No Ecigs allowed

[stevegmu]

I apologize if I'm interpreting this wrong, but publicly and falsely implying that CASAA has or will have some sort of ongoing, working relationship with NORML - and is thereby jeopardizing vaping - only seems to serve one purpose: an attempt at discrediting and vilifying CASAA within the vaping community. I just don't understand this animosity you seem to have for CASAA? You seem to always be looking for reasons to criticize it.

You said so yourself CASSA would work with them again-

I didn't think you ever planned to join or donate anyhow, but it depends what you mean by "coordinating with NORML?" We just found ourselves working on the same side opposing proposed laws in California that affected both their membership and our's.

Someone from CASAA may have alerted them about our Berkeley Call to Action, because they were so effective fighting a vaping ban in Sacramento (Cal NORML are a lot bigger, richer and have more influence than CASAA in California), but we don't have any formal, working relationship with them. CASAA is not interested in taking up NORML's cause or mission, but if they are fighting against the same laws as we are, we will work with them if it ultimately benefits THR and vapers.

I find that completely unacceptable. May be fine in California, but once the two are linked, vaping will never become widely accepted.

It is also the CASSA extremists who give the organization a bad name.

 

[Racehorse]

I have always been the only "smoker" I know, so when I smoked all my friends were just very tolerant (I was lucky) and if I didn't over do it, could smoke at their homes, in their cars w/window down, etc.

I had a few ejuice orders and due to our ice storm a friend was driving me around. I left the ejuices in her new car (packages opened, but no juice opened). Windows shut tight of course, it's winter.

We went into a restaurant to eat. Came out 2 hours later and I have to tell you, the car *STUNK*.

She was not happy as the car is brand new . I checked all the bottles......no leaks. I had 2 flavorings in the packages as well. The car stunk of bananas, whcih makes sense because 2 of the ejuices were banana type vapes.

This convinced me that, while this stuff smells good to me, it does not smell good to other people so I will not be vaping banana around my friend, cuz she really doesn't like that smell.

I can fully appreciate that someone may not like to be in an enclosed space w/me while I vape.

 

[Pav]

I find that completely unacceptable. May be fine in California, but once the two are linked, vaping will never become widely accepted.

Except that acceptance of "the other" rises every year. Maybe it's not such a bad idea to link up with that. At least in the case of common goals. Seems to me you're very out of touch with the majority opinion of "the other" in America today.

 

[Pav]

As for the real topic, vaping in public, yeah, it should be just common sense. Not vaping where smoking is disallowed is probably a good guide rule but imo doesn't need to strictly be adhered to. Many of my friends who won't allow smoking in their house have no problem if I vape (I ask first). Outside shouldn't be a prob. In a restaurant or movie theater I don't vape. In a bar I do depending on the bar. Dark type of rock or dance bar I might have a vape. A bright sports bar where people are watching TVs - I don't vape.

It's really all common sense. And like in post 98 I think acceptance will grow over time. I've had quite a few people I know who scoffed or laughed at my vaping come around and change their opinion later, sometimes even asking my advice so they could quit smoking too or help a loved on quit. I'm always eager to help get them going.

 

[stevegmu]

Except that acceptance of "the other" rises every year. Maybe it's not such a bad idea to link up with that. At least in the case of common goals. Seems to me you're very out of touch with the majority opinion of "the other" in America today.

I don't care, either way; what people do in their homes is their business but I just don't want it linked to vaping. The other is safer than alcohol, in my opinion, but it should have no connection to vaping- that's where my Provari becomes paraphernalia.

 

[Pav]

How is a provari not paraphernalia? That word covers a lot more than what you think it does.

Paraphernalia is apparatus, equipment, or furnishing used for a particular activity.

You provari is paraphernalia used for the particular activity of vaping.

 

[Pav]

And furthermore my point stands. The other "thing" which we can't talk about is rapidly on it's way to full on mainstream acceptance as evidence by changing laws in state after state. SomedayI'm sure we'll even be able to talk about it here like we do freely with alcohol.

Nobody bats an eye if you say "I enjoy a smooth whiskey and a vape".

 

[stevegmu]

How is a provari not paraphernalia? That word covers a lot more than what you think it does.



You provari is paraphernalia used for the particular activity of vaping.

I don't want it or my other mods to be classified as paraphernalia for use with the other, or dual use and become illegal to have in public or transport. I don't live on the left coast. The other is not widely accepted here, nor will ever be.

There has already been proposed legislation in some localities- mostly in California, tying vape gear to the other.

 

[Racehorse]

What a laughable, incongruent response.

If you are not just a "troll" from the ANTZ camp, you really should consider joining them. Your so-called "logic" blends well with theirs.

Have you ever noticed how you always turn to getting personally insulting to people who present ideas here which you do not like?

I could go thru the forum and find so many posts from you like this.

Similar to another militant vaper basically calling me a "schill" for the medical industry in another topic when I disagreed with her.

How sad, vapers attacking other vapers like this. Name calling, and belittling.

The inability to work with others, or respect other points of view, is the kind of representation that can only hurt us.

 

[Jman8]

I am in the vape everywhere, with respect, camp.

I strongly feel that vapers, who were ex-smokers, ought to be aware that SHS being harmful is a myth, and there is research to back this up. As this is partially what we are up against with vaping, it matters to the discussion on a vaping forum. If you honestly believe, and have currently no doubts that SHS is harmful to non-smokers in the vicinity, then you are operating under misguided information.

The fact is, it won't change because that perception of it being dangerous is very well ingrained. Plus, you have a whole bunch of people, includes vapers, who think they are 'stinky' and so it has 2 strikes against it. Strike three comes when you combine these first 2 and realize that SHS does linger, for a pretty long while. Like days, or at very least hours.

Regarding the 'respect' issue, I'm curious when people think that was occurring in public life, here in America? Was it 50 years ago when you could smoke everywhere and anywhere? When was this period that some in this thread are referring to? I'm very curious about that claim.

If it is about what is exhaled, then arguably people ought to not talk in public, as you are exhaling stuff and no one reading this is exhaling 'pure air' so if we follow the logic of 'respect' being tossed around in a very loose manner, then it is plausible to say that people in conversation near you are causing a disturbance based on what they are exhaling, and based on the noise factor. Even a whisper could be a noise that, if feeling particularly sensitive, is annoying.

Which goes to a larger point that I continue to wonder about if vaping were somehow banned from all indoor places; what activities, if any, could persons do in public that wouldn't be deemed a disturbance? I'm very curious what that list looks like to some people. In my current world view, if society were to magically all agree that vaping is such a disturbance, I could see literally everything being on the table in terms of 'behaving in a disrespectful manner' while being out in public. And am curious what would be examples of for sure not being a disturbance. I honestly cannot think of any as I do put vaping, of the respectful kind, on par with two or more people having a conversation while in public.

And back to the original point of this post and what matters to this thread.
Second hand vapor is relatively harmless. The data is around to support this. To argue that 'we don't know' or it is not for sure known, is coming from a position that is ignorant of what is known. And is akin to saying, people ought not to talk in public because when they do, they exhale stuff, and 'we don't know' what they are exhaling, therefore, no more talking in public. Perhaps exceptions could be made if you wear some sort of filtering mask over your mouth.

Second hand vapor manifests a very very faint smell. I speak this from lots of experience of vaping around non-vapers and periodically asking them if they smell it. Very very rarely will they say yes. Most of the time, they let me know they cannot, even a little bit, smell it. And these are people I'm visiting with, in a rather enclosed space, for several hours. I'm also fairly certain given my forum experience, that I'm not only vaper that does this, nor only one who would report that non-vapers usually indicate that they cannot smell exhaled vapor.

Third point is it certainly doesn't linger. Perhaps we need a linger meter, but in my experience of vaping, it dissipates in 3 seconds or less 98% of the time. The other 2% of the time it sometimes will linger for up to a whole 10 seconds, and then completely dissipate.

And with that in mind, unless I were checked at the entrance way of some place where vaping was absolutely forbidden, I would take my chances of vaping in that location. Openly. As I have done in hospitals where I was only person in fairly long hallway, knowing that a) the stuff I'm vaping doesn't smell, b) it doesn't linger and c) it is harmless. Plus d) you / anyone really would have no way of knowing I did just vape unless they caught me in the act, and thus dancing on line of what some would call disrespectful. Just like I could be someone that calls people talking in public, on the borderline of being rude in public. Admittedly, I didn't use to think it was rude, but things done changed when my harmless, odorless, quickly dissipating second hand vapor was deemed rude to exhale in public.

 

[Jman8]

Nothing prevents us from being douchebags and give bad press to vaping. It is the land of the free after all.

Just to be clear, are you saying or implying that people who vape indoors in public where it is not explicitly approved are acting as douchebags?

 

[Jman8]

I really think it says a lot about the juvenile attitude of some people that they believe that sating their addiction is more important than the comfort of everyone around them. This IS the United States of America, and we are free, but your freedom only goes as far as the person sitting next to you. What gives you the right to disrespect them by making them inhale whatever it is you're exhaling?

Hence the reason people need to stop conversing in public, right? I mean you agree with me on this based on this exact logic you are presenting here. If not, why not?

 

[Jman8]

As has been said before, just because something isn't harmful doesn't mean it's not a disturbance. Talking on a cell phone isn't harmful, but it's been banned in some places because it's a disturbance. Why is it so difficult to see that exhaling clouds of an unidentifiable substance into the air causes a disturbance? Why is your comfort more important than those around you?

This unidentifiable substance of which you speak, in my case, tends to dissipate very quickly. I've mentioned this specifically in earlier post. Cigalikes are good like that. And the substance is identifiable, just like exhaled breath is identifiable, even while one could say, if playing the ignorant card, there is no way of us knowing 100% sure what people exhale when they are talking. Thus, by your reasoning, it is automatically a disturbance.

Regarding my comfort and idea that I could plausibly be operating in such a manner that gives off impression that I simply don't care about other people's comfort, I feel it goes back to what is it that comes out when I exhale. And my claim, backed by science, is that it is relatively harmless, fairly odorless, and as a high tendency to not linger and/or dissipates in 3 seconds or less. Therefore, I have a very tough time understanding how one could claim discomfort unless playing a fake card of discomfort, i.e. fake coughing when 10 feet away from my exhaled vapor. Now, if I stood face to face with someone, and intentionally blew my exhaled vapor directly into their nostrils, hopefully timing it while they were inhaling, then that I could see as rude. As that has NEVER occurred while I've vaped indoors, either in public or private, then again, I have very tough time understanding how plausible it truly is that I am causing legitimate discomfort to those in my immediate surrounding by exhaling vapor. I have less of a challenge in understanding how second hand smoke could be seen as discomforting.

 

[Jman8]

Do you really think that vaping where smoking is not allowed will educate non vapers about vaping? Please....

Yes, I do think vaping where smoking is not allowed will plausibly lead to a teachable moment that allows non-vapers to learn about this exhaled vapor being relatively harmless, with science to back this up. I also would be interested in that teachable moment if person could actually smell the flavor and would want to test out distances, like me standing 7 feet away while I took a drag and exhaled. If they said they could detect the flavor, I'd actually be amazed. My exhaled vapor ain't coming out in plumes, so it would be amazing to me. Akin to my being able to smell someone's bad breath from 7 feet away, and assuming it isn't horribly bad breath, just on par with someone who ate apple pie for lunch and now me, standing 7 feet away, claiming I can detect it based on their exhale.

Only one thing will educate the general public about vaping and that is time. When the real data comes out, in 30 years or so, when real, long term scientific data will be available, not just a single research that says second hand vapor is fine.

Time has been going on since vaping started. You say 30 years, another person may claim 100 years, and another may say 5 years. Who's sense of timing do we go with, when current science has spoken to the issue and has results that are testable? Not to mention the abundance of anecdotal evidence that us vapers experience daily, or at least I do.

When lung cancer will be on a decline and directly linked to vaping..... Then we will have the right to vape where smoking is not allowed...

I believe, strongly, that you are sadly mistaken on this point. Perhaps you can cite some other product / substance where things played out like you are saying. I'm guessing you cannot or will not.

Edit: we should focus on the real battles, like exaggerated regulations. Vaping in public should be the least of our worries.

I honestly think with logic you, and others, are bringing to the table on this aspect of vaping rights, that the other regulations aren't all that exaggerated. In fact, feel free to bring one of those up, and I'll be sure to bring the sort of logic you have expressed on this issue to that topic to demonstrate that, when spun a certain way, there is nothing remotely positive about vaping in that situation or with regards to that aspect of the vaping experience. Vaping in public is not a top 2 concern for me, but is a top 5. And if on a vaping forum, I can't use science and vast amount of anecdotal evidence to present rationale for exhaling a relatively harmless, virtually odorless, non-lingering substance, then I think it is quite possible that all the issues we are up against are dead on arrival.

Vapers who are okay with a ban on vaping in public, with virtually no questions asked, no recourse, are IMO, representative of a side of this whole equation that could easily lead to vaping being met with a de facto ban. IMO, it is a bit worrisome that some vapers are on that side of the equation.

Which is reason #11 why I advocate for vape everywhere - because we are in a golden era, and things will change soon. Not only because of non-vaping ANTZ, but because some vapers think certain bans are, how you say respectful and reasonable.

 

[Jman8]

Vaping in public places IS the least of MY worries. What I AM worried about, is big corporations (especially tobacco ones) taking over the vaping products and production and reducing my ability to get vaping supplies and juices of my choosing easily and affordably.

Cool! I'll speak to this one with the logic being employed on this thread.

Big corporations have every right to enter the market and use their resources to not only achieve maximal regulation in an industry that currently lacks it, but to do so with increasing their profit which is clearly the American way. If you will just wait 30 years for this to play out, you will see that they will be offering a far superior experience to what exists today. Your ability to get vaping supplies of your choosing, that is affordable, is really just you saying your an addict and can't stand that small businesses can't keep up with the big guys who are doing it the right, and honestly respectful way.

Having better quality products delivered to the vaping community, via businesses that are strong and likely to be around in the long term ought to be the least of your worries when it comes to vaping.

I will be fine with vaping at home, in my car, or in designated areas, PROVIDED I get to use what I want how I want it. Just my 2 coppers on the subject. Thank you.

Please don't vape in your home or your car as these items may belong to someone else someday and it is simply disrespectful to have that future owner have to put up with your dirty addiction. We don't know for sure if vapor doesn't linger for many years, and thus your need to have a fix today, or this year, does not outweigh those who wish to have comfort in what will someday be their car and their home. This is why I can go along with a ban on vaping in one's own home and car, as it really is just a matter of respect.

 

[wv2win]

Have you ever noticed how you always turn to getting personally insulting to people who present ideas here which you do not like?

I could go thru the forum and find so many posts from you like this.

Similar to another militant vaper basically calling me a "schill" for the medical industry in another topic when I disagreed with her.

How sad, vapers attacking other vapers like this. Name calling, and belittling.

The inability to work with others, or respect other points of view, is the kind of representation that can only hurt us.

Since you didn't single out the poster you agree with on this issue and call them out for calling many of us "douchebags" but instead my post for not calling the poster a "troll" but suggesting his posts are similar to a trolls, I must assume you think the term "........." is one of endearment.

I don't mind being called out for probably being too aggressive in my reply, but your selective double standard, questions the purpose of your post.

 

[LDS714]

This is a very emotionally charged issue.

It is also a generationally charged issue.

If you grew up when there were no restrictions on where you could smoke, the "only vape where you can smoke" seems idiotic and Draconian.

If you grew up subsequent to smoking being made the equivalent of a witch in Salem, then vaping in public around "normal" people seems rude and disrespectful.

If you grew up prior to the era of the rights of those being "offended" taking precedence over everyone else's, then you probably don't worry about people being offended or made uncomfortable by seeing something that "OMFG!!!! Looks Like SMOKING --- Right Out IN PUBLIC!!!!!!"

Remember - water looks just like vodka, and people don't have to hide to drink water.

 

[Pav]

I don't live on the left coast. The other is not widely accepted here, nor will ever be.

I believe it will be. If there ever was a place where people need it, it would be Ohio.

There has already been proposed legislation in some localities- mostly in California, tying vape gear to the other.

Interesting. Have a source for any of this?

 

[Racehorse]

This is a very emotionally charged issue.

It is also a generationally charged issue.

If you grew up when there were no restrictions on where you could smoke, the "only vape where you can smoke" seems idiotic and Draconian.

If you grew up subsequent to smoking being made the equivalent of a witch in Salem, then vaping in public around "normal" people seems rude and disrespectful.

If you grew up prior to the era of the rights of those being "offended" taking precedence over everyone else's, then you probably don't worry about people being offended or made uncomfortable by seeing something that "OMFG!!!! Looks Like SMOKING --- Right Out IN PUBLIC!!!!!!"

Remember - water looks just like vodka, and people don't have to hide to drink water.

Speaking of vodka, I live in a "dry" county. And yes, some people have had to hide to drink water, there was a certain festival here a number of years back where people walking around the street with cups were subjected to sniff tests.

Just sayin', we've been thru all kinds of things to simply have a coctail in a nation where liquor is not an illegal substance.

Vapers could learn a lot from counties like this and what the people have done to "fix" this. Suffice to say there are now at least 4 restaurants I can go to here and get a glass of wine or a beer with my meal, they figured out how to do it and do it "legally".

Similar fight reallly, except the ANTZ were religious groups who owned every liquor license for 100 miles.....but I can assure you, there were no fist fights or anything "untoward" necessary to make things better for us. Adults, unlike children, do have control over themselves and their emotions. Those who don't and didn't we didn't want on our side. They just cause problems.

Those with historical references concerning "sin" behaviors and substances know all about how these things happen and how they go.

 

[stevegmu]

I believe it will be. If there ever was a place where people need it, it would be Ohio.




Interesting. Have a source for any of this?

The media and the left will tie the 2 together, whether they think the other is ok or not. What better way to save the children?

I have read through all of the calls to action and legislation news- actually reading the legislation. You may want to do the same.