http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:S.1147: <--- PACT ACT
Last edited by a moderator:
U.S.A: PACT Act 2009
- Thread starter AngeLsLuv
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
-
- Tags
- revolution
- Status
It's not about the PACT act (at least not directly). The PACT act does not make shipping tobacco illegal. It does put restrictions on it. The confusion has been that there has been statements made that all the carriers have agreed to not ship tobacco products, and that's not true. It should read that the carriers have agreed to not ship cigarettes. In fact UPS quit shipping cigarettes before the bill came up.
I don't know about the others but UPS does not ship cigarettes but does ship smokeless tobacco (and perhaps other types as in pipe tobacco, cigars etc, but I don't know about those). That's where the typo is and likely the source of the rumors.
Last edited:
The way I just read that sucker... In 88-89 days will be illegal until the shops abide by the laws. (Merchant License, Childproofing, Taxation), Like a legit business, because it is hurting the current cigarette tax in place. It sort of gives all the merchants 90 days to get their crap together.
They (UPS) do ship cigarettes but only for delivery to recipients who are licensed or otherwise authorized by applicable federal, state, provincial, or local law or regulation to receive deliveries of cigarettes.
For shipments not tendered pursuant to an approved Agreement For Transportation Of Tobacco Products: Packages containing tobacco or tobacco products ("Tobacco Product Shipments"), as those terms are variously defined under applicable state law, that are not tendered to UPS pursuant to an approved Agreement For Transportation Of Tobacco Products must comply with the UPS Tariff/Terms and Conditions of Service, and the terms, conditions, restrictions, and prohibitions set forth at UPS: Shipping Tobacco at the time of shipping. UPS's terms, conditions, restrictions and prohibitions regarding Tobacco Product Shipments are subject to change without prior notice and the shipper shall be solely responsible for complying with the terms, conditions, restrictions, and prohibitions in effect at the time of shipping. UPS does not provide service for, and shippers are prohibited from tendering to UPS, any Tobacco Product Shipment that does not comply with the General Restrictions and Prohibitions set forth in the version of Addendum A to the UPS Agreement For Transportation Of Tobacco Products in effect at the time of shipping, as set forth at UPS: Shipping Tobacco.
AGREEMENT FOR TRANSPORTATION OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS ADDENDUM A*
The terms, conditions, restrictions and prohibitions set forth in the version of Addendum A in effect at the time of shipment shall apply to Tobacco Product Shipments tendered by Shipper to UPS pursuant to this Agreement. Shipper understands and agrees that UPS's terms, conditions, restrictions and prohibitions regarding Tobacco Products Shipments are subject to change without prior notice, and that Shipper shall be solely responsible for complying with the terms, conditions, restrictions and prohibitions in effect at the time of shipping. For UPS's current terms, conditions, restrictions and prohibitions regarding Tobacco Products Shipments, and the version of Addendum A in effect at the time of shipping, see www.ups.com/tobacco.
Sun
You're right Sun, I forgot about that. I was thinking along the lines of consumers.
In March, we had a shipment held in Louisville for almost two months until UPS offered to ship it back to China (I don't believe they still do that as our case seems to be the exception to common practices)
At the time, we spoke to anyone at UPS that would answer a phone and it seemed that it was a judgement interpretation call by whoever was handling the paperwork. (That was our take anyway) Some said they saw no reason it was held, some said it was policy but no one would go on the record or fax us any documentation to say it was anything but "held for inspection" (although Customs was never mentioned)
We lucked out in getting several thousand dollars in kits sent back and reshipped and have since avoided UPS like the plague.
At the time, we spoke to anyone at UPS that would answer a phone and it seemed that it was a judgement interpretation call by whoever was handling the paperwork. (That was our take anyway) Some said they saw no reason it was held, some said it was policy but no one would go on the record or fax us any documentation to say it was anything but "held for inspection" (although Customs was never mentioned)
We lucked out in getting several thousand dollars in kits sent back and reshipped and have since avoided UPS like the plague.
There's the Pharmacutical companies who are probably not a bit happy because the e-cig might hurt their sales of "quit smoking" products. They have a huge lobby.
my daughter who is 18 didn't like the e-cig, doesn't think it's stupid or anything, just rather smoke analogs...why? you say.... because she doesn't feel sick yet from cigarettes, she can still go up stairs, she's 18 and she thinks she's invensible...I didn't want her to smoke at all, but I would rather that she smoked an e-cig any day.
So then heres question for ya, if you can buy e-cig products online from CVS... your ordering it online, how does that work out?
This also sounds to me like the government is trying to once again take control... Dollar bills in the eyes of a monster!!!
Since they can't grasp this thing through the FDA.. Then, they are figuring.. why can't we just start this thing off by attacking the post office for the delivery and then, get the tobacco industry involved as the middle man.. Jack up the prices on the juice some more, have the tobacco companies control production, mixing, and supply of the e-juices, kill the little business man/woman who currently supplies juice products, slap a hefty tax on top, and make it available for purchase at every drug store behind the counter.... who knows.. maybe make it only available by prescription, if possible.
I tell you.. I don't know what this country is coming to... but it isn't free and hasn't been for a very long time. The taxes wouldn't have been put up with back with the Boston Tea Party but they are now, and good lord, can we please stop hearing about how are we going to take care of the countrymen in far distant countries... Man, we have to take care of own and not look over the other shoulder, just to say that his problem and not mine.
my $0.02 worth.. Take it for what it is worth to you!!
Tom
Ashley, there is no problem yet. If they decide to ban, or impose severe restrictions on internet sales of e-cigs, then CVS will just stop selling them.
Well if this helps..
I receive my insulin pump supplies from Medtronic...
The pump suppies consist of tubing and the injector/canula tubing with a pretty big needle in it.. It's like an IV but instead of placing it in a vein, it goes into fat (stomach, leg, and upper arm)..
Not only do I need to sign for it, I have to show ID and age verification to the UPS man with every order...
I'm here *LOL*
I wanted to put the "tobacco" experiment in a small plastic jar that I swore was on a shelf.. Went to get it and it poofed, was gone.. Now I need to look around the house for something to put it in...
Don't worry.. I won't kill myself.. 10 drops/units will yield me 0.1mg liquid tobacco at a time.. That's not enough to even effect my 30+ year old Mrs. Beasley doll *LOL*
When I got the idea of trying this, I searched alot to make sure I'd be alright...
Slowly raising the mg from 10, I'll do it probably by 2 units to be safe... Of couse I need to find something to put it in first....
Fugure somebodys got to do it... I just can't afford to smoke anymore... Buying ciggies online for so many years really spoiled me...
And Hey!! Why do pipe smokers get away with it and ciggie and vapors don't?? Oh that's right... Those in DC smoke pipes..
Those mother-%$%^^&%&*'s!!!!
Give me a gun.. A BIG gun!!!
A quick update on the actual status of this bill:
The Senate HAS NOT voted on this bill.
The bill was considered in the Judicial Committee.
As of Nov 19, 2009:
- This bill was considered in committee which has recommended it be considered by the Senate as a whole.
- Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 216.
(Currently scheduled to be addressed on Nov. 30 - subject to change and does not necessarily mean a vote will be taken).
And, BTW, even if the Senate does pass it - it still needs to go to the President for signature before it becomes law.
Refer to my posts earlier in this thread that give the definitions of the things that are covered by the bill (and, therefore, the things NOT covered as well).
I have taken the time to read the full text...
Please, let's all stick to the facts...
We do need to be vilgilant to watch for changes to these bills or to new bills that may affect us - right now they do not.
Respectfully,
-bogie
The Senate HAS NOT voted on this bill.
The bill was considered in the Judicial Committee.
As of Nov 19, 2009:
- This bill was considered in committee which has recommended it be considered by the Senate as a whole.
- Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 216.
(Currently scheduled to be addressed on Nov. 30 - subject to change and does not necessarily mean a vote will be taken).
And, BTW, even if the Senate does pass it - it still needs to go to the President for signature before it becomes law.
Refer to my posts earlier in this thread that give the definitions of the things that are covered by the bill (and, therefore, the things NOT covered as well).
I have taken the time to read the full text...
Please, let's all stick to the facts...
We do need to be vilgilant to watch for changes to these bills or to new bills that may affect us - right now they do not.
Respectfully,
-bogie
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
