Ohio Ignores ALA & ACS, Decides to Protect Kids Instead

[AgentAnia]

With thanks to Steve K's vaping World blog:

Ohio Ignores ALA & ACS, Decides to Protect Kids Instead

There's a link in the post to the original article.

 

[Anjaffm]

good find

The Cancer Society says higher taxes are more effective at keeping tobacco products away from teenagers than laws restricting sales to youths.

Hahahahahahahaha! And the earth is flat
So, now it is useless to "protect the children"? What a bunch of utter horse manure!

 

[NicoHolic]

Way to go, Ohio!

 

[Uma]

Saaaweeeeeeet!! Loved the title, so true & straight to the point. Great article, and WTG Ohio!!!

 

[NicoHolic]

One battle down. It still has to go through the Senate. Ohio vapers, let your voice be heard there, as well.

 

[Bill Godshall]

OH House passes bill (H 144) to ban e-cig sales to minors (67-25) over outrageous and hypocritical opposition by drug industry funded CTFK, ACS, AHA, ALA E-cigarette bill passes House despite criticism | The Columbus Dispatch

The good news is there are 23 Republican Senators and just 10 Democrat Senators.

In most states (and in Ohio), CTFK/ACS/AHA/ALA have relied upon liberal/left Democrats to champion their legislation.

And since the bill was introduced by a Republican Rep, Republican Senate leaders are likely to push it through (but some letters of support from vapers and vendors would be helpful).

 

[Anjaffm]

Well done, Ohio!

Actually, I have a hard time wrapping my mind about the "reasoning" by the alphabet soup ANTZ groups.

To my mind, they are saying in the same breath:
"Product X is horrible, terrible, deadly, awful, and it will lead teenagers to a life of addiction and suffering - thus, we are in favor of selling Product X to minors!" ( )

And nobody calls BS on that?

Or, actually, IF somebody calls BS on that, they reply with:

"Well, if the government can get high taxes off Product X, then it miraculously ceases to be horrible, terrible, deadly and awful! And - although it is freely available to minors everywhere - it will no longer lead teenagers to a life of addiction and suffering, because, you know, teenagers will not buy Product X because it costs more money"

Duh. I call BS on that, too

And those same people use the war cry "protect the children"? - I call double BS on that

 

[AgentAnia]

This is called "clutching at straws," aka flexible ideology to support their fanatical crusade. They want ecigs to be banned. Never forget this. Never let yourself be distracted from their main goal.

"Save the children" sounds good and is likely to gain the most support ("We must BAN ecigs for everyone so children can't get their hands on them."). Wherever common sense prevails ("Well gee, we don't have to ban ecigs, we just have to pass a law/ordinance that prohibits selling to children.") the ideologues change their tune.

"Well poo, you aren't going to ban ecigs to save the children? Then never mind prohibiting sales to them, just raise the tax to make ecigs prohibitively expensive, which oh by the way will make it more difficult for children to buy them. So see? You're still saving the children, but you're also making us happy by effectively banning ecigs for *everyone*! And you'll get lots of tax revenue too, which will make you happy too! And we'll get to keep our jobs, which will make us, and the people who pay us, *very very* happy!!

:going for more coffee and a vape:

 

[Spazmelda]

I don't understand this thing they are saying that goes like, "we oppose this legislation because it creates a new category for electronic cigarettes, which will exempt them from future regulations". Is there any basis in truth to that? Would creating a new category for ecigs really exempt them from having any rules made about them, or would it make it more difficult? Ecigs really do belong in a different category than 'tobacco'. They are derived from tobacco, but they are not tobacco. This is their stated reason for opposing banning sales to minors. I've seen it multiple times in articles about Ohio, Arizona, and other states.

 

[WorksForMe]

I wouldn’t think the ANTZ would want e-cigs to be lumped in with regular cigarettes. If that happens, they can’t ban one and not the other. It’s all about the money.

J.R.

 

[Uma]

Save the children ... Rob the food money off the table, evict them into the streets, deny them health insurance, ban the safer alternatives that those who can't/won't quit switch to, invent contests for the kids to constantly have cigarettes on mind as they try to win tobaccoFreeKids spot the exciting tobacco adds, advertise cigarettes constantly to always infiltrate the mind with cigarettes, demean, humiliate, abuse the children & their families, teach the kids to never trust the government... Wait, there is one good thing out of their campaign. Whodathunkit.

 

[AgentAnia]

I don't understand this thing they are saying that goes like, "we oppose this legislation because it creates a new category for electronic cigarettes, which will exempt them from future regulations"....

I wouldn’t think the ANTZ would want e-cigs to be lumped in with regular cigarettes. If that happens, they can’t ban one and not the other. It’s all about the money.

My gut tells me the ANTZ want ecigs lumped in with tobacco cigarettes, for regulatory purposes, because they're lazy and scared and if this is done, they'll have to fight their ideological war on only one front. If separate regulations are imposed for ecigs (as common sense dictates, but never mind common sense....) then they'll have to fight on two count 'em two fronts... Because no matter what, they'll still have to fight ecigs, because it's what they're paid to do...

 

[Orb Skewer]

Talking of money-most of the teenagers I know have more expendible cash than I have, and I work full time-think of the parents !

 

[Anjaffm]

This is called "clutching at straws," aka flexible ideology to support their fanatical crusade. They want ecigs to be banned. Never forget this. Never let yourself be distracted from their main goal.

Oh I know, dear
And it cannot be mentioned often enough.
Their real - and only - aim is to gain total control over smokers, vapers, tobacco, e-cigs and anyone/ anything else they can lump into their definition of "witches to be eradicated". They get paid money to do so. And not just piddling amounts either.

I was merely wondering why not more people call BS on their - obviously twisted and just plain stupid - "reasoning".

"Save the children" sounds good and is likely to gain the most support ("We must BAN ecigs for everyone so children can't get their hands on them."). Wherever common sense prevails ("Well gee, we don't have to ban ecigs, we just have to pass a law/ordinance that prohibits selling to children.") the ideologues change their tune.

"Well poo, you aren't going to ban ecigs to save the children? Then never mind prohibiting sales to them, just raise the tax to make ecigs prohibitively expensive, which oh by the way will make it more difficult for children to buy them. So see? You're still saving the children, but you're also making us happy by effectively banning ecigs for *everyone*! And you'll get lots of tax revenue too, which will make you happy too! And we'll get to keep our jobs, which will make us, and the people who pay us, *very very*happy!!

well said indeed.

Talking of money-most of the teenagers I know have more expendible cash than I have, and I work full time-think of the parents !

I do agree.
Most of the things that teenagers like - say, video games, electronic gadgets, designer clothing, designer sneakers - are prohibitively expensive to the normal working adult who will often say "Nawwwww... I do not need that stuff, it is not worth the money, my other expenses - such as rent and food and car upkeep - are more important". So I agree: making something more expensive so that teenagers do not buy it... duh

 

[Painter_]

This looks like a win for us Ohio. Ohio Senate set for vote on bill to ban sale of e-cigarettes to minors | cleveland.com

The only concern I have is this part of the bill "... prohibit retailers from breaking up a package of e-cigarettes to sell individually."

COLUMBUS—The Ohio Senate will likely hold a final vote Wednesday on tobacco industry-backed legislation that would ban the sale of e-cigarettes to children.
The legislation, House Bill 144, was reported unanimously by the Senate Criminal Justice Committee on Tuesday. The bill previously passed the Ohio House of Representatives 67-25.
E-cigarettes, battery-powered devices that deliver nicotine in a vapor rather than tobacco smoke, have surged in popularity among teens. Approximately one in ten high schoolers now use the product.
HB 144 would ban the sale of the devices to customers under the age of 18 and prohibit retailers from breaking up a package of e-cigarettes to sell individually.
Anti-smoking groups agree that e-cigarettes shouldn’t be sold to minors. But they’ve expressed concern that the bill classifies the devices as an alternative nicotine product – a tactic that would allow e-cigarettes to evade higher taxes imposed in cigarettes.

 

[Bill Godshall]

This is more good news, but please remember to post legislative news in the Legislative News thread.

It would be helpful if an admin moved this to the Legislative News thread, preferrably as a comment on the following thread about this same legislation.
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...res-ala-acs-decides-protect-kids-instead.html

 

[Bill Godshall]

Yesterday, the Ohio Senate Criminal Justice Committee unanimously approved HB 144
Ohio Senate set for vote on bill to ban sale of e-cigarettes to minors | cleveland.com

The Ohio Senate is expected to consider (i.e. approve) the bill tomorrow.

And of course, the ANTZ continue to complain that the bill doesn't tax e-cigs.

 

[sonicdsl]

This looks like a win for us Ohio. Ohio Senate set for vote on bill to ban sale of e-cigarettes to minors | cleveland.com

The only concern I have is this part of the bill "... prohibit retailers from breaking up a package of e-cigarettes to sell individually."

COLUMBUS—The Ohio Senate will likely hold a final vote Wednesday on tobacco industry-backed legislation that would ban the sale of e-cigarettes to children.
The legislation, House Bill 144, was reported unanimously by the Senate Criminal Justice Committee on Tuesday. The bill previously passed the Ohio House of Representatives 67-25.
E-cigarettes, battery-powered devices that deliver nicotine in a vapor rather than tobacco smoke, have surged in popularity among teens. Approximately one in ten high schoolers now use the product.
HB 144 would ban the sale of the devices to customers under the age of 18 and prohibit retailers from breaking up a package of e-cigarettes to sell individually.
Anti-smoking groups agree that e-cigarettes shouldn’t be sold to minors. But they’ve expressed concern that the bill classifies the devices as an alternative nicotine product – a tactic that would allow e-cigarettes to evade higher taxes imposed in cigarettes.

This is more good news, but please remember to post legislative news in the Legislative News thread.

It would be helpful if an admin moved this to the Legislative News thread, preferrably as a comment on the following thread about this same legislation.
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...res-ala-acs-decides-protect-kids-instead.html

Threads merged per OP's request.

 

[Painter_]

This shows the true colors of the vaping fight, it is all about the money.
Ohio to ban sale of e-cigarettes to minors, but what about the money? « Watchdog.org

 

[NorthOfAtlanta]

This quote from Rep Carney is straight from BP and their house pet alphabet groups.

Carney said taxing one product but not another could create an incentive for individuals to use the less expensive one.

By adding two words it would change to the truth.

Carney said taxing one product but not another could create an incentive for individuals to use the healthier and less expensive one.