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

[Robino1]

I think the problem here is that most doctors do feel that e-cigs are way better than smoking, they are waiting for enough studies to be done before they officialy go on record as saying they are a safer alterative to smoking.

But if the ANTZ get their way, the studies that ARE being done are being repressed and/or denounced as false.

 

[Anjaffm]

BTW - Here is an Good Read when it comes to Both Sides of the vaping Coin.

http://www.reddit.com/r/electronic_.../i_just_made_my_bar_vape_free_am_i_a_bad_guy/

great link!
I especially like this comment:

That's because we've been trained well to understand that we have no rights, only granted privileges. This understanding is often accompanied by an unswerving compulsion to never upset the herd. Unfortunately, what is not understood so well is the fact that the herd actively seeks reasons to be upset if no real reasons are provided.

Thank you very much for showing this to us. What a lovely surprise

 

[DrillRX]

I keep hearing 'decency' in this thread. I hear this term used a lot in this forum whenever this topic comes up. I want to clarify what that is, because to me what is decent may not be decent to you. So I have a few questions about it. Honestly, I am not trying to flame anyone, I just want to understand the perspective/meaning intended from a word that has multiple meanings for different people, and the implications of its use.

Does it mean that if your definition of 'decency' is not met, then those not meeting it are indecent people, or are their actions indecent?
Are the youths smoking near the movie theater entrance indecent?
Am I indecent because I vape in the indoor common area of a large, two-story mall? I vaped openly but not flamboyantly. I took in one large draw, held it for a while (a bit longer than usual) and breathed out. I did so because I did not wish to take three or four puffs while walking down the middle of the mall. I was not trying to "blow a huge cloud", but I was not trying to hide it either. Does my choice make me less 'decent'?

Now your just being deliberately obtuse.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Iffy]

DC et al,

Gonna have to deep six dis thread. 'Nuff's nuff!

Cat chasing tail, cuttin' off nose and all da other crap...

Just a few observations 'fore I leave ya'll to wrestle and wallow in da vapin' muds:

- Follow da money
- Not all vapin' activists blow voluminous clouds vapor in every ones' faces
- Not all vapin' pacifists live in closets/basements/under bridges
- We should promote vapin' to da unknowing, and especially da media
- Educate whenever possible via civiized means
- Be bold, brave and respectful!

I'll continue to try and garner more v-verts ('bout 50 thus far) by being grateful I quit da 'bakky and letting folk approach me due to my vapin' visibility. I'll also continue to support all those that are willing to fight for the right to improve their health. As for the others... <sigh>

 

[bcalvanese]

But if the ANTZ get their way, the studies that ARE being done are being repressed and/or denounced as false.

I know it sucks, but people that complain about the negative don't need proof, and have nothing to risk, and bad news (true or not) travels faster than good news.

I think one day all the necessary studies will be done then everyone will know the facts. If and when that day comes and if it is found that vaping is a safe alternative to smoking, the medical community will go on the record to support it.

Just my hope anyway...

 

[RosaJ]

What is really surprising to me is that more and more of the medical community aren't getting on board with e-cigs being a viable alternative and safer than smoking. Yet they are not being vocal? If they would stand up and be counted..... It seems as only those that are against it are getting the press. Yet time and time again I hear, from members here, that their doctor has either approved, recommended, or has seen the improvement of their patients in regards to e-cigs.

If we could somehow get those pro e-cig doctors to be counted..... Wishful thinking, I'm sure...

I believe it's because of the fear of malpractice lawsuits.

 

[SmellYaLaterCigs]

All good Points.

But Business Owners don't like having the Cops coming to their place of Business every week. And neither do the other Paying Customers.

The point is I can see problems with Some, less Respectful - More Militant, vapers if e-Cigarette use is Purely left up to Individual Vaper's / Business Owners.

---

BTW - Do you think it is OK to use an e-Cigarette while Pumping Gas at a Gas Station?

Sure, some people will attempt to circumvent the rule and each business will deal with them as they see fit - most likely "sir, you need to take that outside". Creating a law banning them in public places would change absolutely nothing. If you go to a restaurant tonight and start vaping, the owner is already allowed to tell you to stop or allowed to ask you to leave. If you don't comply he's also allowed to call the cops because you're breaking the policies of that establishment (though as you pointed out, that would be a last resort, law or not). The cops may choose not to arrest you but they're definitely going to escort you off the property. So what extra ability would the law give the restaurant owner?

The only thing creating a law against vaping in public would accomplish is to deny businesses the option of allowing vaping. Why shouldn't private businesses be allowed to say "we welcome vapors"? There is no reason to deny that option until we discover vaping is harmful, until that point people should be allowed to decide on their own if they want to be around it or not.

 

[zoiDman]

Sure, some people will attempt to circumvent the rule and each business will deal with them as they see fit - most likely "sir, you need to take that outside". Creating a law banning them in public places would change absolutely nothing. If you go to a restaurant tonight and start vaping, the owner is already allowed to tell you to stop or allowed to ask you to leave. If you don't comply he's also allowed to call the cops because you're breaking the policies of that establishment (though as you pointed out, that would be a last resort, law or not). The cops may choose not to arrest you but they're definitely going to escort you off the property. So what extra ability would the law give the restaurant owner?

The only thing creating a law against vaping in public would accomplish is to deny businesses the option of allowing vaping. Why shouldn't private businesses be allowed to say "we welcome vapors"? There is no reason to deny that option until we discover vaping is harmful, until that point people should be allowed to decide on their own if they want to be around it or not.

Unfortunately, without the Possibility of Punishment, Rules have Little Meaning. Anyone who has Raised Children knows that.

Where as there are Definitely to Two Sides to a Ban, does the possible Inability of those who want there to be No Vaping Allowed in their establishment Outweigh those who would like vaping to be Allowed?

Tough Call. Because there is going to be One Side who Doesn't like the Outcome.

BTW - What is your Position on the Larger Issue of Vaping in Enclosed spaces in the Workplace? It would seem that Consumers have a Choice where they Frequent. But the Workplace brings up More Unique Challenges.

Do you think a Company has the "Right" to Allow or Dis-Allow Vaping in Enclosed Spaces?

 

[p.opus]

The same answer I use on every thread like this that I post on .. "Until concrete regulations are in place as to the exact where and when a PV can be used, I use what I consider common sense .. I'm not going to puff up at a Church, at a Theater, at a Hospital, I live in a State that initiated a State wide public ban for indoor areas quite some time ago and I am not so tethered to my PV that I can't put it down when rational thinking says you should put it down.. "

I fight regularly .. but my fight is thru teaching the uninformed .. those that want to "fight" may want to consider giving a presentation to any number of your local Civic organizations such as the Kiwanis Club and others .. these folks are always looking for a speaker ...

Happy .. ??

If you use common sense, then why does your "common sense" equate vaping to smoking. That is what is at the core of the issue.

Vaping is to smoking as drinking water is to drinking vodka. (ESPECIALLY IF YOU ARE VAPING ZERO NIC JUICE)

Both liquids are clear, both liquids are put into a glass, and both liquids are consumed by drinking. However that's where the simularities end.

How can we convince the uninformed that vaping is NOT smoking if we can't convince ourselves?

When you divorce vaping from smoking then you begin to see how all ridiculous all the objections sound.

Vape on it's own is no different than perfume, anti-perspirant, cologne, air freshener. etc. In fact many of the "air fresheners" we spray around our house consist of hazardous chemicals by the score. Take a toke of Lysol and tell me how you feel. Yet the public use of these products go without saying. So why is vape so special? Because it is primarily used by "ex smokers" or smokers trying to quit.

Vaping is stygmatized not because what it is, but because of who WE ARE (or WERE).

When we as vapers continue to treat vaping as the same as smoking, they only further the false perception that vaping is somehow equivalent to smoking.

I am all for being "considerate" and "decent". I really wish the e-cig community would stop using terms like "clean smoke" and "smoke anywhere". They only serve to reinforce the perception that vaping equals smoking.

That is the message that needs to be driven home. Vaping is not smoking. Vapers don't smoke and e-cigarettes are not cigarettes. If "we the people" want to establish standards of courtesy and manners regarding vaping, I don't have a problem with that. Just so long as those standards are not based on the presumption that vaping and smoking ought to somehow be treated the same.

If we are going to institute bans on vaping simply because it can be confused with smoking or looks like smoking, then we should also ban the sale of water to minors (looks like vodka), ban the drinking of water except where alcohol can be consumed (to avoid confusion in the enforcement of alcohol restrictions). And discourage people from drinking water because it can be a gateway to drinking alcohol.

If this sounds ludicrous to you, it should. The same way that bans on vaping are ludicrous for the very same reasons.

 

[wpalex1975]

Its all about the MONEY. Vapers are cutting into Big Tobacco's profits. What are the punishments for the bans if caught? A fine usually. The governments are broke, they need money. The Pharma companies need money too. They care less about ones health unless it has dollar signs attached to it. Remember there are no cures, just Treatment of ailments. Illinois has a new law that will fine people that throw their butts on the ground. Lunacy i say, since Illinois already has Littering laws on the books. We all are grown up and dont need baby sitters or micro-managers running our lives.

Another aspect of the bans are they don't want the Children seeing it. Its for the children's safety.......i could ramble on and on.

 

[boog]

it says right in the header that this is the General E-Smoking Discussion forum

 

[zoiDman]

...

When we as vapers continue to treat vaping as the same as smoking, they only further the false perception that vaping is somehow equivalent to smoking.

...

You kinda make it sound like all the Vaping Community needs to do is to Go Outside and Vaping in front of Every Person they meet and Bing Bango, Problem Solved.

I'm Afraid that it Isn't that Simple.

I think at the current rate we are going, that in a few years when the Majority of Population with be Half Way Knowledgeable regarding e-Cigarettes.

But Much will have Changed by then.

 

[quiter]

If you use common sense, then why does your "common sense" equate vaping to smoking. That is what is at the core of the issue.

Vaping is to smoking as drinking water is to drinking vodka. (ESPECIALLY IF YOU ARE VAPING ZERO NIC JUICE)

Both liquids are clear, both liquids are put into a glass, and both liquids are consumed by drinking. However that's where the simularities end.

How can we convince the uninformed that vaping is NOT smoking if we can't convince ourselves?

When you divorce vaping from smoking then you begin to see how all ridiculous all the objections sound.

Vape on it's own is no different than perfume, anti-perspirant, cologne, air freshener. etc. In fact many of the "air fresheners" we spray around our house consist of hazardous chemicals by the score. Take a toke of Lysol and tell me how you feel. Yet the public use of these products go without saying. So why is vape so special? Because it is primarily used by "ex smokers" or smokers trying to quit.

Vaping is stygmatized not because what it is, but because of who WE ARE (or WERE).

When we as vapers continue to treat vaping as the same as smoking, they only further the false perception that vaping is somehow equivalent to smoking.

I am all for being "considerate" and "decent". I really wish the e-cig community would stop using terms like "clean smoke" and "smoke anywhere". They only serve to reinforce the perception that vaping equals smoking.

That is the message that needs to be driven home. Vaping is not smoking. Vapers don't smoke and e-cigarettes are not cigarettes. If "we the people" want to establish standards of courtesy and manners regarding vaping, I don't have a problem with that. Just so long as those standards are not based on the presumption that vaping and smoking ought to somehow be treated the same.

If we are going to institute bans on vaping simply because it can be confused with smoking or looks like smoking, then we should also ban the sale of water to minors (looks like vodka), ban the drinking of water except where alcohol can be consumed (to avoid confusion in the enforcement of alcohol restrictions). And discourage people from drinking water because it can be a gateway to drinking alcohol.

If this sounds ludicrous to you, it should. The same way that bans on vaping are ludicrous for the very same reasons.

Yet we have bans on toy guns in schools whether they look like guns or not. Candy cigarettes are even banned in some places. They tried to ban large soda drinks for goodness sakes. The war on a plant is another one. Laws do not have to be based on reality at all. They are based on perception. So I get what you are saying. Change people's perceptions and the battle is won. But I honestly don't think that will ever happen. People need to change how they think period.

They need to realize that LIBERTY itself is worth fighting for.

I know it's silly but fighting for the right to sell candy cigarettes is worth fighting for and so is fighting to be allowed to smoke in bars if the owners want it. But far too many people from all walks of life have no problem at all asking people to give up their Liberty if we don't see that specific thing as worth fighting for. If we don't believe in equal rights and liberties for everyone we can't expect it for ourselves.

They are already passing laws that state that vaping should be considered the same as smoking and people will go along with it. Why? Because they don't care about your liberties and unless you care about their liberty to do something that they care for why should they care about your's? Outside of libertarians I find very few people in this country who really care about Liberty for all. I see people every single day from the Right and the Left who have no problem at all curtailing the liberty of others. That is the problem and until that changes you can try and convince people until you are blue in the face that vaping isn't smoking but you might as well be banging your head against a wall.

One Nation, indivisible with Liberty and Justice for all? Don't make me laugh. Those are nothing more than quaint, outdated, pretty words for the vast majority of Americans. People have unfortunately decided that Liberty and Justice are mutually exclusive properties. Why? Because they believe that Justice means being able to tell others what to do with their own bodies and with their own property. The left does it based on the "Social Contract" and the Right all too often does it in the name of "god". Both of them Left and Right are attempting to enforce their ideas of morality by the use of the Government's monopoly on the use of Force.

 

[DC2]

I believe it's because of the fear of malpractice lawsuits.

This.

Any doctor that recommends vaping to a patient is taking a risk.
And it's a risk they would not take unless they were certain there is no harm to come from vaping.

It's called Standard of Care...
Standard of care - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[SmellYaLaterCigs]

Unfortunately, without the Possibility of Punishment, Rules have Little Meaning. Anyone who has Raised Children knows that.

Where as there are Definitely to Two Sides to a Ban, does the possible Inability of those who want there to be No Vaping Allowed in their establishment Outweigh those who would like vaping to be Allowed?

Tough Call. Because there is going to be One Side who Doesn't like the Outcome.

BTW - What is your Position on the Larger Issue of Vaping in Enclosed spaces in the Workplace? It would seem that Consumers have a Choice where they Frequent. But the Workplace brings up More Unique Challenges.

Do you think a Company has the "Right" to Allow or Dis-Allow Vaping in Enclosed Spaces?

You obviously don't understand how the law works currently. There is already a punishable by law ban on ecigs in private establishments if those establishments choose there to be (in the United States).

As far as vaping in the workplace, yes, I feel each employer should be able to decide if they want to allow it or not. The government isn't our parents, we are adults and we can regulate ourselves.

My general mantra is, I don't care what you do as long as it doesn't hurt someone else. Our current data shows ecigs aren't harmful. If that changes down the road i'll be glad to reevaluate my opinion. Otherwise vaping is only an annoyance to other people, which is a legitimate gripe, but it certainly doesn't require an outright ban to solve the issue. People can figure this one out on their own.

 

[p.opus]

This.

Any doctor that recommends vaping to a patient is taking a risk.
And it's a risk they would not take unless they were certain there is no harm to come from vaping.

It's called Standard of Care...
Standard of care - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yeah.....That's why they are more than ok to prescribe you Wellbutrin or Chantrix

Wellbutrin Side Effects in Detail - Drugs.com
Chantix Side Effects in Detail - Drugs.com

Standard of Care my ...!!!! The reason they don't do it is that Innokin and Kangertech are not paying for the doctors to go on a 1 week paid "symposium" in Las Vegas or Palm Springs on the benefits of "vaping as a cessation method"

 

[p.opus]

Yet we have bans on toy guns in schools whether they look like guns or not. Candy cigarettes are even banned in some places. They tried to ban large soda drinks for goodness sakes. The war on a plant is another one. Laws do not have to be based on reality at all. They are based on perception. So I get what you are saying. Change people's perceptions and the battle is won. But I honestly don't think that will ever happen. People need to change how they think period.

They need to realize that LIBERTY itself is worth fighting for.

I know it's silly but fighting for the right to sell candy cigarettes is worth fighting for and so is fighting to be allowed to smoke in bars if the owners want it. But far too many people from all walks of life have no problem at all asking people to give up their Liberty if we don't see that specific thing as worth fighting for. If we don't believe in equal rights and liberties for everyone we can't expect it for ourselves.

They are already passing laws that state that vaping should be considered the same as smoking and people will go along with it. Why? Because they don't care about your liberties and unless you care about their liberty to do something that they care for why should they care about your's? Outside of libertarians I find very few people in this country who really care about Liberty for all. I see people every single day from the Right and the Left who have no problem at all curtailing the liberty of others. That is the problem and until that changes you can try and convince people until you are blue in the face that vaping isn't smoking but you might as well be banging your head against a wall.

One Nation, indivisible with Liberty and Justice for all? Don't make me laugh. Those are nothing more than quaint, outdated, pretty words for the vast majority of Americans. People have unfortunately decided that Liberty and Justice are mutually exclusive properties. Why? Because they believe that Justice means being able to tell others what to do with their own bodies and with their own property. The left does it based on the "Social Contract" and the Right all too often does it in the name of "god". Both of them Left and Right are attempting to enforce their ideas of morality by the use of the Government's monopoly on the use of Force.

preach it....

 

[Jarbs]

all of these people exhaling water vapor with every breath!! will someone think of the children?!?!?!

 

[EddardinWinter]

Now your just being deliberately obtuse.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Who is being obtuse?

My questions had already been mocked pages ago. Nobody wants to answer them, fine, now you resurrect them just to call me stupid.
Thanks.



Tapped out

 

[generic mutant]

...
If we are going to institute bans on vaping simply because it can be confused with smoking or looks like smoking, then we should also ban the sale of water to minors (looks like vodka), ban the drinking of water except where alcohol can be consumed (to avoid confusion in the enforcement of alcohol restrictions). And discourage people from drinking water because it can be a gateway to drinking alcohol.

If this sounds ludicrous to you, it should. The same way that bans on vaping are ludicrous for the very same reasons.

The difference being that water was not developed specifically to mimic, and appeal to users of, vodka.

-edit: further, to aid people in maintaining their vodka addiction. There are dual-users who vape only where they can't smoke. Might not be how most of us, vaping enthusiasts, use them, but they are a major factor to those designing the legislation.