The Elephant in the Room
- Thread starter Plastic Shaman
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Sorry to disagree again, but peer pressure is hard to overcome. Many resolute teens who begged their parents to quit and who swore they'd never EVER smoke start smoking. By your definition ANYONE is a potential smoker. Anyone.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I object to alcohol-free beer.
It's kind of an interesting thing. I don't know if they can buy that, but I know a lot of places won't let them into smoke shops to buy the paraphernalia within. Those items do not necessarily have anything bad for them, nor do we know if they will use anything dangerous with said products.
However, society does not seem to approve. The question is why? Is there a concern beyond whether they are actually using something that is normally considered off limits? Maybe people are worried about whether or not they are using something that might lead to restricted behavior. The same may work with zero nic liquid. They might not have any nicotine on hand, but they do have a means to use nicotine if they can get their hands on it. They are doing something that replicates the behavior of using a nicotine product.
I'm not saying anything about whether or not this is right, I just find it a fascinating if people are only concerned with children actually doing something that is bad for them.
Last edited:
I can support vaping for children who work in mines, but only if we limit their use to coal flavored liquids.
No blood in a turnip so no. Energy in a potato however. We were taught how to make potato batteries in primary school (hey, I'm from Finland, we came up with the Molotov cocktail) and while that was a really, really long time ago I might still remember how to do it.
Youtube provides everything you need to know to extract nicotine:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=extracting+nicotine+from+tobacco
Do we really want the police SWAT teams breaking down doors to prevent people from making nicotine based liquid? This exactly what you will get if politicians are allowed to start passing laws. Government does not know when to stop passing laws. I contend that more lives have been ruined by out of control drug warriors than by the use of drugs.
I have nothing more to add to this topic.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=extracting+nicotine+from+tobacco
Do we really want the police SWAT teams breaking down doors to prevent people from making nicotine based liquid? This exactly what you will get if politicians are allowed to start passing laws. Government does not know when to stop passing laws. I contend that more lives have been ruined by out of control drug warriors than by the use of drugs.
I have nothing more to add to this topic.
Well, you're talking about police action over a civil statute and regulation. I think that they would just fine you first and give you an order to shut down your operation. If you continually refused to comply, I guess police action might come about.
I think it's really just an issue of if you're selling it and on what scale. Also, this would only come about in a situation where the e-cigs were totally banned, which I don't think is likely. Yes, drug policy has worked out terribly, but that's a different issue since it's criminalized. This is an issue about regulating the sale.
Sure, it's about perception. Vaping looks a lot like smoking. A politician need look no further than the majority and often stops far short of any science when forming an opinion on anything.
Then throw a kid into the equation. For a "socially conscious politician" and his magical BS, it's a no-brainer. Vaping+kids=smoking/drugs/hookers/forming a start up company. Smoking and vaping bring out deep passions in people. Both sides are gonna use that to any advantage.
Can you prove to me that anyone is not a potential smoker? The fact is, you never know if someone will do something until they do it. I believe that if someone is resolute enough that they would never be tempted/pressured to smoke, they won't smoke, even if they decide to vape. OTOH if they vape and then, defying logic, start to smoke, they were probably going to smoke eventually anyway.
In all fairness, I think the vast majority of politicians would be opposed with children being involved with anything relating to drugs or hookers.
I just don't know if it's just about passions. I think there's an argument that some people look at it as something that leads children to unsafe things or exposes them to something that is close to something considered unsafe. For example, there are probably a lot of politicians who believe that adults should be able to view adult material. However, they also support children not being able to view it. This makes sense in a way since most people think children cannot properly deal with that. However, they usually also support movie and television ratings, especially for adult content. However, this content is not the adult material I'm thinking of, but it is suggestive of it. In this sense, it seems that they are concerned about children being exposed to something that they can't handle, even though they are not actually being exposed.
In other words, the contents of both of these raises the same concerns, but only one of them actually exposes children to something that the politician is normally in favor of. Maybe that doesn't make sense. It just seems odd to me and suggests that people are concerned about potential harm and not just driven by passions.
Actually, if a smoker is someone who will be tempted/pressured to smoke, they are still a potential smoker, even if they actually do smoke. Except of course when they are actively smoking, at which time they are a smoker.
Yeah... I started doing that at age 11 too, before I had ever seen it on tv. I think that one, like not wanting minors to vape, is way more social taboo than anything else. Of course parenting has a lot to do with it too.
It's surprisingly easy to grow herbs in your home as well. In fact, I had some friends back in the early 80s who did exactly that in their college fraternity house rooms. One of them even built a fake wall with grow lights behind it.
Of course it wasn't so funny when one of them got busted and went to prison. Really.
I can see it now, "SWAT Team Storms Frat House Secret Eggplant Grow!"
I object to alcohol-free beer.
You're in luck. I think nonalcoholic beer still had a teensy bit of alcohol in it. 1% or something like that.
ETA Looks like it is 0.5 or less.
Last edited:
I've made my position on this clear. I don't think underage children should be given free reign to do something that could potentially lead to them doing something that is ultimately bad for them. Even if they start with 0 nicotine juice. If they already smoke, I support a parents right to help their child quit by buying them vaping gear.
In fact, I was at my vape shop not long ago, where a mother was doing just that. She was buying her son an ego system with juice containing nicotine to get him off cigarettes. I heard her make him promise he'd use the ego and not smoke, even if offered one from a friend. And he agreed. Whether he did so I don't know. But I applaud the mother who did this for her son.
Well, I object to it on principle.
Removing the alcohol from beer is somehow ungodly. Worse than decaffeinated coffee and zero-nic e-juice. Joking! Just joking around here. lol hahaI think we talked the hell out of this thread. But anyway...
Don't mean to shoot the elephant in the room, but when a kid can legally fire a machine-gun and can't smoke or drink or vape, both legislators and parents need to take a look at themselves for signs of hypocrisy and lack of responsibility. Simply, I favor fewer laws and more personal responsibility. Not to say I favor drunken maghine-gun toting tots who smoke cigars or blow clouds. If vaping becomes one of the Great Scourges of Humanity I might support legislation. But so far I'm not worried about everyone else's kids. More of a "roads-and-schools" socialist commie tax-and-spend bleeding heart than a "tell-you-and-your-kids-what-to-do-with-vices" type.
This is the exact reason some regulation is needed. Because right now a seller can put just about anything in a liquid, isn't required to tell you about it, inform you of levels, or even warn you, and can make almost any claim they want to about it. Just because a seller says they use premium USP ingredients means nothing because there's no rules, no one to answer to, its about as close to buying something from an alley as you can get. Why some can't comprehend this is beyond me.
- Status
Similar threads
