Vaping in Public
- Thread starter ckn71nm
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Now there's a man I could easily call MY FRIEND! Someone who had the ability to stand up for himself! Everyone today is so concerned about getting their feelings hurt or hurting someone else's feelings. Here's a thought how us vapers could probably learn to live with the rest of the bleeding hearts.........
Be Yourself, Do what YOU believe is right, and NO APOLOGIES for how you live YOUR life. If someone doesnt like you, screw 'em. They are probably not worthy of being your friend.
Andria, I too lost my dad to lung cancer due to smoking back in 2012. I feel your pain.
You make life harder for yourself by trying to avoid a confrontation, just whip out your unit and vape, and if someone moans then take it from there. I'm not going to adjust my whole life around other people and feel like I'm doing something wrong. If that was the case I'd just be another sheep in this world. Stop getting worked up with what other people are thinking about you and life will become a lot easier.
Should vaping in shops be allowed? Some places i go dont mind but others do. Is it illegal?
So what I'm getting out of this:
People are still trying to control other people's actions.
Okay...why?..
That if you vape where smoking is banned, you will get vaping banned in the same places.
Okay.....
People are still trying to control other people's actions.
Okay...why?..
That if you vape where smoking is banned, you will get vaping banned in the same places.
Okay.....
It doesn't really have anything to do with vaping where smoking is banned, that's a strange misconstrual that neither side in this debate seems able to drop... It is to do with vaping where vaping is banned.
I don't have any argument with people who do it outside - banning vaping outside makes no sense whatsoever.
But people have the right to not want people to vape in their businesses, or the places they manage. They might not exercise that right for rational reasons, it really makes no difference.
There are people who vape in pubs etc, and when asked to stop put up a fight, or skulk away and try to keep doing it out of sight. They exist, incontrovertibly. I've seen then with my own eyes. I've been told about them by pub staff when I've asked if they mind if I vape. I've read accounts on the net, including an account *by a vaper* of having to ban vaping in the pub he manages, because people just refused to follow the rules he'd set about where and how you could do it.
These people create a bad impression of vapers among the general public. That makes it easier to ban it, even if only locally, because the general public's impression of things matters in democratic countries.
Sorry, but you don't get to say "Join CASAA! Our collective voice matters!" one minute and then "actually it has nothing to do with what the public thinks, it's all about taxes and corrupt pharmaceutical companies" the next.
I don't have any argument with people who do it outside - banning vaping outside makes no sense whatsoever.
But people have the right to not want people to vape in their businesses, or the places they manage. They might not exercise that right for rational reasons, it really makes no difference.
There are people who vape in pubs etc, and when asked to stop put up a fight, or skulk away and try to keep doing it out of sight. They exist, incontrovertibly. I've seen then with my own eyes. I've been told about them by pub staff when I've asked if they mind if I vape. I've read accounts on the net, including an account *by a vaper* of having to ban vaping in the pub he manages, because people just refused to follow the rules he'd set about where and how you could do it.
These people create a bad impression of vapers among the general public. That makes it easier to ban it, even if only locally, because the general public's impression of things matters in democratic countries.
Sorry, but you don't get to say "Join CASAA! Our collective voice matters!" one minute and then "actually it has nothing to do with what the public thinks, it's all about taxes and corrupt pharmaceutical companies" the next.
Okay brother. Forgive and forget. I apologize if I may sounded hostile that last time. I did not see the other posts from you. But you do make good points and I respect that. Stay fresh, love life.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
I agree it should be left up to individual businesses. No argument from me there.
Bolded part by me: Our collective voice DOES matter. There is corruption. As cigarette sales drop, so does the income from taxes on those cigarettes. Why can't we say one and not the other?
Either public lobbying, petitions, marches etc., and indeed democratic process matter, or they don't.
If they don't, a significant chunk of what CASAA does is pointless. If they do, then alienating the public is counterproductive.
You won't hear me arguing that corruption, taxes and vested interests aren't important factors (even some of the most important). But some people when presented with the suggestion that how individuals choose to vape influences our political outcome immediately cry "It has nothing to do with that, it's all about tobacco / pharmaceutical lobbying and taxes".
If they don't, a significant chunk of what CASAA does is pointless. If they do, then alienating the public is counterproductive.
You won't hear me arguing that corruption, taxes and vested interests aren't important factors (even some of the most important). But some people when presented with the suggestion that how individuals choose to vape influences our political outcome immediately cry "It has nothing to do with that, it's all about tobacco / pharmaceutical lobbying and taxes".
This seems pretty straightforward to me.
Our actions don't matter against vested interests, right? They're too powerful, we are but individuals.
How many billions does CASAA have in the bank? I suggest you remove them from your signature if we, the mere public, don't matter.
Or start acting like we do, which would include acknowledging that the people who complain about pushy vapers have a point.
Last edited:
Yeah, he was one of a kind, that's for sure.
Of course I miss him, though I'm pretty much over it now, he died in 2006, but what really got me was the other day when I was reading this interview with the original inventor of the "electric smoke-free cigarette", Herbert Gilbert. He notes that the "modern" e-cigarette was invented in 2006 (the year my dad died) by some Chinese guy, but Mr Gilbert came up with the idea originally, in 1963 -- he got a patent and everything, but hey, '63, EVERYONE smoked except possibly the ultra-religious; big tobacco had a stranglehold on America that didn't even START easing until '70 when they got the ads off TV. If the e-cigarette had been supported and marketed in the mid-60s, my dad -- along with probably MILLIONS of others -- would almost certainly still be here (probably being his old comically-abrasive self right here in this forum).
That really choked me up. Big Tobacco killed my father not just by marketing their poison, but by actively preventing any alternative from reaching the market. That's just plain criminal.
Andria
CASAA is not a PR firm. They are a consumer advocacy group. Nobody says public perception is entirely pointless. What I am saying is that it is low level background noise when compared to the process issue steamrolled by the ANTZ.
Want a good example of how public opinion counts for zero VS "the system"?
75% of the voting public in the US favors term limits for Congress. No other issue has such widespread support, and has enjoyed it for decades. Wanna know what the current term limits are in the House of Representatives and the US Senate? None. There are no limits.
Sure, there are differences between vaping and term of service for Congress, but you get my point...maybe. Sometimes you are intentionally obtuse.
What is your issue with CASAA, anyway?
He is just being GM. He got so frothed up over second hand smoke earlier in the thread I thought he was gonna blow a fuse.
What I find amusing is people who cannot wait to tell me why they won't support CASAA. As if I (or anyone else) want to draft them into service...CASAA will go right on defending everyone's rights, often thanklessly, while they go right on sniping about the pettiest of issues that they have with some tiny portion of membership. Whatever. Don't join, bash away, you are free to express yourself.
I give my time and my money to CASAA, and am very grateful for their efforts.
I'm getting confused -- what exactly is the argument?
We're all former (or present, in my own case) smokers, who have been unjustly made to feel like the very worst of criminals just because we had/have this dreadful addiction, or enjoy smoking/vaping, or both. So now we're vapers, yes, primarily to benefit our own health, but there has to be a small part of any vaper's mind that also considers how much less socially offensive vaping is, and is justly annoyed that the Smoke Nazis think it's the same thing.
I'm a rabid supporter of an individual's right to kill himself however he/she chooses -- however I acknowledge that businesses have the right to set whatever rules they deem necessary, and certainly individuals have the right to not have poisonous smoke/*perhaps*-toxic vapor in their home or workplace or vehicle -- I stopped smoking in my own home so my son would be healthier, and though he's now grown and gone, I still take it outside because I don't want my house and everything in it to smell like an ashtray.
It seems to me, though, that the real problem is that some easily-offended people (the "Smoke Nazis") equate vaping with smoking, and are trying to make it just as difficult for vapers as they made it for smokers, and THAT is simply not fair. I guess I can understand (grudgingly, but I do get it) why a business or park wouldn't want smoking anywhere on their premises, even outdoors -- it leaves a hell of a mess, butts and ashes everywhere, and a lot of folks are just not polite with how they dispose of those -- and even outdoors, if you are close enough, you can get a mighty faceful and lungful of the smoke and the smell -- but that is simply not the case with e-cigs. The vapor dissipates very rapidly, with little to no odor, contains perhaps 1/10,000th of anything really toxic, and there are no butts or ashes; so while I still acknowledge the right to not have it indoors, outdoors is a completely different matter, and it should not be treated like smoking, because it's just not the same. It offends *ME* that some people are just so plain stupid that just because it vaguely resembles smoking, they assume it's identical, and identically dangerous.
The issue with the government, that's wholly a matter of corruption -- they want to get re-elected, which takes a gazillion dollars these days, and hey, there's Big Tobacco and Big Pharma with many gazillions of dollars, going, "tell everyone that vaping is the same as smoking, or worse than smoking, and we'll give you this big chunk of cash so you can be re-elected and spread more lies that benefit us, and nevermind the health and well-being of your lawful constituents."
Does this sum it up pretty well? Because I really am getting confused.
Andria
I'm getting confused -- what exactly is the argument?
We're all former (or present, in my own case) smokers, who have been unjustly made to feel like the very worst of criminals just because we had/have this dreadful addiction, or enjoy smoking/vaping, or both. So now we're vapers, yes, primarily to benefit our own health, but there has to be a small part of any vaper's mind that also considers how much less socially offensive vaping is, and is justly annoyed that the Smoke Nazis think it's the same thing.
I'm a rabid supporter of an individual's right to kill himself however he/she chooses -- however I acknowledge that businesses have the right to set whatever rules they deem necessary, and certainly individuals have the right to not have poisonous smoke/*perhaps*-toxic vapor in their home or workplace or vehicle -- I stopped smoking in my own home so my son would be healthier, and though he's now grown and gone, I still take it outside because I don't want my house and everything in it to smell like an ashtray.
It seems to me, though, that the real problem is that some easily-offended people (the "Smoke Nazis") equate vaping with smoking, and are trying to make it just as difficult for vapers as they made it for smokers, and THAT is simply not fair. I guess I can understand (grudgingly, but I do get it) why a business or park wouldn't want smoking anywhere on their premises, even outdoors -- it leaves a hell of a mess, butts and ashes everywhere, and a lot of folks are just not polite with how they dispose of those -- and even outdoors, if you are close enough, you can get a mighty faceful and lungful of the smoke and the smell -- but that is simply not the case with e-cigs. The vapor dissipates very rapidly, with little to no odor, contains perhaps 1/10,000th of anything really toxic, and there are no butts or ashes; so while I still acknowledge the right to not have it indoors, outdoors is a completely different matter, and it should not be treated like smoking, because it's just not the same. It offends *ME* that some people are just so plain stupid that just because it vaguely resembles smoking, they assume it's identical, and identically dangerous.
The issue with the government, that's wholly a matter of corruption -- they want to get re-elected, which takes a gazillion dollars these days, and hey, there's Big Tobacco and Big Pharma with many gazillions of dollars, going, "tell everyone that vaping is the same as smoking, or worse than smoking, and we'll give you this big chunk of cash so you can be re-elected and spread more lies that benefit us, and nevermind the health and well-being of your lawful constituents."
Does this sum it up pretty well? Because I really am getting confused.
Andria
You will offend some people here, who are highly sensitive about terminology with "Smoke Nazis". Many of us use the term ANTZ (Anti-nicotine tobacco zealots) which also has disturbed some of these folks to the point that they have taken to calling us NUTZ. Personally, I embrace the term (but I still don't know what the acronym stands for). I wear my NUTZ membership as a badge of honor...although the floating brain says I might not qualify... In any case, you will see that you will soon be accused of "Godwinning the thread" and all sorts of other fun stuff.
If you get called a NUTZ, you know you are marked. I suggest you embrace it, too. Oh, sometimes they passively-aggressively will just refer to NUTZ, so keep an eye out for the term.
They collect signatures, don't they?
I guess weight of opinion must matter to them. Why doesn't it matter to many of their supporters, who regularly imply that it makes no difference whatsoever if we annoy people?
Polling consistently shows support for reinstating the death penalty here. Hasn't happened though.
But we can't change implacable ideology, undisclosed funding streams and shady misinformation campaigns. We can, slowly and painfully, change public perception. If I'm happy to write "yes, corruption, poor science, lobbying etc. make a significant difference", do you not think it would defuse the situation if more people on the "vapers' rights" side wrote "Yes, we need to be careful not to needlessly annoy people" too?. I'm trying to strike a sensible middle ground, and some others, from both sides, are too.
Intentionally obtuse? Really?
This site is absolutely full of people shouting slogans at each other. "You treat vaping like smoking!", "People like you are responsible when vaping gets banned!"
I try to avoid that. At no point earlier in the thread, for example, did I say "People like you are going to get vaping banned" to wv2win, even when I misunderstood his position to be one that I believe does harm to our cause. It isn't helpful. In fact I don't believe I've *ever* written it in those terms, about anybody, in the heat of any argument.
If I'm repetitious, it's normally because the people on the other side aren't listening. How many times have you ever heard me say we should treat vaping like smoking? In fact, have you ever heard *anybody* clearly state that we shouldn't vape where vaping is allowed but smoking isn't, which I'm sure you must agree would be the way to treat vaping like smoking?
I look forward to similar diligence pointing this straw man out when you see it posted...
I don't have an issue with CASAA policy, as far as I understand it. I disagree with Kristin's tactics, in that I think her conflation of smoking and vaping is unhelpful. But that's a European perspective, which may bear poorly on the situation over the pond.
I have an issue with some of their advocates though, some of whom seem to view this whole situation rather one dimensionally.
No, I fight back. Because I don't agree that it is harmful. Just to be clear, I'm not concerned with the feds. They can go stick their head where the sun don't shine. My concern are the people around me I'm interacting with.
Last edited:
Well, the Nazis were fascists. Fascists are those who want to control other people via any means, but especially brute force coercion -- which is exactly how they've dealt with smokers -- and it always offends people like that to be called what they really are. Truth is the LAST thing they're interested in -- censorship and disinformation are among their primary means of power.
At this point in my life, what people call me or think of me is of very little concern to me -- I just consider the source.
I'm just so incensed that even when a means has been found for us to constructively deal with our addiction without "stinking up the place", they're STILL trying to coerce everyone to believe exactly as they do. I just can't abide control freaks, and these days control freaks have managed to go completely amok, with government -- the ultimate control freak -- approval. Grrrr!Andria
I hear people say "I don't vape where smoking isn't permitted" all the time.
The convoluted, exacting phrase that you came up with? No, I have not hear that clearly stated...ever.
I have no issue with people vaping their way, I have no issue with people not supporting CASAA, I agree there is inflammatory language used all the time. You just seem to turn a blind eye to it when the "vape where smoking is permitted" crowd starts using it. We have discussed this before, I am not changing my mind, and neither are you. Fine, I still think you are okay...you are even free to disagree with Kristin and to criticize her.
Here's the thing:
Do you wanna add up all that you have done for vaping and compare it to her accomplishments?
Has Kristin made some mistakes? Sure she has, she's human.
She also makes many good decisions to defend our rights, and does it with know-it-all Monday morning quarterbacks nit-picking her every decision and position. You wanna talk about how you know better, fine. That's your right and I will defend your right to express yourself. That said, I am not impressed by that sort of thing in the least.
You wanna impress me? SHOW me how you can do better.
PS - You did not straw man anything I could detect in that last post.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
