Proposed Bill makes it Illegal to sell flavored eliquid or flavors used in eliquid

Status
Not open for further replies.

caramel

Vaping Master
Dec 23, 2014
3,492
10,735
l
Considering Portland is the microbrew capital, perhaps it's time to push for tobacco and menthol only beer. Or better yet, make it all as bland and boring as PBR since that is what the kiddies are playing beer pong and flippy cup with these days.

You wouldn't want the kiddies getting a hold of a bottle of strawberry porter, now would ya

Sent from my HTC One M8 Harman/Kardon edition

This is discriminatory. It should cover everything from vapes to chewing gum to soft drinks to barbeque sauce. not to mention that barbeque makes smoke/vapours too so it should be construed as smoking and taxed accordingly.
 

caramel

Vaping Master
Dec 23, 2014
3,492
10,735
"“Characterizing flavor” means a distinguishable taste or aroma other than tobacco or menthol."
"“Flavored inhalant delivery system product” means a component of an inhalant delivery system or a substance in any form [...] that has been manufactured to impart a characterizing flavor."

Put the two together and you get anything with a flavor that isn't tobacco or menthol.

could a barbeque grill be construed as a flavoured inhalant delivery system? I'd absolutely love to see that tobacco or menthol flavoured 'Oregon steak' option in restaurant's menus.
 

Jshawnbleacher

Full Member
Nov 11, 2014
49
26
Lancaster, PA. USA
  • Deleted by Robino1
  • Reason: Drug reference. That is a no-no. Thank you :)

englishmick

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Sep 25, 2014
6,604
35,898
Naptown, Indiana
For those with the knowledge or willingness to mix their own, this won't have too much of an effect. It's the new vapers, or those who don't want to bother with mixing, that won't be able to buy a pre-mixed bottle of watermelon e-liquid, and the vape shops that won't be able to sell theirs or any other line of e-liquid, without which I assume most will be less than profitable.

Right. We can stockpile and get knowledgeable about food flavorings and so forth, but without a widespread base of vapers who aren't into doing all that the system could shrink or collapse. Hard to see how many juice vendors or shops could survive selling unflavored and menthol. And with a much smaller customer base there wouldn't be the same level of innovation and variety of delivery devices being produced.

Maybe that's pessimistic though. The need is there, and over the centuries people have shown a lot of persistence about making their way through the regulatory obstacle course.
 

WharfRat1976

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 31, 2014
4,731
5,981
Austin, Texas
WharfRat1976, LOL, you changed your post but...

(2) A person may not distribute, sell or allow to be sold a flavored tobacco product or a flavored inhalant delivery system product in this state.

(3) The Oregon Health Authority may impose a civil penalty of up to $5,000 for each violation nof this section. All moneys collected pursuant to this subsection shall be deposited in the Oregon Health Authority Fund established under ORS 413.101 and are continuously appropriated to the authority for the purpose of carrying out the duties, functions and powers of the authority under this section.


https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2015R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB0415/Introduced
Yes, it is asking to ban all eliquid as well as all vape gear. They have overcharged the bill in the hopes of getting a lesser bill and ultimately regulation. The 2 senators believe nicotine is a tobacco derivative from the shade leaf of the tobacco plant. It does not ban flavoring. It bans all eliquid with nicotine.
 

HecticEnergy

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jan 24, 2014
2,417
1,638
TX, USA
My thoughts:
In the end it will be taxed/banned.
Personally I think the most effective tax would be on the manufactures of the liquid nicotine, though they will probably include a tax on hardware as well.
Outright banning or creating a prohibitively high tax will force these products to the black market. Enforcing a ban (either on the product it self or on the blackmarket that results) becomes very costly (War on Dr*gs anyone?) Not just for the cost of the increased police force, prosecution, and jailing of convicted offenders. The blackmarket by nature is not something the government can control.
Given the US is trying its hand at what I consider an approach to socialized medicine, things that provide an unnecessary health risk will need to be over taxed to off set the cost of the impact to the rise in medical visits (though maybe this is an arguement FOR vaping over smoking... healthier alternative and all that).
More than that "logical" approach, people in their cushy tobacco related jobs (Big Tobacco as well as ALA and such) will fight to have tighter regulation.

At the end of the day the politicians generally want to stay in office or move up. That means going with the consensus of their constituents. If a majority of your constituents aren't happy you will likely be voted out next term. This leads to less of a principled approach to governing.
My personal opinion is it should be the adults choice on what they put in their body. If you choose to smoke whatever or drink whatever, that's your choice and you will pay the price. The best approach the government should take is inform instead of trying to "protect us from ourselves." Regulation that goes to improve the quality of a product (within limits of course) isn't always a bad thing, as long as the bar to entry isn't so high that it takes a small fortune to receive/maintain approval. That said, I believe the free market approach we have now is doing a great job of self regulating - anyone with a flashlight body can make a mod, but the market is flooded with competition, so if your battery has a reputation for exploding, chances are you will not be in business long.

Final thought: Our governments (local, state, and federal), by and large, spend more than they bring in (taxes). This means they need to cut overall spending (yeah right) or increase taxes. When they start loosing significant amounts of money in one area, they need to offset that "loss." Vaporizers are a natural target to offset the loss in revenue from traditional tobacco as that is what is replacing the traditional tobacco tax base.
 

ReigntheGamer

Account closed on request
ECF Veteran
Oct 14, 2014
5,979
26,132
"(3) The Oregon Liquor Control Commission, pursuant to an agreement or otherwise, may
assist the authority with the authority’s duties under subsection (1)(a) of this section and
the enforcement of section 1 of this 2015 Act."

Sure we will help you regulate the banning of flavored e-juice so the kiddo's don't start vaping. Cotton candy flavored vodka you say? Look a squirrel. SMH :facepalm:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread