SO - What is going to happen ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rossum

Eleutheromaniac
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 14, 2013
16,081
105,222
SE PA
They better allow vaping wherever we end up or I’ll be ...... for eternity.
My wife has been instructed to bury me with one of my stainless steel or titanium mechs and a liter of nic base.
 
Last edited:

Rossum

Eleutheromaniac
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 14, 2013
16,081
105,222
SE PA
We are all responsible, we pushed for it, we raised so much ruckus 'they' had no choice but to come up with the MSA.
Please elaborate on this.

I don't know about you, but I certainly didn't push for anything with regard to smoking that would have caused them to "come up with the MSA". It has always been my opinion that lawsuits from anyone who started to smoke after the original Surgeon General's report (1964?) should have been thrown out. "You knew (or should have known) it was dangerous, but you started anyway; now the consequences are all yours to bear."
 

Rossum

Eleutheromaniac
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 14, 2013
16,081
105,222
SE PA
I understand what their idiotic reasoning is behind it. I still wonder if there is a way to legally challenge it. Then another question is who would challenge it and where would the money come from. I would be willing to donate for such a challenge. IMHO the FDA has severely overreached here but that's no suprise.
I've never understood how a government agency can force a manufacturer to lie.

Nope, zero nic juice does not contain nicotine, and neither does a brand-new "delivery device".
 

DavidOck

ECF Guru
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Jan 3, 2013
19,957
169,793
Halfway to Paradise, WA
Man. I am an older person. I haven't posted on this forum in ages. But today, I tried four of my usual online shops to replace a bit of hardware and was told nope. We can't ship to you, you is in Arkansas.

Can you ship to an out of State friend, and have them reship to you? In a plain brown wrapper? :lol:
 

VapingMattCA

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Feb 27, 2010
298
371
West Palm Beach, FL
Man. I am an older person. I haven't posted on this forum in ages. But today, I tried four of my usual online shops to replace a bit of hardware and was told nope. We can't ship to you, you is in Arkansas.

Bet you could order from Fasttech. Doubt China cares or knows about state vape laws and they have a discount code later this week of 15%. I have ordered from them many times and have never had any problems.
 

CMD-Ky

Highly Esteemed Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Sep 15, 2013
5,321
42,394
KY
... It has always been my opinion that lawsuits from anyone who started to smoke after the original Surgeon General's report (1964?) should have been thrown out. "You knew (or should have known) it was dangerous, but you started anyway; now the consequences are all yours to bear."

I agree. The societal concept of personal responsibility and its legal equivalent, assumption of risk, are dying concepts.
 

DeloresRose

Vaping Master
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 25, 2014
8,601
63,044
toledo ohio
I've never understood how a government agency can force a manufacturer to lie.

Nope, zero nic juice does not contain nicotine, and neither does a brand-new "delivery device".
Exactly. Like labeling my car ‘produce’ because I use it to bring home groceries.
 

Eskie

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 6, 2016
16,087
77,743
NY
I agree. The societal concept of personal responsibility and its legal equivalent, assumption of risk, are dying concepts.

There's a process occurring in the US regarding liability for the rapid rise in opioid abuse and overdoses. States and municipalities have sued the drug makers over their marketing and misrepresentations regarding their products that resulted in overprescribing of opioids to patients who became dependent on them. The liability was meant to reimburse states and cities for the cost of medical care needed for all those patients that needed treatment. Sounds a little like the MSA, right?

Then it goes further. The pharmacies get added as defendants for filling all those prescriptions. OK, maybe they should have seen a pattern, especially the national chains that had tons of data that could have raised red flags. But they're not done. Then they tack on individual pharmacists working in those stores for filling the prescriptions. So the pharmacists decide to sue the individual doctors for writing the prescriptions. Mind you, no one has identified a particular patient or prescription in this mess, just the whole lot are responsible.

Following that chain of logic, the doctors can then sue the patients for asking for the prescriptions in the first place. If the patient never complained about pain none of this would have happened. Then the patients can sue the drug makers for making the opioids that got them dependent. Which sorta brings us back around to the states, representing their citizens, suing the drug companies to begin with.

I'm not suggesting or certainly defending what the drug makers did when they pushed so heavily that their products could be prescribed with a lower risk of abuse than the old fashioned opioid pills already in use for decades. It was a money grab and they do bear responsibility. Yet if you follow the above line of logic, essentially everyone believes they can blame someone else for the problem, and our legal system allows an endless cycle of lawsuits to be filed and argued, while not a dime is going to any individual actually harmed by those marketing practices. The end result will be billions of dollars paid in settlements, which to the drug companies is just part of the cost of doing business, all of which will end up either in the pockets of all the attorneys or in the general revenues of states which won't use the money for its intended purpose in the first place.

Of course then there's the unintended consequence of people who truly have severe chronic pain losing access to any relief because no one want to manufacture, dispense, or prescribe the drugs because they're afraid they'll get sued all over again. This is the "justice" system we've allowed to develop because no one wants to be responsible for their actions.
 

CMD-Ky

Highly Esteemed Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Sep 15, 2013
5,321
42,394
KY
I love the Law.

There's a process occurring in the US regarding liability for the rapid rise in opioid abuse and overdoses. States and municipalities have sued the drug makers over their marketing and misrepresentations regarding their products that resulted in overprescribing of opioids to patients who became dependent on them. The liability was meant to reimburse states and cities for the cost of medical care needed for all those patients that needed treatment. Sounds a little like the MSA, right?

Then it goes further. The pharmacies get added as defendants for filling all those prescriptions. OK, maybe they should have seen a pattern, especially the national chains that had tons of data that could have raised red flags. But they're not done. Then they tack on individual pharmacists working in those stores for filling the prescriptions. So the pharmacists decide to sue the individual doctors for writing the prescriptions. Mind you, no one has identified a particular patient or prescription in this mess, just the whole lot are responsible.

Following that chain of logic, the doctors can then sue the patients for asking for the prescriptions in the first place. If the patient never complained about pain none of this would have happened. Then the patients can sue the drug makers for making the opioids that got them dependent. Which sorta brings us back around to the states, representing their citizens, suing the drug companies to begin with.

I'm not suggesting or certainly defending what the drug makers did when they pushed so heavily that their products could be prescribed with a lower risk of abuse than the old fashioned opioid pills already in use for decades. It was a money grab and they do bear responsibility. Yet if you follow the above line of logic, essentially everyone believes they can blame someone else for the problem, and our legal system allows an endless cycle of lawsuits to be filed and argued, while not a dime is going to any individual actually harmed by those marketing practices. The end result will be billions of dollars paid in settlements, which to the drug companies is just part of the cost of doing business, all of which will end up either in the pockets of all the attorneys or in the general revenues of states which won't use the money for its intended purpose in the first place.

Of course then there's the unintended consequence of people who truly have severe chronic pain losing access to any relief because no one want to manufacture, dispense, or prescribe the drugs because they're afraid they'll get sued all over again. This is the "justice" system we've allowed to develop because no one wants to be responsible for their actions.
 

Rossum

Eleutheromaniac
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 14, 2013
16,081
105,222
SE PA
I love the Law.
So do I.

thelaw.jpg
 

DavidOck

ECF Guru
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Jan 3, 2013
19,957
169,793
Halfway to Paradise, WA
Things are in a pretty much chaotic place, with the various States enacting onerous laws. Different vendors do different things to try to not be in violation.

But some are truly bizarre, such as not shipping say hardware to States that have a flavor ban. Uh, just what flavor is pyrex??
 

BigPappa

Ultra Member
Sep 21, 2019
2,052
10,557
Fort Myers, FL
Things are in a pretty much chaotic place, with the various States enacting onerous laws. Different vendors do different things to try to not be in violation.

But some are truly bizarre, such as not shipping say hardware to States that have a flavor ban. Uh, just what flavor is pyrex??
There probably is no easy way for the shopping cart scripts to handle denying only liquids to certain areas while still allowing hardware without paying a programmer to set up something customized.
 

Don29palms

Moved On
ECF Veteran
Sep 12, 2014
4,162
14,595
joshua tree, ca
Things are in a pretty much chaotic place, with the various States enacting onerous laws. Different vendors do different things to try to not be in violation.

But some are truly bizarre, such as not shipping say hardware to States that have a flavor ban. Uh, just what flavor is pyrex??
In a way I don't blame the vendors. These laws are so vague that it's easier to just not deliver anything than take a chance. As an example I wanted to buy a couple mods and a few RDAs from AREliquids. When I tried to checkout it says they don't deliver to Kalifornia. In the area I live there are no bans all. There are only a couple places in Kalifornia where there are bans. I could have had the stuff sent to my son in Arizona and then to me but it wasn't worth the hassle for me. This whole vaping situation is ridiculous but it's really going to get worse in May.
 

englishmick

Vaping Master
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Sep 25, 2014
6,004
32,648
Naptown, Indiana
During the period when juice imports were banned in Indiana there were some vendors that still shipped hardware there but not juice, and some that wouldn't ship anything there. No idea what was behind that. Maybe some of them had more sophisticated processing systems.
 

pfaber11

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Dec 16, 2009
1,389
901
england
I haven't been on ECF in a while but like to check it out every now and then . I can't believe this is still going on . How can they seriously legalise MJ and ban vaping , are they mad? I'm in the UK and over here vapes are booming . Ban smoking that's what they should be doing they just can't because of the money . Well good luck to you all in the US and hopefully things will work out ok .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread