Smokeless attacked; e-cigs next?

[Grenage]

I should imagine making tobacco illegal would push a fair few people out of the country. I've been seriously considering moving away over the last few years, and something like that would be the final straw.

I don't want to live in a nanny state.

 

[e-pipeman]

Beyond the lost revenue aspect, banning things really is not a good solution for something so widespread (see prohibitionism), even if it is done to show principle and coherence. On the other hand, the kind of war of attrition waged against smokers (which infuriates me) may end up having a very similar impact, without all the bad side effects of making tobacco outright illegal. Maybe there is method in this strategy....

The prohibition point is an interesting one, and I would agree that it does not usually work. But if the Government were to ban tobacco they would prove that they really did mean their health messages all along and re-establish some credibility as being people of principle. The "war of attrition" approach by government is devious and a method of political operation that we should roundly condemn. I still believe that adult people have the right to make adult choices (electing governments, smoking tobacco etc). We elect governments to represent our views not to be dictated to by them.

 

[Schroedinger's cat]

Yes, I am infuriated by the crusaders against smoking, and by any other faction that says that everyone has to think and live like them, because it is the "right" way. However, most states are becoming nanny states now, and try to regulate every aspect of one's life -even those that claim freedom and liberty as their highest ideals. Don't get me wrong. I am a liberal, and I think that governments should provide basic services to their citizens, such as education, health care, etc. But I don't like it when anyone tells me what I can eat, drink, or do, as long as I am not endangering someone else.

So, I am all for speed limits, for example, although seat belts should be recommended and not imposed. One could argue that, where the state provides health care, not wearing a seat belt (or smoking) damages everyone else. But, then, most sports should be forbidden and eliminating cars would solve a lot of problems..... I am not sure I can explain this, but I think I gave the idea....

 

[sagicorn62]

i think someone should pose a question to all of these anti's.....do they drive automobiles or use any type of equipment with a combustion engine? i would bet on it! i understand this thread is about smokeless, but it is going to be the same group of people attacking it!

 

[Schroedinger's cat]

Unfortunately, the world is full of self-righteous people who want everyone to do just like they do.... I tend to be a libertarian about things people do, although things are sometimes complicated. For example, I get instantaneous migraines if someone wears perfume in my vicinity (over 20 years of smoking have not blunted my sense of smell, unfortunately....). I get really sick in those instances but, as long as I can, I do not say anything about it. However, smokeless tobacco is not even close to such an example. Some people claim it's gross (apparently a good enough reason for banning it), which may be the case if someone goes about spitting streams of it. Mostly, though, that does not happen. I have a colleague who uses it, and I would not have had a clue had she not told me.....

 

[TropicalBob]

You do NOT spit when using either snus or dissolvable tobacco pellets. So that is not an issue. But note that one says "children" could use these in school and the teacher wouldn't even know it. Oh my.

These are the quit-or-die brigade members. They don't like smoking. They don't like tobacco. And they don't even like candy cigarettes, bubble gum cigars or anything that reminds them of the filthy habit they so detest. They are not e-smoking's future friends ...

 

[Schroedinger's cat]

The reason NIH adduces to ban smokeless tobacco (along with all other forms of tobacco) on their Bethesda campus is that it causes "devastating cancers', and the fact that NIH is "the steward of health" and employers have to follow "our own best advice". When commenting with my (non-smoking) colleagues about the similar ban that will soon come to my workplace, they all agreed that it was excessive to forbid smoking outisde. About smokeless tobacco, they also acknowledged that it was health fascism (they agreed to my definition, that is). Some, however, argued that it was gross. None of them was aware that one of their colleagues uses it, though, and she uses the "spittable" kind. She does it very discreetly, however, and I was the only person she told (as a fellow addict, I guess). I wonder whether the next steps will be to remove all snacks sold on the property and enforce compulsory exercise... (There are way more people with severe weight problems than smokers where I work). I don't know. Frankly, I am sick and tired of this attitude.
On the other hand, I came here from Europe a smoker, and was never apologetic about it (in fact, I strongly defended my right to smoke outside and at my place, where I live by myself). I was pleasantly surprised that all my colleagues took this in stride, and some of them used to come with me on my smoking breaks (before the e-cig, which is now my main smoking device at work), and even did not mind me smoking at my place while they were visiting. I remain the only cigarette smoker most of them know, however.

 

[SMILIN]

You do NOT spit when using either snus or dissolvable tobacco pellets. So that is not an issue. But note that one says "children" could use these in school and the teacher wouldn't even know it. Oh my.

These are the quit-or-die brigade members. They don't like smoking. They don't like tobacco. And they don't even like candy cigarettes, bubble gum cigars or anything that reminds them of the filthy habit they so detest. They are not e-smoking's future friends ...

TB, I wholeheartedly agree, to many people trying to push "their" way, on others. In the name of society, sort of religious zealot .......'s, who know what's best for all. I am really getting sick and tired of it all. These E.cigs are a frikin godsend, and the ONLY substitude that has EVER worked for me in 40 years. I thank the Chinese developer of these, and look forward to being a stalwart for the continuation of these fabulous devices.

God help us if the "other side" succeeds.

 

[Grumpysanta]

Trouble is that a total ban on tobacco / nicotine could so easily lead to an outbreak of people using substances far more deadly. People requiring pacifying by use of nicotine will find something else.

I wonder what the next subject to have a go at will be, wearing animal skin shoes? or eating spicy foods?

 

[sagicorn62]

soon, we will all have to go to a drug dealer to buy our tobacco and/or nicotine.

"hey man! where can i score some tobacco!"

 

[Didge]

I do love the constant moral blackmail the 'anti brigade' try to use. One of their favourite ones is children as in this classic little snippet from TB's link in his original post:-

Payne said that Reynolds does not promote the new smokeless products as a means to cessation.
"These new products pose serious threats to the nation's health," Myers said. "They are likely to appeal to children because they are flavored and packaged like candy, are easy to conceal even in a classroom and carry the Camel brand that is already so popular with underage smokers."


Oh dear. It's pathetic.

 

[NerdyCinderella]

Boston health board may stamp out cigar bars - BostonHerald.com