Please DO vap where you can't smoke!!!

[LordDavon]

According to CASAA's legal minds, the interpretation of laws is usually "common use" of a term, if it is not otherwise defined in the law. The common use of "smoke" in relation to smoking bans is the first definition in Merriam-Webster's: the gaseous products of burning materials especially of organic origin made visible by the presence of small particles of carbon

So, for the vast majority of indoor smoking ban legislation, if it's not something burning, it's not legally "smoke."

My point is that the uninformed cop who is the one coming over to deal with the complaint may still put the cuffs on you and haul you away. Obviously, the case wont hold up in court. vaping where you can't smoke doesn't mean you aren't going to get hauled away. It is the cop who is making the decision as to take you to the station. It is not the smartest thing to do.

We should educate other smokers by vaping where they smoke. Not offend the non-smokers.

 

[kristin]

A cop is not going to arrest someone when there is no clear law in place. That's an awefully lot of paperwork for him to make an assumption like that.

You also assume vaping will automatically offend non-smokers. There are more stories on ECF about non-smokers being cool with it or being accepting after it's been explained to them than causing a huge uproar. Most of the non-smokers who object (in article comments) have not yet seen one in use up close. If they never experience it up close, they will never understand the difference.

If non-smokers see it, so will the smokers. If we are only out by the smokers, ONLY the smokers see it and learn the truth. We need EVERYONE to know the truth.

 

[LordDavon]

A cop is not going to arrest someone when there is no clear law in place. That's an awefully lot of paperwork for him to make an assumption like that.

You also assume vaping will automatically offend non-smokers. There are more stories on ECF about non-smokers being cool with it or being accepting after it's been explained to them than causing a huge uproar. Most of the non-smokers who object (in article comments) have not yet seen one in use up close. If they never experience it up close, they will never understand the difference.

If non-smokers see it, so will the smokers. If we are only out by the smokers, ONLY the smokers see it and learn the truth. We need EVERYONE to know the truth.

Unfortunately, I was arrested about 15 years ago due to a cops "assumptions". They really will make arrests.

As you said, most non-smokers were fine with it AFTER they were educated on the subject. Walking into Saks and puffing away is a great way to offend lots of people. Wal-mart may be fine since most of the people there are offensive. j/k ;-)

David

 

[scinsc]

I have read many post on ECF that are pretty far out but I have never seen one that is this stupid.

 

[kristin]

I have read many post on ECF that are pretty far out but I have never seen one that is this stupid.

Considering that I work part-time at a Walmart, I'd have to agree.

 

[kristin]

Unfortunately, I was arrested about 15 years ago due to a cops "assumptions". They really will make arrests.

As you said, most non-smokers were fine with it AFTER they were educated on the subject. Walking into Saks and puffing away is a great way to offend lots of people. Wal-mart may be fine since most of the people there are offensive. j/k ;-)

David

Yet, there was probably an actual law that he thought you were breaking? Cops have a lot more to worry about than smoking.

And I don't think most people want to vape in Saks. They want to be where they were before the bans in bars, restaurants, airports and in New York - public parks.

You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs. There will be people who have a knee-jerk reaction, but that will be our opportunity to educate them.

Rosa Parks wouldn't have changed minds if she hadn't decided to risk offending people by not sitting at the back of the bus. If she had continued sitting in the back, people would have continued to believe that is where she belonged.

I'm not talking about being obnoxious and "in-your-face." I'm talking about polite and quiet protest.

 

[LordDavon]

Yet, there was probably an actual law that he thought you were breaking? Cops have a lot more to worry about than smoking.

And I don't think most people want to vape in Saks. They want to be where they were before the bans in bars, restaurants, airports and in New York - public parks.

You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs. There will be people who have a knee-jerk reaction, but that will be our opportunity to educate them.

Rosa Parks wouldn't have changed minds if she hadn't decided to risk offending people by not sitting at the back of the bus. If she had continued sitting in the back, people would have continued to believe that is where she belonged.

I'm not talking about being obnoxious and "in-your-face." I'm talking about polite and quiet protest.

Huh?! E-cigarettes contain nicotine. Some even contain diacetyl and/or diethylene glycol. I don't vape around my kids. You think you are going to puff away at the table next to ours so you can "break a few eggs"?! "Polite and quiet protest"s don't include offending people or exposing them to the gases you expel. Talking to managers about indoor locations where you can vape is. "Polite and quiet protest"s don't include vaping where ever you can't smoke, which my original post was rebutting. It is not how we should be doing things. Lines need to be drawn and people need to understand the difference between offensive and tact.

As well, I can't believe that you would compare what Rosa Parks did with vaping in public! I'm not touching that one. I get your point with it but, we will have to agree to disagree. As a matter of fact, I think we should just agree to disagree all together. I will do things my way and you can do things your way.

 

[LordDavon]

I have read many post on ECF that are pretty far out but I have never seen one that is this stupid.

The j/k means just kidding. I was trying to lighten the mood a bit.

 

[kristin]

I will do things my way and you can do things your way.

Yep.

..............................

 

[my2heartboys]

Wish I could, but school won't let me. I am told to go out where the smokers are...... Right now that is a huge BBBBRRRRR

Anybody got any ideas?

Anne

 

[Mathew R Taylor]

Anne - I would talk to the head of the school or the board, and start the education there. Depending on your educational establishment, their main concern would likely be undue influence, and the perception that they "allow" smoking (as from a distance it appears as though you are smoking). I am going through that at work now, and though I respect my Employer's request to vape outside, I will be persistent in attempting to sway his decision to favor mine. I have already begun forwarding him articles, and using each opportunity I can to educate him and those around me.

 

[my2heartboys]

Well, got a meeting with the program director and one of the admins tomorrow. I am going armed with a print out of a couple of articles and will see where that will get me. I do respect their wishes (most of the time....I have been known to take a vape or two in secret in the classroom as well as in the building....but I really try not to push it).

Anne

 

[wv2win]

Yet, there was probably an actual law that he thought you were breaking? Cops have a lot more to worry about than smoking.

And I don't think most people want to vape in Saks. They want to be where they were before the bans in bars, restaurants, airports and in New York - public parks.

You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs. There will be people who have a knee-jerk reaction, but that will be our opportunity to educate them.

Rosa Parks wouldn't have changed minds if she hadn't decided to risk offending people by not sitting at the back of the bus. If she had continued sitting in the back, people would have continued to believe that is where she belonged.

I'm not talking about being obnoxious and "in-your-face." I'm talking about polite and quiet protest.

Excellent points, Kristin!! +1

 

[wv2win]

Huh?! E-cigarettes contain nicotine. Some even contain diacetyl and/or diethylene glycol. I don't vape around my kids. You think you are going to puff away at the table next to ours so you can "break a few eggs"?! "Polite and quiet protest"s don't include offending people or exposing them to the gases you expel. Talking to managers about indoor locations where you can vape is. "Polite and quiet protest"s don't include vaping where ever you can't smoke, which my original post was rebutting. It is not how we should be doing things. Lines need to be drawn and people need to understand the difference between offensive and tact.

As well, I can't believe that you would compare what Rosa Parks did with vaping in public! I'm not touching that one. I get your point with it but, we will have to agree to disagree. As a matter of fact, I think we should just agree to disagree all together. I will do things my way and you can do things your way.

Your way sends the exact message the FDA, ASH and ACS wants to be sent across the country about the use of PV's. Namely that it is extremely dangerous and must be banned. You prove their extreme positions simply by your actions which speak louder than words. And no one is advocating blowing vapor in the face of the uninformed but instead using common sense, education and respect in advocating the use of PV's in public. You simply want everyone to know that you are just another smoker who needs to be kept away from the rest of society because what you do is dangerous to others.

 

[wv2win]

Anne - I would talk to the head of the school or the board, and start the education there. Depending on your educational establishment, their main concern would likely be undue influence, and the perception that they "allow" smoking (as from a distance it appears as though you are smoking). I am going through that at work now, and though I respect my Employer's request to vape outside, I will be persistent in attempting to sway his decision to favor mine. I have already begun forwarding him articles, and using each opportunity I can to educate him and those around me.

That is exactly the way to handle the situation and I applaud your persistence by continuing in your efforts to educate your employer. You might want to explain to your employer (especially if they partially provide health insurance) that smoking causes more illnesses which results in loss time from work. In addition, going outside to smoke does reduce productivity. If you were able to vape inside, you could make the case for more productivity and the possiblity of converting others to vaping since they would be able to stay inside, also. Just a thought.

 

[VapingRulz]

Kristen, What we need to differentiate is actually the safety of e-cigarettes and whether their use should be allowed in places where smoking is prohibited.

No, we do not. Vaping is legal. It is not smoking. No smoke or carcinogens are produced. No bystander is in danger of being harmed by vapor. Smoking is prohibited because it does produce carcinogens due to burning; that is the basis of banning smoking in public areas.

Why is there even an argument here? Why does any non-vaper, anywhere, have a say in the matter? It's none of their freaking business...period. Just like it's none of anyone's business if I choose to use Pine-Sol as an underarm deodorant. If they don't like it, that's just too bad. I'm not running for Miss Congeniality.

I no longer smoke and I will not be relegated to smoking areas. Like all non-smokers, I am entitled to a smoke-free environment.

 

[Shel]

I no longer smoke and I will not be relegated to smoking areas. Like all non-smokers, I am entitled to a smoke-free environment.

VapingRulz
I agree with you one hundred % on this!

However, the use of PineSol as an underarm deodorant... that's just wrong. I'd have to fight you on that one.....

 

[my2heartboys]

I did try to point out the fact that there is actually no smoke (or combustion) happening, and they just gave me the look..... I really don't get their hang up with it....especially considering the fact that we all know (but can't necessarily prove) that people use the patch and the little lozenge thingys as a substitute instead of smoking. It is just more socially acceptable.

Anne

 

[Vapmire]

This is probably the best thread started on these forums in a long while..

Yes, DO VAPE where you cannot smoke..

I do it all the time, NEVER HAD A BAD EXPERIENCE!

People actually KNOW you're not really smoking, they ask questions or figure it out all on their own..

People who give you stares are only ones who KNOW but hate your EXTRA-SENSE-OF-FREEDOM!

People who become aggressive are only SICK..

my 2 cents

 

[kristin]

Well, got a meeting with the program director and one of the admins tomorrow. I am going armed with a print out of a couple of articles and will see where that will get me. I do respect their wishes (most of the time....I have been known to take a vape or two in secret in the classroom as well as in the building....but I really try not to push it).

Anne

CASAA.org has also created a lot of good resources to print, as well.

Some good ones for those new to e-cigarettes:
http://www.casaa.org/files/CASAA-Ecig-TriFold-Brochure.pdf

http://www.casaa.org/files/CASAA Medical infograph(4).pdf

http://www.casaa.org/files/Electronic Cigarette Fact Sheet.doc

http://www.casaa.org/files/FAQs sheet(2).pdf

http://www.casaa.org/files/8 Biggest Electronic Cigarette Myths(2).pdf