New York Suffolk County Bans E-Cig Public Use

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nepenthy

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Jun 16, 2009
281
9
Cbus, Ohio
Dont get me wrong, I love my vapin, but I dont know what the big deal is about smoking indoors. Smoking has such a negative stigma now, that even if you are going through the motions without hurting anyone, its still viewed as a very bad thing. To me, that is fine. I dont need to show off my pretty LED and blow vapor in everyones face. If they ban it in my workplace, Ill sneak it. Bathroom stall, walking outside, blowing the vapor under my desk..etc. Its hard to detect unless you are walking around broadcasting that you are vaping. I was vaping like a chimney for a week at work before anyone even noticed and thats just because someone saw me refilling a cart. I guess some people view it as a freedom thing or even want to show it off, and Im not knocking that, its just not a big deal to me. Im not vaping because I think its cool or to impress anyone or out of defiance, I just want my nicotine. I guess Im just glad its not outright banned or illegal yet. Even at the bar, i just slap a pen cap on to cover the LED and exhale slowly so the lights dont catch the vapor. I dont want to talk to every single person in the bar about vaping anyway, which is what happens when you vape in public. I havent run into a single situation yet where I needed to vape and couldnt, discretely.

I guess maybe the public ban is a sign of things to come and that is cause for alarm, but its kinda like women walking around topless. Its a beautiful, wonderful thing that everyone should do, but its a huge distraction and very offensive to some. Most public places just dont want to deal with all the vaping controversy, and I can understand that. I will still vape discretely, no matter what.
 
Last edited:

Satyr

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Jul 20, 2009
202
0
Franklin Park, Illinois
Dont get me wrong, I love my vapin, but I dont know what the big deal is about smoking indoors. Smoking has such a negative stigma now, that even if you are going through the motions without hurting anyone, its still viewed as a very bad thing. To me, that is fine. I dont need to show off my pretty LED and blow vapor in everyones face. If they ban it in my workplace, Ill sneak it. Bathroom stall, walking outside, blowing the vapor under my desk..etc. Its hard to detect unless you are walking around broadcasting that you are vaping. I was vaping like a chimney for a week at work before anyone even noticed and thats just because someone saw me refilling a cart. I guess some people view it as a freedom thing or even want to show it off, and Im not knocking that, its just not a big deal to me. Im not vaping because I think its cool or to impress anyone or out of defiance, I just want my nicotine. I guess Im just glad its not outright banned or illegal yet. Even at the bar, i just slap a pen cap on to cover the LED and exhale slowly so the lights dont catch the vapor. I dont want to talk to every single person in the bar about vaping anyway, which is what happens when you vape in public. I havent run into a single situation yet where I needed to vape and couldnt, discretely.

I guess maybe the public ban is a sign of things to come and that is cause for alarm, but its kinda like women walking around topless. Its a beautiful, wonderful thing that everyone should do, but its a huge distraction and very offensive to some. Most public places just dont want to deal with all the vaping controversy, and I can understand that. I will still vape discretely, no matter what.

You took the words right out of my mouth. :thumbs: Vapor and smoke are two very different things. One you can hide easily, while the other is impossible to cover up. If I have to sneak it, I'll sneak it. Whether it's at work or at a bar. Maybe we do need some 75mg fluid so we only have to take a couple puffs when the time comes that we will all need to sneak. Maybe fluid w/o PG or VG so there is minimal/no visual will be a good product for the near future. Save the other stuff for outdoors or at home.
 

jj2

Moved On
ECF Veteran
May 30, 2009
196,879
212,801
Hundred Acre Wood
I'm pretty sure the big battle is lost. Now is the time to start the little war. Gather your info and make sure your friends and family know that the e-cig is less dangerous and if the FDA bans them, it will be their doing that you've caught a cold from standing outside or smell like an ash tray because you’ve been forced to stand next to a smoker. Place the blame where it lies: The FDA and other politicians are at fault for you going back to analogs.
Next refrain from using your personal opinions and post links to newspaper stories so the uninformed can read and they too will ask why wasn't the electronic cigarette or cigar allowed while test were conducted.
You're fellow American will be more receptive than any politician and inevitably every politician will do whatever takes be reelected.

I've collect a few to use:
The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary: Comparison of Carcinogen Levels Shows that Electronic Cigarettes are Much Safer Than Conventional Ones

Dr. Dean Edell’s (America's most 'listened-to' source for health information) opinion:
http://www.tji-java-ide.com/e-cigarette/edell.html

Press Release - Electronic Cigarette Company (eCigarettesChoice.com) Claims FDA Study Proves E-Cigarettes Are Safer Than Tobacco Cigarettes

OfficialWire: Is The FDA Blowing Smoke On E Cigarettes, Or Is Their Fight Dissipating Like Vapor?

The American Cancer Society: The World's Wealthiest "Nonprofit" Institution
 

deewal

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Aug 30, 2008
692
3
79
In a house.
Yes, that is true. Give the lawmakers an inch and they will take a yard. The trick is to never offer the inch to begin with ...
Companies like Intelicig are leading the way, fortunately for us, in the UK. Their quality control is second to none.

Don't get Too complacent Planet. Remember we are the 51st State of America and Airstrip 1. We usually follow our Masters lead.

@ TBob. Well Bob, a year ago when i joined this Forum you were warning that this day was coming. In fact you gave all the reasons it would happen. I just wish more people had listened and read all your posts my friend. Over 75% of the members of this Forum still don't know what is happening.
 
Last edited:

Sevenchan

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
May 23, 2009
99
0
Tokyo
Those who took up vaping for perceived health benefits will now have to share air space with cigarette smokers. Those who took up vaping to practice it at their desks will now have to clock out and go outdoors -- off the property, in some cases -- to take an e-smoke break.

TropicalBob, I really appreciate your posts. You're one of the smartest, best informed people on this forum IMO and that is saying a LOT! Also I usually agree with your clear-eyed pessimism.

Not on this point, however :D They will never drive me out of the building to have a vape, as long as there are toilets and stairwells. It doesn't leave a smell, and that is the beauty of it :evil:
 

Satyr

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Jul 20, 2009
202
0
Franklin Park, Illinois
I really dont see this as a bad thing....Look, it really doesnt need to be done indoors! I think that is one of the big reasons the FDA and others are all up in arms because people just assume that because its not "smoke" they really can do it anywhere...

Just my 2cents


Ummm, being able to use it indoors is what was appealing to me and what convinced me to give it a try. My goal wasn't to quit smoking. That part just sort of happened. Take away the ability to use indoors in public places, and smokers won't see the point in plunking down the start up cost of e-cigs "just to try them". I hope like Hell this doesn't spread like wildfire.
 

kristin

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Aug 16, 2009
10,448
21,120
CASAA - Wisconsin
casaa.org
Well, I got here too late to help Spikey's cause, but I'm definitely being proactive in my area now! I just searched the local paper to see if any reporters did "pro" e-cig stories and found one:A smoke without exhaust - JSOnline
I wrote a HUGE, long, plea to him to research, write more and give e-cig users a public forum and a larger voice. Also made the case for e-cigs as best I could. Unfortunately, my comments were so long that they wouldn't post to his blog, so I emailed him.
Dear Patrick,

I came across your blog post of May 10, 2009 (http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/44613277.html) on the topic of e-cigarettes. I felt compelled to comment, as I fear deeply that this lifeline will be yanked away from us, if the media doesn't come to our rescue! My comments were probably too long to post, so I wanted to email you directly, hoping to find a voice on a larger forum and a sypmathetic ear. E-cig users are a far larger group than anyone can imagine and growing every day. (http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum) Just about every smoker I've come across, just since I purchased mine, has asked, "Where can I get one?" with a glow of hope on their face. The FDA ban and subsequent lawsuits by two distributors has us all in a panic.

Below are the comments I was trying to post to your blog:
Last Saturday, my husband & I saw the electric cigarette at the State Fair. It was AMAZING! Long-time smokers, having tried patches, gum and even medication - nothing worked. We bought two kits and extra cartridges for over $200. I used to smoke 1/4 - 1/2 pack a day and my husband 1+ pack a day. We have both already quit "analog" (real) cigarettes and are only using the e-cigs. I have NO desire to buy real cigarettes and am excited that this new "habit" could easily lead to my quitting any kind of inhalant altogether! Our kids are thrilled we quit smoking and our smoking friends want to get them, too! But now people want to ban them and/or treat us like smokers and make us go out and stand next to the smokers - exposing us again to second-hand smoke (or pushing us back to real cigarettes) and defeating the whole purpose of the e-cigarette!

This irrational fear of e-cigs is truly puzzling to us ex-smokers!!??

What are the REAL negatives?
1. Addictive Nicotine (a non-cancerous, naturally occurring substance) is being inhaled in a cigarette-like way by the user only
2. Ummm......can't think of anything else

Positives?
1. No second hand smoke. Only produces an odorless, fine vapor - like seeing your breath on a cold day
2. Minute traces or no carinogenic ingredients, no tar, no carbon monoxide or any of the other hundreds of additives & poisons in tobacco cigarettes. The e-liquid contains water, nicotine, flavoring & a type of glycerine (which makes the mist effect & is readily available at Walgreens in many, many personal care products) NICOTINE IS NOT A CARCINOGEN!
3. No missed work or leaving family gatherings for smoke breaks - can be used indoors without bothering anyone else
4. Simulates smoking action, so some people are able to stop using the more harmful nicotine inhaler - real cigarettes - without drastic changing of their habits. There are high, medium, low & zero nicotine liquids - which allow for gradual, pain-free weaning, if desired
5. Less expensive - more money to pay bills or save. Less illness = less medical bills & lower insurance premiums
6. Kids can't sneak cigarettes out of the pack
7. Can be used without any nicotine (can't say that about patches or gum or cigarettes!)
8. Allows smokers to continue their habit/addiction with less harmful effects (Don't judge an addiction - I know people addicted to caffine, chocolate, sugar, reality tv, the internet - but no one is suggesting banning THOSE!)
9. Less intake, because it can be set aside without expensive waste. No finishing the whole cigarette because you don't want to throw it away
10. Less garbage & smell - no butts on the street, no ashes in the car, no smelly clothes, curtains or bad breath

PERCEIVED negatives?
1. It's marketed to kids with candy flavors.
OK, this is just silly.
For one, it costs over $100 for a good starter kit & you have to be 18+ to buy.
Second, since when don't adults like cherry or chocolate or vanilla? Are fruit and candy-flavored vodkas being marketed to kids too then?? Or cherry cough drops and chocolate constipation chews?? Just because it tastes good, doesn't mean that kids are being targeted. It's just another step to getting away from real tobacco taste.
Third, even if a kid wanted to try it for some weird reason, they make ZERO NICOTINE flavors and only sell to 18+ ages. It's a huge leap to think that a kid trying a cherry flavored mist would say, "Hmmm...I should try one with nicotine. It doesn't get me high or give any kind of rush - it's just addictive. Great idea! Oh, and then I'll try stinky REAL cigarettes." Please! Isn't going to happen! If anything, it'll give them something INSTEAD of trying real cigarettes!
2. It's not proven safe.
Really?? You're REALLY going to ban something that is an "unsafe" replacement for cigarettes when cigarettes are 100 times worse? Ban the e-cig and the only alternative for most e-cigarette users is SMOKING. So, which is worse?? It's like banning low-fat ice cream, because it still contains fats, so it's still bad for you. Well - DUH. But at least it's better than full-fat ice cream!?
3. It looks too much like smoking and may encourage use.
Seriously, you would have NO interest in e-cigs unless you are a smoker trying to get that monkey off of your back. And most e-cigarette smokers use e-cigs that look very little like the real thing. They start with those "copies" and then quicky want to move away from anything that looks "real." Mine is black with a blue LED light at the tip! Again, if kids (18+) think they are cool - there are a LOT of NON-nicotine e-liquids available - nicotine & smoke free. Better that than trying tobacco cigarettes!

Imagine if someone invented an auto fuel that was 100% renewable, gave your car better performance, lengthened the life of your engine, had little or no emissions and was 50% cheaper than gas. Awesome, right? All of our problems are solved - travel, shipping, products, cost of living - all cheaper. But the government says, "Wait! We tested 3 cars (out of millions) and there may still be a little pollution in the emissions. So, we think it's bad for the environment, even though we know gasoline is much, much worse. And we're afraid that the enhanced performance is going to cause kids to drive faster and cause accidents (which they already will do anyhow), so without even doing further research, we are banning this fuel!" You would be PERPLEXED and OUTRAGED!

Well, that is how we e-cig users feel. The FDA and local governments are banning us and our salvation out of fear, ignorance and completely irrational arguments, without knowing the facts and seeing the larger picture. Or worse, for their own financial gain.

They are basically telling us that "e-cigs MAY be "unhealthy" so we are taking it away from you - go back to your cigarettes, which we at least KNOW will kill you."

How fair and reasonable is that? Please, Wisconsin, don't follow these lemmings. See reason. See the lesser of two evils that has far, far more positives than negatives. We aren't asking you to try it - we just want to have this option available to us. The only people who benefit from a ban or FDA control are the big tobacco and pharmacutical companies and the U.S. government (taxes and campaign funds.)

Please don't send us back into the cold streets, with a proven killer, for THEM.
 

Jherek

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Jul 19, 2009
131
1
Missouri
Bravo, Kristin!

"Imagine if someone invented an auto fuel that was 100% renewable, gave your car better performance, lengthened the life of your engine, had little or no emissions and was 50% cheaper than gas. Awesome, right? All of our problems are solved - travel, shipping, products, cost of living - all cheaper. But the government says, "Wait! We tested 3 cars (out of millions) and there may still be a little pollution in the emissions. So, we think it's bad for the environment, even though we know gasoline is much, much worse. And we're afraid that the enhanced performance is going to cause kids to drive faster and cause accidents (which they already will do anyhow), so without even doing further research, we are banning this fuel!" You would be PERPLEXED and OUTRAGED!"

Excellent analogy. This is the best kind of stuff to reach people with, I believe.
 

duke118

Full Member
ECF Veteran
May 9, 2009
69
0
47
Long Island, N.Y
Can't wait for Nassau county do it next. You see I'm right next Suffolk county so what they do we do.The bottom line with all of this is NY state is not getting any taxes from ecigs, they are losing money hand over fist.They know ecigs are not going to give you or any one Cancer and the FDA knows that as well. Now the FDA has control of the ingredients that go into real cigarettes. With this new power they will produce a product called low risk cigarettes! Just like light cigs more people will smoke and start smoking thinking the risk is minimal.In turn more taxes more quit aides more doctors to treat Cancer caused by smoking.FDA and all these 'Law Makers' or very simple condemning millions of people to a horrible death.They don't care for the public at all, you and I don't matter the truth don't mater, the only thing that matters is money and control.This is mass murder on a grand scale!
 

dopebeat

Full Member
May 10, 2009
29
0
45
wow, i hate the way the government just does something without even extensively studying something its pointless you know, not giving something a chance

They have to assume that it's bad until proven otherwise, can you imagine the lawsuits that would arise if it turned out 40 years down the line that they are dangerous and the government OK's them for inside use with no evidence. Now imagine the lawsuits when it turns out they aren't dangerous and e-smokers are allowed back indoors.
 

PlanetScribbles

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 3, 2009
1,046
124
Londinium, Brittania
They have to assume that it's bad until proven otherwise, can you imagine the lawsuits that would arise if it turned out 40 years down the line that they are dangerous and the government OK's them for inside use with no evidence. Now imagine the lawsuits when it turns out they aren't dangerous and e-smokers are allowed back indoors.

This gets to the crux of the matter. If people in the US didn't file law suits like people in other countries eat hot dinners, maybe e-cigs would not have even been an issue? A self fulfilling prophecy maybe? With the good comes the bad?
Capitalism at it's finest.
 

eplanet

Unregistered Supplier
ECF Veteran
Hi all,
In Suffolk, the bill still needs to be signed by Levy...30 - 60 days, so it is not a law yet, but it will be. When this legislation spreads to Nassau we will fight it there too...As depressing as it is, we still had success because the original bill was for a total ban (banning sales and use).

For more information on how you can help please visit Long Island, New York - Vapers Club


Peace...
 

Stric9

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Jun 13, 2009
92
0
62
Fort Mill, SC
They have to assume that it's bad until proven otherwise, can you imagine the lawsuits that would arise if it turned out 40 years down the line that they are dangerous and the government OK's them for inside use with no evidence. Now imagine the lawsuits when it turns out they aren't dangerous and e-smokers are allowed back indoors.

This is the problem.... I don't see or hear of them doing any testing (either way). Just a full out ban based on trumped up FDA results and a few tight a**ed counsil members. If it's so dangerous why not pony up the evidence? I'm open minded, show me a 4 headed baby or some dude that vaped and decided he could fly off a building or something.

Respects
 

TropicalBob

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Jan 13, 2008
5,623
65
Port Charlotte, FL USA
It is not up to governments to prove danger ... or safety. That's the job of manufacturers and sellers. Government can, and should, act on mere suspicion or assumption of hazard or danger. To do otherwise would be irresponsible.

The case in Suffolk seems more about perception that danger, however. E-smoking looks like cigarette smoking, that disgusting practice now being relegated to the dungeons of hell. So e-smoking gets the hook.
 

Roober

Full Member
ECF Veteran
Jul 25, 2009
11
0
36
Sent to that governer dude... county.executive@suffolkcountyny.gov:



Alright. I understand you're the man that may be able to make a difference in a lot of peoples lives for either good or bad.





I would like to let you know, I have very bad asthma. I also am an ex-smoker. Now, with smoking I woke up hacking up a lung every night, kept my husband up, and was killing myself day after day. A friend told me about the ecig, so I went out and got a DSE 801 from awesomevapor.com. His products are pure and he is honest. Now, after THREE weeks of using this ecig, my asthma is almost non existant, I can walk longer distances, and I can actually make love to my husband without going out of breath!!!!



I have many friends I have been telling about the ecig, and they love the idea too. This is not a product for children or to hurt us, please let us exercise our rights by choosing what we do with our lives -- I would much rather spend the money on a product that allows me to breathe freely, has no nasty smell, NO tar, in fact my lungs are rapidly SHEDDING the tar from smoking. We as americans fight for our freedom time and time again. Please do not take one of the best things that has happened to man kind and do something like ban it. Most of us will go back to our daily suicide routine without the electronic cigarette.



Thank you for your time, and I hope that you can do something for us, as we really do deserve to have a choice in this matter.



-Heather
 

l_____l

Full Member
Aug 22, 2009
8
0
65
SLD: That's the correct summary -- vaping is smoking. And that's something many of us, myself included, never wanted written into the law. I wanted vaping to become socially acceptable, something that was legal to do in public. This board said that will not happen.

Those who took up vaping for perceived health benefits will now have to share air space with cigarette smokers. Those who took up vaping to practice it at their desks will now have to clock out and go outdoors -- off the property, in some cases -- to take an e-smoke break. That's not what many of us wanted.

It's a bitter legal pill to swallow. Spikey did a job few others could have done, much less would have done. Now she's tired. And beaten. There's no recount with this vote.

And, BTW, it was 12-1. Spikey's tabulation included 5 abstentions and one "not present". Those don't count in the final tally.

12-1.

Well, Dear Tropical-Bob,

I have read most of what you have posted and I agree...to a point. However, "Vaping is NOT smoking", in any worldly thought of even the most brain dead politician., but, most are, either that or just "plain purchased" like our 9 term pissy ..... William Jefferson. Nonetheless, I know damn good and well you are seeing the sun rise. All you need to do to "remember" words once said. It's SO easy, it would put the entire Supreme Court in a state of shock.

Oh well, ...here goes...

Where there's smoke, there is fire, If the "smoke" is "water vapor", please tell me where the fire is? If there is no fire, what is wrong with "water vapor".

It would take about 20 seconds for the Justices on the Supreme Court to decide, "Being that the combination of propylene glycol and or USP glycerin with the need or not of nicotine, has had, and shall continue to give US citizen of our great country the option to chose best for what they wish in their lives. So long as it is the wish of the people of our great nation, we, being the governing body, of our people, will never bow down, but to the American Citizen is indeed the government.

Well, then there was Wood Stock! I missed it my 3 years.
 
Well, the problem is that they are worried about what is coming out:

coldbird.jpg


like breath on a cold day.


photolibraryphotoofbrea.jpg


But what about what is going in?

Propylene glycol is okay going in and not out.
Why out and not in?

- -
Okay,
Father Luke
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread