Question for those who think we should not vape where we can not smoke...

[p.opus]

All of this talk of decency and what is appropriate and not appropriate dilutes the central issue at hand.

vaping is not smoking

When you boil it all down, that is the bottom line. As with any behavior, a person should use common sense and be considerate to their fellow man. I personally hate when people smack their gum. But I don't think there should be laws against it, nor should there be ban's against public "gum smacking". I don't like when people have loud cell phone conversations next to me at a restaurant, but I don't favor that cell phone users have to step outside to talk on the cell phone.

The bottom line is that there is no way to "legislate" politeness. Laws are created to protect from harm, not to protect our emotions.

When considering "laws" against vaping one thing must be remembered: Vaping is not smoking

If you complain because you see a slight puff of vapor exit my mouth while I am enjoying my after dinner coffee?
Vaping is not smoking

If you have want me to vape only in areas where smoking is allowed?
Vaping is not smoking

If you want to ban vaping in public places because smoking is banned?
Vaping is not smoking

If you desire to legislate vaping products the same way you do tobacco?
Vaping is not smoking

If you desire to tax vaping products like you do tobacco?
Vaping is not smoking

Vaping is it's own activity. It has it's own rules regarding appropriateness and courtesy. I believe in setting boundaries, just as other forms of public behavior. But in setting those boundaries, make sure your basis for those boundaries are not based on the boundaries you set for smoking because........

Vaping is not smoking

 

[EddardinWinter]

All of this talk of decency and what is appropriate and not appropriate dilutes the central issue at hand.

Vaping is not smoking

When you boil it all down, that is the bottom line. As with any behavior, a person should use common sense and be considerate to their fellow man. I personally hate when people smack their gum. But I don't think there should be laws against it, nor should there be ban's against public "gum smacking". I don't like when people have loud cell phone conversations next to me at a restaurant, but I don't favor that cell phone users have to step outside to talk on the cell phone.

The bottom line is that there is no way to "legislate" politeness. Laws are created to protect from harm, not to protect our emotions.

When considering "laws" against vaping one thing must be remembered: Vaping is not smoking

If you complain because you see a slight puff of vapor exit my mouth while I am enjoying my after dinner coffee?
Vaping is not smoking

If you have want me to vape only in areas where smoking is allowed?
Vaping is not smoking

If you want to ban vaping in public places because smoking is banned?
Vaping is not smoking

If you desire to legislate vaping products the same way you do tobacco?
Vaping is not smoking

If you desire to tax vaping products like you do tobacco?
Vaping is not smoking

Vaping is it's own activity. It has it's own rules regarding appropriateness and courtesy. I believe in setting boundaries, just as other forms of public behavior. But in setting those boundaries, make sure your basis for those boundaries are not based on the boundaries you set for smoking because........

Vaping is not smoking

I was trying to make a point about the nebulous nature of that word.

In retrospect, it was probably not useful for the thread or the discussion herein.

 

[edyle]

I step outside to vape during work because my brain was hardwired to combine smoking and a break away from my office together. When a strong cigarette craving hits, I found that it isn't the cigarette I necessarily want, it's the break and the excuse to step out that I want. So, I often vape with the smokers who smoke. I've converted a couple of smokers this way actually. There is absolutely nothing political about it, and I don't see why where EVERYONE vapes needs to be a political statement of some kind. When I do vape inside, I stealth vape. Again, there's no political statement I'm making. I'm not trying to thumb my nose at Bloomberg and his cronies by vaping indoors, nor am I ashamed of vaping. I stealth vape because my boss, a former smoker himself, told me to. There is no company policy on vaping at any of our centers and we both agree there shouldn't be one for now. I'm not the only one in the office who vapes, and in the interest of those clients who vape, it would be best that there is no reason to create a company policy on vaping.

Regardless of being what I guess would be called a little mousy vaper, I have written, and will continue to write to my representatives about lifting the ban on vaping in NYC. I have attended and will continue to attend council meetings. I have and will continue to call my representatives. Like it or not, accept it or not, but this mousy vaper is, indeed, on your politcal side regarding vaping and yes, smoking outdoors at beaches and parks. Smoking in court houses, hospitals and other public buildings is another matter and in my mind, a completely separate debate regarding a completely separate activity that has completely separate consequences then vaping does. As such, I don't quite understand the desire to get into bed with Big Tobacco and their paid scientists by including the smoking ban on analogs in our battle.

Me too; when I switched to a cigalike, I continued to step outside for a 'smoke'; sometimes when I am inside and I feel I could do with a pull on a cig but don't really want to take a five minute break, I just take a pull on the ecig; not particualarly stealthy, not particularly obvious either.

 

[DC2]

In retrospect, it was probably not useful for the thread or the discussion herein.

I'd say this is as good a place as any for that discussion, as it seems quite relevant.

It appears that most people who believe we shouldn't vape we we aren't aloud to smoke generally mean indoors.
(Thank God most appear to believe that concept should not apply outdoors for the most part)

One common reason is the most obvious, which is of respecting the rights of property owners.

But the other reasons all seem to boil down to ideas of common sense, respect for others, and decency.
I have no doubt the wide range of views can be distilled into differences of opinion on what those words mean to each of us.

 

[Uncle Willie]

Are you aware that smoking restrictions are getting increasingly draconian?
I can only imagine this fact has at some point come to your attention.

Sometimes it seems that perhaps some of you don't mind or don't care.
I hope I'm wrong, but as I said, it does sometimes seem that way.


So, do you also support the idea of not being able to vape in public parks and on public beaches?
The Real Motivation Behind Park And Beach Smoking Bans - Forbes



How about bans that include entire college campuses, including the parking lot in your own car?
Or entire hospital campuses, including the parking lot in your own car?


Or are you willing to concede those injustices as well?


And if so, does that include also these restrictions?
Or is that where you will finally draw a line?

Smoke-Free Multi-Unit Housing
Additional Resources to Help You Implement Smokefree Housing Policies | ChangeLab Solutions
How Landlords Can Prohibit Smoking in Rental Housing | ChangeLab Solutions
How to Make a Condo Complex Smokefree | ChangeLab Solutions
Creating Smokefree Policies for Affordable Housing in California | ChangeLab Solutions


This is not a rhetorical question.

I really want to know where those of you who ascribe to this "do not vape where you can not smoke" philosophy stand on these questions.
And more importantly, I want to know if you are prepared to fight against the entire idea of equating vaping to smoking.

While you state this is not a rhetorical question, the post in effect, is a loaded question .. beginning with the word Draconian ..

And, if you really want a direct answer .. here's mine .. there are many worthwhile battles that need to be fought these days, but if I'm going to expend my time and effort, I'm pretty sure I'd pick working for a food bank, homeless shelter .. etc over a battle that essentially is silly as it relates to where I can use or not use a PV .. society itself will at some point, dictate that use .. and the odds of the 80% non-using Public becoming "converts" are slim to none and Slim just left town ..

And, yes, I'm an addict to the nic .. as are we all unless you're using zero ..

IOW, if the miles of text that has been feverishly and passionately added to ECF over the years over this beaten to death topic were .. well, I think you get the picture ..

 

[Orb Skewer]

While you state this is not a rhetorical question, the post in effect, is a loaded question .. beginning with the word Draconian ..

And, if you really want a direct answer .. here's mine .. there are many worthwhile battles that need to be fought these days, but if I'm going to expend my time and effort, I'm pretty sure I'd pick working for a food bank, homeless shelter .. etc over a battle that essentially is silly as it relates to where I can use or not use a PV .. society itself will at some point, dictate that use .. and the odds of the 80% non-using Public becoming "converts" are slim to none and Slim just left town ..

And, yes, I'm an addict to the nic .. as are we all unless you're using zero ..

IOW, if the miles of text that has been feverishly and passionately added to ECF over the years over this beaten to death topic were .. well, I think you get the picture ..

So, what your saying Willie is, that it's absolutely pointless you taking part in any thread/discussion about where you can or can't vape ?

 

[EddardinWinter]

I'd say this is as good a place as any for that discussion, as it seems quite relevant.

It appears that most people who believe we shouldn't vape we we aren't aloud to smoke generally mean indoors.
(Thank God most appear to believe that concept should not apply outdoors for the most part)

One common reason is the most obvious, which is of respecting the rights of property owners.

But the other reasons all seem to boil down to ideas of common sense, respect for others, and decency.
I have no doubt the wide range of views can be distilled into differences of opinion on what those words mean to each of us.

It seems that the question was met with condescension and disdain. Perhaps you can find a better way to get feedback on what I felt was a fair question. It seems that there is a significant segment of the ECF population that is eager to declare there is no use to the thread but cannot resist posting in it.

Now, the nicotine addict issue is one I must address.

Addiction is the continued repetition of a behavior despite adverse consequences, or a neurological impairment leading to such behaviors. I have a dependence on nicotine, it was what my doctor and I have come up with to treat my ADHD. I would appreciate it if my use of nicotine was not automatically deemed addiction. I could easily quit using it, if I were willing to take Adderal or Ritalin. I am using nicotine because it has equal results with fewer side effects than a Dextroamphetamine/Amphetamine cocktail.

So please, would the armchair and amateur ECF doctors and psychologists give it a rest?

 

[Myrany]

Now, the nicotine addict issue is one I must address.

Addiction is the continued repetition of a behavior despite adverse consequences, or a neurological impairment leading to such behaviors. I have a dependence on nicotine, it was what my doctor and I have come up with to treat my ADHD. I would appreciate it if my use of nicotine was not automatically deemed addiction. I could easily quit using it, if I were willing to take Adderal or Ritalin. I am using nicotine because it has equal results with fewer side effects than a Dextroamphetamine/Amphetamine cocktail.

So please, would the armchair and amateur ECF doctors and psychologists give it a rest?

Exactly my friend.

I vape 0 nic 99% of the time. I am dependent on nic to control my occasional bouts with anxiety and depression (which btw I have had all my life, even before smoking entered it). I would far rather vape eliquid with nic in it for a day every other month or so than live my life on antidepressants daily.

I think I can pretty safely say I am no longer a nic addict.

 

[Anjaffm]

All of this talk of decency and what is appropriate and not appropriate dilutes the central issue at hand.

Vaping is not smoking

When you boil it all down, that is the bottom line. As with any behavior, a person should use common sense and be considerate to their fellow man. I personally hate when people smack their gum. But I don't think there should be laws against it, nor should there be ban's against public "gum smacking". I don't like when people have loud cell phone conversations next to me at a restaurant, but I don't favor that cell phone users have to step outside to talk on the cell phone.

The bottom line is that there is no way to "legislate" politeness. Laws are created to protect from harm, not to protect our emotions.

When considering "laws" against vaping one thing must be remembered: Vaping is not smoking

If you complain because you see a slight puff of vapor exit my mouth while I am enjoying my after dinner coffee?
Vaping is not smoking

If you have want me to vape only in areas where smoking is allowed?
Vaping is not smoking

If you want to ban vaping in public places because smoking is banned?
Vaping is not smoking

If you desire to legislate vaping products the same way you do tobacco?
Vaping is not smoking

If you desire to tax vaping products like you do tobacco?
Vaping is not smoking

Vaping is it's own activity. It has it's own rules regarding appropriateness and courtesy. I believe in setting boundaries, just as other forms of public behavior. But in setting those boundaries, make sure your basis for those boundaries are not based on the boundaries you set for smoking because........

Vaping is not smoking

Wonderful, dear, wonderful
You hit the nail right on the head.

 

[DC2]

While you state this is not a rhetorical question, the post in effect, is a loaded question ..

You think it is a loaded question.
I think people who think it is a loaded question need to wake up.

And, yes, I'm an addict to the nic .. as are we all unless you're using zero ..

Forget for a moment that I completely disagree...
I don't really see how that is relevant to the conversation.

 

[zoiDman]

What is somewhat Ironic about these threads, and something that Many Members Don't think about, is that this is Exactly how Many e-Cigarette Use Policies are Formulated/Decided.

The Powers that be gather and the Pro's and Con's are weighed. General and Individual Scenarios are Discussed. Data is Presented and Data is Argued over. And Sides are Formed and Lines are Drawn.

But Sooner or Later someone who either has a Cooler Head, or is just Sick of the Entire Process, says...

"Look Folks, We can do this Forever and Still Never come to a Solution that Everyone Agrees with. I say we put it to a Simple Up/Down Vote.

Do we Ban e-Cigarette Use where Smoking is Not Allowed?

Do we Not Ban e-Cigarette Use where Smoking is Not Allowed?

I say we Call a Vote."

And of Course those For a Ban Vote Yes. And those Against it Vote No. But what is Interesting is that the People in the Middle, those who have Mixed Feeling and can see Both Sides, they Mostly Vote for the Ban.

 

[EddardinWinter]

Exactly my friend.

I vape 0 nic 99% of the time. I am dependent on nic to control my occasional bouts with anxiety and depression (which btw I have had all my life, even before smoking entered it). I would far rather vape eliquid with nic in it for a day every other month or so than live my life on antidepressants daily.

I think I can pretty safely say I am no longer a nic addict.

I agree that you are not. However, I would not diagnose you as such without:

*Proper qualifications
*Being employed by you (or others) to diagnose said condition AND having given you care in this regard
*Being an expert in the field of addiction and have spent the time and effort to reach the conclusion

Looks like you and I just don't understand this issue as well as others. I guess we are just slow. At least I am in good company.

 

[Anjaffm]

oh...

IOW, if the miles of text that has been feverishly and passionately added to ECF over the years over this beaten to death topic were .. ..

were..what?
Were utilized to defend the constitutional rights of citizens of sovereign and democratic countries against an attempted breach of precisely those constitutions and the curtailment of precisely those rights? By a handful of people who are not even IN those sovereign and democratic countries?

They are, sweetpea, they are....

edit:
@zoidman:
something to read - about the bans that you mentioned. And about the motivation of those who vote in favor of such bans.
If you wish to read a text. If you do not wish, then of course you need not read anything.
http://watchdog.org/119734/bribery-grants-e-cigs-brick-in-the-wall/

As before.. I am not holding my breath.

 

[Myrany]

I agree that you are not. However, I would not diagnose you as such without:

*Proper qualifications
*Being employed by you (or others) to diagnose said condition AND having given you care in this regard
*Being an expert in the field of addiction and have spent the time and effort to reach the conclusion

Looks like you and I just don't understand this issue as well as others. I guess we are just slow. At least I am in good company.

/me shifts kitty and parks next to the lion

 

[Orb Skewer]

What is somewhat Ironic about these threads, and something that Many Members Don't think about, is that this is Exactly how Many e-Cigarette Use Policies are Formulated/Decided.

The Powers that be gather and the Pro's and Con's are weighed. General and Individual Scenarios are Discussed. Data is Presented and Data is Argued over. And Sides are Formed and Lines are Drawn.

But Sooner or Later someone who either has a Cooler Head, or is just Sick of the Entire Process, says...

"Look Folks, We can do this Forever and Still Never come to a Solution that Everyone Agrees with. I say we put it to a Simple Up/Down Vote.

Do we Ban e-Cigarette Use where Smoking is Not Allowed?

Do we Not Ban e-Cigarette Use where Smoking is Not Allowed?

I say we Call a Vote."

And of Course those For a Ban Vote Yes. And those Against it Vote No. But what is Interesting is that the People in the Middle, those who have Mixed Feeling and can see Both Sides, they Mostly Vote for the Ban.

Do they, and how would anyone ever know this ?
They abstain Zoidy-it's called abstention-but you raise a good point about voting, would you like to count all the 'likes' in this thread and see where the consensus lies ?

 

[DC2]

And of Course those For a Ban Vote Yes. And those Against it Vote No. But what is Interesting is that the People in the Middle, those who have Mixed Feeling and can see Both Sides, they Mostly Vote for the Ban.

My observation is that in the early days we vapers were defeating almost every vaping ban.
And we were doing so because we had passion and conviction and a willingness to show up and be heard.

Now it appears we are losing on a much more consistent basis, and I believe I know exactly why...
First of all they are trying to sneak these by now, so we don't know about them and can't organize opposition.

But when they can not sneak them by, the ANTZ are putting forth far more effort than they used to.
And more importantly, they are matching our passion and conviction, only they are doing it with lies and misinformation.

 

[Uncle Willie]

So, what your saying Willie is, that it's absolutely pointless you taking part in any thread/discussion about where you can or can't vape ?

I promise to not read into posts you conjure and fabricate what is not there .. I believe DC asked what he termed a "question" .. I gave my answer .. very clearly ..

 

[zoiDman]

Do they, and how would anyone ever know this ?
They abstain Zoidy-it's called abstention-but you raise a good point about voting, would you like to count all the 'likes' in this thread and see where the consensus lies ?

I have been involved in a Few e-Cigarette Use Policy making processes.

And no, they Don't abstain if it means that a Policy will not be formed.

 

[zoiDman]

My observation is that in the early days we vapers were defeating almost every vaping ban.
And we were doing so because we had passion and conviction and a willingness to show up and be heard.

Now it appears we are losing on a much more consistent basis, and I believe I know exactly why...
First of all they are trying to sneak these by now, do we don't know about them and can't organize opposition.

But when they can not sneak them by, the ANTZ are putting forth far more effort than they used to.
And more importantly, they are matching or passion and conviction, only they are doing it with lies and misinformation.

It Isn't us DC. It's Everyone. All People. On All but the Most Cut n' Dried Topics.

You see, we a Vaping community can not come to a consensus as to e-Cigarette Use Policy. Why should a Mixture of Smoker's, Non-Smoker's, Ex Smoker's, Vaper's, Non-Vapor's and Everything in-between be able to agree on things?

Heck, we can't even agree if we should be able to Vape when we are Pumping Gas at the Gas Station. LOL

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/law-e-cigarette/502253-vaping-gas-station.html#post11697384

Don't feel bad. And that we should somehow be able to Band Together and be United on When and Where People should be Allowed/Not-Allowed to Vape.

The Vaping Community is Too Vast Spanning Too Many Groups of Different People in Different Areas across the USA.

One Size just Doesn't Fit All.

 

[Anjaffm]

Yooohooo zoidman *waves hands in air*
Would you like to read something on these bans instead of blaming the vicitims?
Few dare call it bribery: OK grants, e-cigs, and another brick in the wall « Watchdog.org

The text is not long. It is not difficult. I promise

And I am so happy that I did not hold my breath before