NYC bans ecigs indoors. The mind boggles.

[Tinkiegrrl]

Out of your list, three of them are not harmful to others. One of your items is much more complicated and doesn't belong, IMO, as a comparison to activities, like vaping, that also does not harm others. I'm not wanting to get into a discussion that isn't relevant to the vaping issue. But I feel strongly that one item does not fit with a discussion of things that don't harm others. No disrespect intended but just don't see it the same way.

I'd agree on the gun one, but I was trying to frame it in such a way that both sides of the political spectrum could see my point. Unless it's the abortion one, in which case, I'd ask how two entities occupying the same space can be legally granted the same rights. They can't. One must trump the other, and we likely disagree on which one that should be.

 

[Tinkiegrrl]

Aren't you NY vapers way too late on this? I never heard of any demonstrations against this law.

The council meeting on it was quite lively, and as another person mentioned, a legal case before the courts may net a better, more decisive result.

 

[boborone]

Does everything really need to boil down to right vs left? Both sides have their extremists and both sides pass stupid laws. I can go on all day over what Bloomberg does AND what Rick Perry does. The fact is, both are pretty far to the left and to the right and very likely doesn't represent what most of the left and the right consist of. Most Americans are pretty firmly in the middle of the spectrum. Most Americans would probably be down for compromising with eachother and down with common sense laws. Common sense and compromise however, doesn't pull in the same rate of viewers as extremism does, so what you see in the news are mostly the extremists. We NYers fought off Bloombergs soda regulation and we will keep fighting this vaping ban. Every other NYer I spoke with, both right and left, agree on this. We can't wait for Bloomberg and the city council who does nothing but lick his boots, to go.

Here here.

I don't know how Perry and the rest of the extremists keep getting elected here.

On another note

I live in a Texas town where smoking is banned. The bar I go to allows ecigs inside and smoking on the patio. The restaurant I work at let's people vape as long as they aren't blowing big clouds, you know being considerate. But the workers have to go to a back room and wash our hands afterwards. Health concerns about handling things that go in our mouth and then food. All rules completely reasonable.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[meanckz]

City Council To Vote On Indoor E-Cigarettes Ban « CBS New York

Key quote:

City Council Speaker Christine Quinn said the ban will make it easier to enforce the city’s Smoke-Free Air Act, which banned smoking in bars, restaurants and other indoor public spaces.“Because many of the E-cigarettes are designed to look like cigarettes and be used just like them, they can lead to confusion or confrontation,” Quinn said.

They're not being banned for health reasons, but because someone might be upset.

So glad I moved out of that place!

umm...how many millions of cars and other vehicles (Hummers) are driving around in NYC ... ????

 

[Tinkiegrrl]

umm...how many millions of cars and other vehicles (Hummers) are driving around in NYC ... ????

In all fairness, those cars and Hummers are not driving into restaurants and bars. Most of the time. Banning smoking indoors I can see, as you are putting innocent bystanders at risk with second hand smoke. Ecigs, however, do no burn anything. Unless the premise behind banning smoking was really about the image it shows to others and not about the health, as they admit is behind banning ecigs. This, is overstepping now.

 

[LDS714]

In all fairness, those cars and Hummers are not driving into restaurants and bars. Most of the time. Banning smoking indoors I can see, as you are putting innocent bystanders at risk with second hand smoke.

No. You're not.

This has been proven false.

 

[p.opus]

No. You're not.

This has been proven false.

Very interesting read from the Cato Institute
The Second-Hand Smoke Charade | Cato Institute

Second hand smoke is very irritating however. Second hand vapor is neither harmful or particularly irritating. Unless you are one of those people who feel that everyone must live and act as you do.

 

[Tinkiegrrl]

Interesting... I'll have to google more on it.

 

[navigator2011]

Harmful or not, indoor smoking is gone for good. But vaping in areas like train platforms, or one's own apartment, there should be no bans on that. These boneheads should be helping smokers switch to vaping rather than making it harder.

 

[Pinggolfer]

No. You're not.

This has been proven false.

How about you are stinking up the place so a smoker can enjoy a cigarette or cigar.

 

[p.opus]

Come on guys, lets not rabbit trail into the pros and cons of secondhand smoke. That train has left the station, and as a smoker I found certain smoke filled rooms to be intolerable irregardless whether or not there was an increased health risk or not.

What we are discussing here is the NYC ban on vaping because it "looks like smoking". This is a very shaky legal position that the city council has based their decision on, and it appears ripe to be embarrassingly overturned. I see "big gulp ban" round 2 to completely discredit mayor Bloomberg and his over the top Nanny State policies.

I simply hope the fine people of NYC see him for what he is and votes in a replacement that has the mental capacity to use some common sense.

Could you imagine Giuliani banning e-cigs or sodas? Neither could I.....

 

[Notorious C.I.G.]

IMO ecigs should be viewed as medicine which prevents cigarette smoking, considering cigarette smoking kills more than almost any disease. It would be absurd to ban any other medication.

Ironic because NY has some of the highest cigarette taxes and cigarette restrictions, one may be fooled into thinking they were actually interested in reducing the harms of cigarettes.

 

[Tinkiegrrl]

IMO ecigs should be viewed as medicine which prevents cigarette smoking, considering cigarette smoking kills more than almost any disease. It would be absurd to ban any other medication.

Ironic because NY has some of the highest cigarette taxes and cigarette restrictions, one may be fooled into thinking they were actually interested in reducing the harms of cigarettes.

If e-cigs were regulated as a smoking cessation device, you could expect a large increase in price, along with regulating away options such as flavored e-liquids and a variety of devices. Basically, you'd be left with something like Blu, only in tobacco and menthol flavors sold at local pharmacies for double the price. The only places who would be able to sell it would have to purchase a license to sell it at $1284639462 which would contribute to higher prices. The FDA once tried to claim it was a smoking cessation device, and a judge shot it down as they are not advertised as such. The kind of regulation that would come from a ruling that made this into a smoking cessation product would likely kill everything we like about the product and it would be rendered almost as useless as the patch. I know that without the flavors (I started vaping cherry, not tobacco) and throat hit from a VV ego, I would not have been as successful. Remember, a big argument the anti vaper side had are the flavors that supposedly make this appealing to children.

 

[LDS714]

How about you are stinking up the place so a smoker can enjoy a cigarette or cigar.

Making something illegal because "I don't like it" should be illegal. Why? Because I don't like it that way!

Now if the business makes the choice on their own, more power to them.

 

[seashells]

If it weren't so pleasurable to vape this probably wouldn't be such a tempest in a teapot. Patches, chantrix, gum- those aren't any fun. Promote those.

 

[navigator2011]

IMO ecigs should be viewed as medicine which prevents cigarette smoking, considering cigarette smoking kills more than almost any disease. It would be absurd to ban any other medication.

Ironic because NY has some of the highest cigarette taxes and cigarette restrictions, one may be fooled into thinking they were actually interested in reducing the harms of cigarettes.

"Viewed" by non-smokers as a way for smokers to cure themselves or make better lifestyle choices, yes. "Regulated" as smoking cessation medicine, no. Gotta keep the damned gov'ment out of it. I think I am mature enough to make my own decisions without any help from Mamma-State.

 

[navigator2011]

If it weren't so pleasurable to vape this probably wouldn't be such a tempest in a teapot. Patches, chantrix, gum- those aren't any fun. Promote those.

Right, quitting smoking cigarettes has to be miserable. If they made the patches, chantix, and gum enjoyable, we might want to take them. God forbid that someone actually enjoys taking something, we just don't alllow that around here, partner.

 

[B1sh0p]

Come on guys, lets not rabbit trail into the pros and cons of secondhand smoke. That train has left the station, and as a smoker I found certain smoke filled rooms to be intolerable irregardless whether or not there was an increased health risk or not.

What we are discussing here is the NYC ban on vaping because it "looks like smoking". This is a very shaky legal position that the city council has based their decision on, and it appears ripe to be embarrassingly overturned. I see "big gulp ban" round 2 to completely discredit mayor Bloomberg and his over the top Nanny State policies.

I simply hope the fine people of NYC see him for what he is and votes in a replacement that has the mental capacity to use some common sense.

Could you imagine Giuliani banning e-cigs or sodas? Neither could I.....

Is it really that hard to stay current? Bloomberg has about a week left in office.

 

[p.opus]

Right, quitting smoking cigarettes has to be miserable. If they made the patches, chantix, and gum enjoyable, we might want to take them. God forbid that someone actually enjoys taking something, we just don't alllow that around here, partner.

The problem is that drug community has been combating smoking cessation as simply a nicotine addiction. There is more to "smoking" than being addicted to nicotine.

The Nicotine withdrawal symptoms last only a couple of days. Within a couple of days of smoking the body is clean of nicotine, but as we know, being "off" nicotine is just part of the problem.

There is the "hand to mouth" behavior, the oral fixation, the social habit, the feel of the throat hit....NONE of the available smoking cessation products address all these issues except e-cigs.

Even if Nicorette gum tasted good, I wouldn't substitue chewing gum for taking a nice hit.

A patch gives you no sensory feedback at all except a time released dose and some local skin irritation.

Only e-cigs provide a method to address all of the habit forming behaviors linked to smoking, while allowing the user to selectively cut down on his nicotine usage. That is why they are so effective. I can slowly lower my nicotine intake so that I don't have the withdrawal symptoms while still satisfying the other smoking behaviors.

Yes, it's a mind fake, but a rather effective one.

 

[Notorious C.I.G.]

If e-cigs were regulated as a smoking cessation device, you could expect a large increase in price, along with regulating away options such as flavored e-liquids and a variety of devices. Basically, you'd be left with something like Blu, only in tobacco and menthol flavors sold at local pharmacies for double the price. The only places who would be able to sell it would have to purchase a license to sell it at $1284639462 which would contribute to higher prices. The FDA once tried to claim it was a smoking cessation device, and a judge shot it down as they are not advertised as such. The kind of regulation that would come from a ruling that made this into a smoking cessation product would likely kill everything we like about the product and it would be rendered almost as useless as the patch. I know that without the flavors (I started vaping cherry, not tobacco) and throat hit from a VV ego, I would not have been as successful. Remember, a big argument the anti vaper side had are the flavors that supposedly make this appealing to children.

I don't want FDA regulation, yes, but in reality, it is a sort of cure to cig smoking, FDA approved or not