Popcorn anyone? Explain this call to action to me once again.

[Steam Turbine]

Ready... set... popcorn!

So I was looking at that giant yellow rectangle right above this post asking us to take action on different vaping issues. Usually, I agree with the overwhelming majority of the calls to action.... Expect that first one on top.... Actually, it's not that I disagree.... It's that I don't care.

I do not care if vaping gets banned wherever smoking is prohibited. I tell myself... big deal... so what? (btw don't forget that popcorn... in some microwaves it will burn if you leave it unattended, no one likes burned popcorn.)

I did not start vaping to vape at the airport or in restaurants or in the hospital or on the launchpad of the Rosetta Space Probe.

Especially now... With all those user-friendly subohm fog machine clearomizers, allowing people to use them in restaurants, for example, seems like a bad idea.

I have evolved into a "subohm" dripper... I blow reasonably big clouds, I don't feel comfortable vaping in public places anyways, so I don't... Maybe that's why I don't care, maybe it's because it wouldn't change my vaping habits... Maybe I'm just being selfish.

So, explain to me why this call to action matters.

 

[alicewonderland]

yeah i dont understand either. im a vaper and i would find it rude if some vaper came into my non vape oriented business and just started chucking clouds around, i love vaping but i find it rude that people have to vape where u arent allowed to smoke but thats just me. Vaping is a habit if you are a nicotine user and if you cant control your habit its not other peoples resposibility to allow you to vape in their vicinity if smokers arent allowed to smoke in that same vicinity, regardless if its harmless to them or not.


edit: i read the threadlink of the call to action for it, it seems it is not the vaping in public ban that is the issue, the issue is that vape stores are not exempt from this law, so people would not be allowed to vape in vape shops either. smoke shops ARE exempt from the ban though, which is stupid.

 

[catsitter]

The problem I see with it is that, once you allow them to equate smoking and vaping in one area, it's liable to be carried over to other areas, such as taxation. The old dominoes theory...

 

[retired1]

Because the law goes too far.

The ordinance would also exempt tobacco retailers from the 'smoking' ban, but NOT specialty vapor retailers.

 

[Steam Turbine]

Because the law goes too far.

I'll take that, That makes sense. Of course this is utterly ridiculous.

 

[TheJakeBailey]

edit: i read the threadlink of the call to action for it, it seems it is not the vaping in public ban that is the issue, the issue is that vape stores are not exempt from this law, so people would not be allowed to vape in vape shops either. smoke shops ARE exempt from the ban though, which is stupid.

I was kind of going right along with you guys. i don't vape in movies, stores, etc. But the devil is always in the details!

 

[Robino1]

It's hard to get all the little details into one small soundbite. Next time I will prepare it with better wording. Sorry if it seemed trivialized Totally my fault as I send the Banner wording to Roly for him to put up for me.

I'm still learning!!

 

[alicewonderland]

yeah, should say something like would hurt local vaping businesses or something, since thats the heart of the matter

 

[choochoogranny]

Yup! Agree with Catssitter and Retired1. Remember when bans got started with "smoking sections" on airlines and restaurants? Sounded reasonable. Now it's parks and pretty much where anybody can SEE you!

There was a lawsuit a few years ago (can't remember what state) where a rabid non smoker swore she could smell her neighbor smoking INSIDE his house 300 yds away and it was causing her distress and illness AND the law should make him stop! Wonder if that neighbor ever got reimbursed his legal fees for defending himself.

 

[Bunnykiller]

you have to understand New Orleans.... we still allow smoking in bars, bars/grills.. it is up to the business owner to post no smoking/vaping if they wish. There are still several resturaunts/bars that allow vaping.. Public/Government buildings dont allow smoking at all... it hasnt been deemed unlawful to vape yet... "yet".. but as you see they are trying.

but if one wants to delve a bit deeper into the process... NYC, large soft drinks banned, see where Im going? Eventually you wont be able to order a medium or rare steak or a fresh spinach salad due to E.Coli possibilities.

 

[Steam Turbine]

I admit that I've only read the title... and not the actual call to action, my bad. A better title would definitely be warranted here. Perhaps something like:

Ban on E-cigarette use wherever smoking is prohibited. Including vape shops. Tobacco stores exempted.

 

[Robino1]

I admit that I've only read the title... and not the actual call to action, my bad. A better title would definitely be warranted here. Perhaps something like:

Duly noted

 

[rolygate]

There is no way to ensure all members know about these issues apart from a rather blunt and intrusive notice of the type you mention. It's Dismissible of course, so you can just X it out and it's gone for ever (click the X at the top right corner) - then you'll only see it once.

This seems a fair bargain, all told: people can see what attacks on their rights are taking place, and dismiss the information if they don't care to see it. Seeing these issues listed doesn't mean they are understood, of course: it may be that people don't know what this is all about. It's simple really: there are a lot of people working very hard in the background to protect your right to vape, often at significant personal cost.

If there weren't, you wouldn't be a vaper now, as the FDA would have successfully banned all ecig products in 2010.

The reason you can vape now is that people have historically fought for your rights. The reason that you will be able to vape tomorrow is that people are fighting hard right now for your rights. If no one fought for you, often without your knowledge, then smoking would be protected at the highest level (as it is) but with no opposition from the public at all (as is not the case, with people like CASAA working for your right and your ability not to smoke).

It's OK to question it if you are not aware of these facts. Please consider the sacrifices others have made in order that you can do as you please, and don't sabotage their efforts. More help is always appreciated by those on the front line, and the minimum anyone can do to start to help is to join their national consumer association for vaping.

It's a bit cheesy: "First they came for the..."; but a good principle to follow, as they take away your rights a bit at a time and hope you don't notice. This applies strongly when we get into the area of threats to government and corporate revenues, where all health policy is. Health policy is influenced by the financial costs/benefits in various forms to others. Ecigs are threatening vast revenues, so strong opposition to vaping is a certainty.

One day you end up in jail, metaphorically speaking, and you can't work out how the heck you got there. The answer is very simple: you let them take away your rights a bit at a time, thinking it didn't matter or that it was someone else's problem to fix it or it was someone else's rights anyway. Don't give them an inch because they will use it as a wedge to take a mile.

 

[bluecat]

You give someone and inch and they will take a mile. There are not many people I trust on this planet that will do with information that is planned for it. People opposed to smoking will do anything against their perceived threat of how the world should look. They are terrified that vaping will be normalized and are doing everything they can to associate it with smoking because they were successful in demonizing smoking, even though man has been smoking for 1000s of years, if not longer.

So as the grease chugging, overweight, starbucks gurgling, bottle of wine drinking, beer case swigging advocates against this demon thing we do, we can't give them an inch because they will take a mile and spin it.

Just wait... these type of people will also try to invade your home and have it banned there too.

 

[CMD-Ky]

I was kind of going right along with you guys. i don't vape in movies, stores, etc. But the devil is always in the details!

I don't either, but it is by choice, out of consideration for others, not by government edict. Long before smoking bans, when I smoked, I was considerate of those around me. Now, however, I resent the mandates.

 

[CMD-Ky]

Well stated, rolygate. I don't think your last two paragraphs are "cheesy" at all; you spoke the truth without hyperbole.

CMD

There is no way to ensure all members know about these issues apart from a rather blunt and intrusive notice of the type you mention. It's Dismissible of course, so you can just X it out and it's gone for ever (click the X at the top right corner) - then you'll only see it once.

This seems a fair bargain, all told: people can see what attacks on their rights are taking place, and dismiss the information if they don't care to see it. Seeing these issues listed doesn't mean they are understood, of course: it may be that people don't know what this is all about. It's simple really: there are a lot of people working very hard in the background to protect your right to vape, often at significant personal cost.

If there weren't, you wouldn't be a vaper now, as the FDA would have successfully banned all ecig products in 2010.

The reason you can vape now is that people have historically fought for your rights. The reason that you will be able to vape tomorrow is that people are fighting hard right now for your rights. If no one fought for you, often without your knowledge, then smoking would be protected at the highest level (as it is) but with no opposition from the public at all (as is not the case, with people like CASAA working for your right and your ability not to smoke).

It's OK to question it if you are not aware of these facts. Please consider the sacrifices others have made in order that you can do as you please, and don't sabotage their efforts. More help is always appreciated by those on the front line, and the minimum anyone can do to start to help is to join their national consumer association for vaping.

It's a bit cheesy, but a good principle to follow (especially when we get into the area of threats to corporate profits, where all health policy is determined by the financial benefit to others - which is where ecigs are firmly positioned as they threaten vast revenues): "First they came for the...", is what we have to remember. They take it away a bit at a time and hope you don't notice.

One day you end up in jail, metaphorically speaking, and you can't work out how the heck you got there. The answer is very simple: you let them take away your rights a bit at a time, thinking it didn't matter or that it was someone else's problem to fix it or it was someone else's rights anyway.

 

[RandyF]

They (BT, BP, our government) are trying the best they can to equate vaping to smoking. If they are successful then it can also be taxed just like smoking, because you can rest assured all this comes down to money and how much they can tax it on the federal level, as well as the state level. The more laws that get passed treating it the same, the closer they get to ridiculous sin taxes.

 

[alicewonderland]

the thing is, the new orleans CTA doesnt even treat vaping the same as it is treating tobbaco in there.

 

[skoony]

recently Minneapolis passed its e-cigarettes = smoking ban.
the health committee meeting and council meeting were a real
dog and pony show from what i heard. there were many speakers,
90 % pro-ban and among them many bar owners. their major
complaint was it was hard to tell if what was being done was
e-stuff or the other stuff. turns out they didn't allow vaping in
their places and were losing money to the bars that allowed
it.
i don't know how things work in other states but,here in Minnesota
i know of no private business nor public or government agency
that has not addressed the issue of e-cigarettes on their property
already. there is no need for government involvement into when
or where e-cigarettes can be used. people when given the choice
will make up their own minds.

regards
mike

 

[alicewonderland]

recently Minneapolis passed its e-cigarettes = smoking ban.
the health committee meeting and council meeting were a real
dog and pony show from what i heard. there were many speakers,
90 % pro-ban and among them many bar owners. their major
complaint was it was hard to tell if what was being done was
e-stuff or the other stuff. turns out they didn't allow vaping in
their places and were losing money to the bars that allowed
it.
i don't know how things work in other states but,here in Minnesota
i know of no private business nor public or government agency
that has not addressed the issue of e-cigarettes on their property
already. there is no need for government involvement into when
or where e-cigarettes can be used. people when given the choice
will make up their own minds.

regards
mike

i can see it from the bar owners point of view as well though if you dont want smoking in there . +losing money to other businesses that allow it isnt an even playing field. i actually agree with their point. If my livelihood depended on it I would vote the same way they did. i think -some- stuff should have government involvement at least, as long as they dont strangle us.