gamble are not entitled to the same clean air non smoking drunks are! J/k I'm a drinker and I love a slot machine sometimes!
What I find very strange is so much of this regulation is based on the contents of nicotine. Did I miss something. Why have there been no moves to tax NRT's? If E-cigs are cessation devices then so are the other NRTs. Big pharmaceuticals will never let that happen.
On the psychology note...
I think alot of the medical community is unrealistic when quitting an addictive substance. The treatment and cessation is based almost solely around the reduction of the addictive element. VERY rarely is anything done about the cause of the addiction. The US medical community LOVES to treat symptoms...
The truth is, most people start smoking for a reason, but that reason isn't often why it's harder to quit. Over time, our brains begin to depend on the addictive item not only for a physical fix, but also a mental one as well.
We call vaping a hobby. It's part addiction for some, as well as recreational. The VAST majority of smokers share recreational use as well. I'm talking about... driving, when you're stressed and just need a cig break, after coitus, post argument... There are MENTAL triggers based purely on habit.
You can't remove the addiction and assume the habit will disappear. To me, Vaping is so far past any other cessation because it allows you to replace both the addiction AND the habit (Cigalikes to me just never did it, if there's one that pushes enough vapor to 'feel' like smoking, it'd be included here as well). Pushed properly(advertising + REAL research), there's no reason 50% or better of smokers shouldn't be able to quit with a good APV.
This is my biggest beef with the legislation. They're calling it a tobacco product, and their supporting fact basically lies in the fact that the nicotine we use is still derived from tobacco... It's absolutely illogical.
You've probably noticed that almost without exception, legislation to tax and/or restrict ecigs include them in the definition of "tobacco products" as anything containing nicotine except those products currently regulated by the FDA as drugs (i.e. NRTs)
This has always seemed a glaring hypocrisy to me, and I think most people here agree, but I rarely see this pointed out in the media. Tobacco Control makes these statements without blinking; frankly I think most of them actually don't see their hypocrisy, blinded as they are by their own ideology.
This also highlights a legitimate cause behind the governments action aside from your typical big brother allegations!
YES, most of us are completely safe in our vaping.
Unfortunately, we live in a country where you can sue and win for millions for spilling coffee on yourself.
Our government has to ensure proper control measures through ANY consumption production. Foods, drinks, smokes, candies, medicines. CURRENTLY we are sidestepping that regulation. G men don't make sure our nicotine is safe, they don't check out juice manufacturers sites by regulation to ensure sanitary and safe conditions are present.
We know batteries are a far larger risk than any contaminants when vaping, but it doesn't matter, because the G men are still too worried about the addictive nicotine we use.
What's being presented as an alternative to the current legislative actions? Not opposition... but 'we think this would work better?' Is there anything?
Regulation will happen, of one form or another... What about regulating nicotine instead of vaping? I know that won't make everyone happy here... but of all the possible solutions I've pondered, it's the only one I think could be a plausible alternative. It would satisfy the medical community and their concern, as it's the only product in our vapes that should be listed as anything but 'safe' or 'generally safe' for consumption by the FDA. It would regulate the items people are concerned will get in the hands of minors...
Thoughts?
General Motors is currently involved with an engine shutoff condition caused by faulty ignitions. 13 deaths in 10 years. Unreal.
They're not supposed to maintain the car for you as long as you own it?
"If it saves just one life".....................................................................
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure? I think that's how it goes?
I understand the governments imposition on that part. Make sure it's safe BEFORE people start dropping like flies (sugar substitute anyone?). My personal opinion? They're nit-picking. We have enough research on the vaporization of pg to conclusively state it's affects in 99% of the population. Vg is essentially vaping sugar. All my personal knowledge aside, I can understand wanting to restrict it based on a safety concern. Like I stated before, something along the lines of nicotine control.
Everything else aside? People are just to ignorant. If you know the facts, the decision is simple.
What's worse? We've already PROVEN WITHOUT A DOUBT it's cutting into cigarette sales. It's making people smoke less. Period. THAT fact aside, if politicians has public interest at heart, and were INFORMED properly, there would be no debate.
Unfortunately, logic is malleable for these people.
We need an argument they can't beat up. We need FDA seals.
It's also worth noting that all the proposed taxes and regulations apply to 0% vaping. Therefore it's not the nicotine per se, it's the verisimilitude with tobacco smoking. So the effect (if not the purpose) is to either (a) protect minors from the gateway effect (if you beleve that junk, and almost everyone in a position of regulatory authority does now) or (b) protect BP's pocketbook.
There has not been much discussion of 0 Mg nicotine vaping with the ANTZ. It would indeed be hard to enforce laws if everyone vaping would claim "Sorry I'm not using nicotine. Leave me alone". They will lump it in for taxes and control.
My argument exactly. I've been vaping 0 nic since day one. Try to tax me! I DARE YOU!
I can confidently say that, given two more weeks for an order to come in, I'll personally be able to suffice for many many years tax free.
At this point though, I don't see laws changing anything for me personally. I've beat them, they can't get me anymore.
But how many people might not quit smoking because restrictions prevent them to having the access I currently do to supplies and whatnot?
Really, I quit smoking two months ago, and about 500 dollars in, have enough equipment and supplies to sustain MY habit for many years to come. I hope to share vaping with as many people as possible, I'm just afraid it's going to become impossible to that without quite a bit larger of a budget post legislative change. If It's as expensive, or more expensive than cigarettes in the long run, it'll kill people.
I can sell tons of people to switch to a APV right now and quit smoking. I started two weeks ago and already have two people almost off cigarettes. I know without a doubt that one of the LARGEST selling points was the thriftiness of vaping as a safe alternative.
This is a case where taxation = death. quite literally. The more the price goes up, the harder it will be for people to CHOOSE to switch from cigarettes from vaping. That's what needs to happen. It's a revolution damn it, I don't care what anyone else says!
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
