Vaping Hypocricy?

[DC2]

I don't have to vape in any of these places. Now let's say I'm on a beach or in a park and I'd like to have a vape. Well, if there isn't someone close enough to me to be bothered by it, I'd probably do it inconspicuously and take my chances on not being caught, knowing that it's doubtful that the wind is going to carry the vape THAT far to actually bother anyone. On hospital property, um, that just goes without saying. Why do you need to vape in a hospital? On a college campus, well, probably there's some designated smoking area that you can vape in I would imagine, if not, just obey the rules--what's the problem?

What's the problem? If you have to ask that question, there is not much I can say.

 

[EddardinWinter]

Anyone that thinks no vaping where we are not allowed to smoke is fine and dandy, click these links...

Smoke-Free Multi-Unit Housing
Additional Resources to Help You Implement Smokefree Housing Policies | ChangeLab Solutions
How Landlords Can Prohibit Smoking in Rental Housing | ChangeLab Solutions
How to Make a Condo Complex Smokefree | ChangeLab Solutions
Creating Smokefree Policies for Affordable Housing in California | ChangeLab Solutions

I dare you.

DC, you sounded a bit like Clint Eastwood when you said that...

 

[spartanstew]

Well, that is no reason for us to surrender freedoms..................

A government ban in public places including private businesses equivalent to the smoking bans? No way.

You keep making this argument, but you're just arguing with yourself. I haven't seen anyone here state that they'd like to see the Government ban vaping in public places.

 

[DC2]

I just think that if you "have" to vape everywhere, that's because you're addicted to nicotine and simply must have it. But you caused your own nicotine addiction. You shouldn't expect others to accommodate you just because you got yourself addicted to nicotine, and there is nicotine in secondhand vape. People have the right not to have to breath your secondhand nicotine. That's where I stand on it.

But vaping anywhere is not the topic here.
It's about not being able to vape in places where smoking is not allowed.

Forget for one minute that many of those prohibitions have been, for some time now, exceeding any reasonable limitations.
Let's just concentrate on the fact that limiting vaping in those same public outdoor places is absurd and discriminatory.

But it's okay to discriminate against us, right?
Not if you ask me.

 

[Joshinthecity]

So you would support a ban on vaping in all places other than the ones you choose to vape? In this case, your car or your house. So a ban on all public vaping of any kind other than the vaper's car or vaper's home is acceptable?

No,
What I support, is a self-imposed ban on vaping anywhere you may have an effect on others (perceived or otherwise) who choose not to vape.
These "bans" come into effect when vapers lack common decency and good sense for themselves. Vaping is banned in restaurants because vapers have vaped in restaurants. A silly and "entitled" thing to do in my opinion.
If everyone had (what I propose is..) common decency, and more importantly, common-sense, no "bans" would be necessary.

Obviously, again, common sense should prevail, if you are outside and near someone who you suspect may "get" it.. just ask, if they say cool, then cool, if they say no, then it's no.. If you want to be reductionist about it.. the person blowing nothing into the air has precedent over someone blowing something in the air..
My wife doesn't vape, but she understands what it's all about very well. She's super-fine with me vaping in the house around her. But you can NOT assume a member of the public, or an establishment owner to be cool..nor do I think they should be expected to be.

Now, the next statement is going to annoy some people, but it's the truth and a simple statement of fact.
In Australia there are NO official "bans" that I know of...
You can be sure the reason for this.... is because people here (gross generalisation warning) have less of the "rights" and "entitlement" mentality, and don't NEED to be banned. They make what I consider good judgement calls when and where to vape.
And, yes, the above comes from an Aussie that has spent a lot of time in the U.S over the last 25 years or so.

Things are different here to there, not better or worse.. just different.. It's just a culture thing I think...
j.

 

[DC2]

DC, you sounded a bit like Clint Eastwood when you said that...

Thank you, as I consider that a huge compliment.

 

[vaperature]

There are studies of the second hand effects of vaping that refute this assertion. One is the famous Drexel study. One is on an active thread in this forum. So if there is no threat of secondhand nicotine, do you support public vaping when an establishment's owner permits it?

I'm not familiar with the studies but common sense tells me that if you're in a room full of people who are vaping you are going to be breathing in nicotine, which although it may be way less harmful than cigarette smoke, has still been shown to cause birth defects. I'm not really a supporter of smoking bans except in eating establishments. If a bar wants to let people smoke in it, then non-smokers don't have to go to that bar. However, since the laws ARE in effect, I don't see any real distinction between vaping and smoking.

 

[DC2]

You keep making this argument, but you're just arguing with yourself. I haven't seen anyone here state that they'd like to see the Government ban vaping in public places.

Anyone who is saying we should not vape where we can not smoke is making that argument.
Even if they don't realize it yet.

 

[DC2]

If everyone had (what I propose is..) common decency, and more importantly, common-sense, no "bans" would be necessary.

I think almost everyone in this thread would agree with that.

But even if such bans weren't necessary, they would still be raining down upon us as they are now.
And it's not because the public wants them, it's because those with money and power want them, and pay good money to have them enacted.

Common sense is great, and I hope we are all using it.
But it isn't about common sense, and everyone in this fight for years understands that quite well.

 

[quiter]

The point is that some people don't want ANY vapor in front of their face when they are eating or drinking or watching a movie. When I first started vaping about 5 years ago I didn't think it traveled that much either. But after a while I noticed that many times I would be vaping in my living room and when I went in my kitchen I could see the vapor when the light hits it.

My rights end at the tip of your nose and being an obnoxious e-cig user isn't going to help anything. If a place doesn't want you to vape go someplace that allows it. Give them your business.

Now on the other hand we have ignorance in place of facts coming out as well. Second hand vapor and the like has no basis in fact. It's not hurting anyone that they can prove or even realistically say. Obnoxious? Yep but can it be harmful? Not proven and very unlikely that they ever will.

So let's keep it real. Don't vape where it annoys people when you do and don't allow anyone to get away with distributing misinformation either. If someone says it's dangerous call them out on it and demand facts and be armed with the facts to call them out. But don't try and pretend that it can't be annoying.

 

[Penn]

Who is the government?

It is us. Not the elected, but the whole of the people....

...(and I'm only assuming you are a US resident - if not, then what I say next is very dependent on what country you are a citizen of and may not be true). You are the govt...

So because a piece of paper which is largely ignored by (or viewed as an obstacle to some) officials in the federal government you think this country is still run this way? On a federal level the only true interests represented are those of the political parties. Your local government may not be this way.

As contradictory as it may seem to what I just said, I agree individual businesses should have the final say so if vaping is allowed. I also have nothing against vaping bans INSIDE government buildings or near entrances but not outdoors. My reason is too many discussions I've had about cologne and perfume. I am allergic to some scents. In conversation with people about this I have found that people not allergic feel assaulted by how heavy some people choose to wear it. As already stated in this thread - "Your rights end where my nose begins" (and that is metaphoric even if it fits what I said literally).

 

[EddardinWinter]

You keep making this argument, but you're just arguing with yourself. I haven't seen anyone here state that they'd like to see the Government ban vaping in public places.

I never said they did. Don't cherry pick a snippet of my post and distort my words, please.

 

[Joshinthecity]

I think almost everyone in this thread would agree with that.

But even if such bans weren't necessary, they would still be raining down upon us as they are now.
And it's not because the public wants them, it's because those with money and power want them, and pay good money to have them enacted.

Common sense is great, and I hope we are all using it.
But it isn't about common sense, and everyone in this fight for years understands that quite well.

I'm sure you're right..
And again, it's an indication of cultural differences more than anything else I suppose..
OVER generalising again...
In this case, it seems the difference is..
Americans (not all, but some) will do something until someone tells them not to.
Australians (not all, but some) tend to self-regulate, so no-one has to tell them what they can and can't do.

Who has more "freedom"? Even to me, it's not entirely clear..
The end result tends to be similar... no vaping in enclosed spaces or eating establishments, or anywhere you could possibly "effect" others, or their experience of a time/place
One way has a sign and a "rule, the other does not, but the result is virtually the same...

j.

 

[EddardinWinter]

No,
What I support, is a self-imposed ban on vaping anywhere you may have an effect on others (perceived or otherwise) who choose not to vape.
These "bans" come into effect when vapers lack common decency and good sense for themselves. Vaping is banned in restaurants because vapers have vaped in restaurants. A silly and "entitled" thing to do in my opinion.
If everyone had (what I propose is..) common decency, and more importantly, common-sense, no "bans" would be necessary.

Obviously, again, common sense should prevail, if you are outside and near someone who you suspect may "get" it.. just ask, if they say cool, then cool, if they say no, then it's no.. If you want to be reductionist about it.. the person blowing nothing into the air has precedent over someone blowing something in the air..
My wife doesn't vape, but she understands what it's all about very well. She's super-fine with me vaping in the house around her. But you can NOT assume a member of the public, or an establishment owner to be cool..nor do I think they should be expected to be.

Now, the next statement is going to annoy some people, but it's the truth and a simple statement of fact.
In Australia there are NO official "bans" that I know of...
You can be sure the reason for this.... is because people here (gross generalisation warning) have less of the "rights" and "entitlement" mentality, and don't NEED to be banned. They make what I consider good judgement calls when and where to vape.
And, yes, the above comes from an Aussie that has spent a lot of time in the U.S over the last 25 years or so.

Things are different here to there, not better or worse.. just different.. It's just a culture thing I think...
j.

Bolded segment one. There is almost zero evidence to support the assertion that bans on vaping are the result of a ban causing militant vaper. Many of these bans are statewide bans and had nothing to do with any individual vaper. This does not mean vapers shouldn't be courteous, it just means that band happen because of ANTZ, not because of vapers.

Bolded segment two. You think I should ask permission to vape outside? Did I read that correctly?

I do agree with much of what you said.

I cannot refute that bit about Australia and bans in general, but I think you cannot import nicotine in e-liquid because of a ban. Did that happen because of some obnoxious vaper?

 

[Baldr]

I have vaped in two situations that made me realize the vapor lingers in the air long after it is invisible. When vaping in a cold bathroom with a hot shower running and when I vaped in a freezing cold barn while tending some horses. In both cases you can see the vapor lingering in a cloud much, much longer than you can at room temperature. That means to me that the vapor is still there even if you can't see it, and personally I don't think I have a right to force anyone to breath my secondhand vapor if they don't want to and especially if they aren't even aware that they're doing it. I'll step outside and have a vape just like I would a cigarette if I feel it will bother people. However, I vape freely in my own home which I definitely would not do if I were smoking cigarettes due to the stink and the tar staining everything. I'm not vaping to prove a point or to protest or to be able to do it everywhere, I'm vaping because I like vaping and part of that enjoyment is knowing I'm not spreading bad vibes around.

Without vaping, the air you breathe out "just hangs around" and "makes other people breathe it". The only real difference is that vaping is visible.

 

[toddrhodes]

Some of these answers are hopefully tongue-in-cheek, if not, the poster should be ashamed of themselves, assuming they live in a civil society with other human beings. Vaping is not a right, it is a privilege and a personal choice. You know what they say though, it just takes one bad apple to ruin the whole bunch. My fellow vapers, respect other people's right to not be subjected to it for whatever reason that may be, well-founded or not.

 

[Baldr]

I just think that if you "have" to vape everywhere, that's because you're addicted to nicotine and simply must have it. But you caused your own nicotine addiction. You shouldn't expect others to accommodate you just because you got yourself addicted to nicotine, and there is nicotine in secondhand vape. People have the right not to have to breath your secondhand nicotine. That's where I stand on it.

I am not sure I would agree with your argument anyway, but since I've been vaping with no nic for several months, you don't even have an argument.

 

[vaperature]

Without vaping, the air you breathe out "just hangs around" and "makes other people breathe it". The only real difference is that vaping is visible.

. . . and has nicotine in it, and smells like whatever you're vaping.

 

[Baldr]

Some of these answers are hopefully tongue-in-cheek, if not, the poster should be ashamed of themselves, assuming they live in a civil society with other human beings. Vaping is not a right, it is a privilege and a personal choice. You know what they say though, it just takes one bad apple to ruin the whole bunch. My fellow vapers, respect other people's right to not be subjected to it for whatever reason that may be, well-founded or not.

Sure it's a right. I have a right to vape, because there are no laws against it. I have the right to jump up and down on one leg for the same reason - there are no laws against it.

Just because some [moderated] like you wants to scream "YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO VAPE!" does not make it true.

I think it's funny as heck that in the real world, nobody complains about me vaping, yet here on ECF, there are a huge number of self righteous hypocrites telling me that I'm not allowed.

 

[vaperature]

I am not sure I would agree with your argument anyway, but since I've been vaping with no nic for several months, you don't even have an argument.

Sounds like you just want to argue which I won't get into since that's a quick way to get a reminder by the mod. I would inquire politely why you must vape in places where it's not allowed if you don't even have nicotine in it.