Virginia (mis)interpretation of statute regarding e-cigarettes
- Thread starter Oliver
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
NBC 12 in Virginia ran a story about PVs and a study being done by VCU this evening. Here is a link to the link.
Personally, I wouldn't even care if I couldn't vape in public places - just don't take away the only device that has kept me from smoking "real" cigarettes for 30+ years and has given me a nodule in my lung.
Even if a study could prove to those that are obsinate that e-cigs are indeed safer than smoking tobacco, that would be leverage to at least let us have the freedom to chose a safer alternate to smoking cigarettes. They are violating our rights as humans to choose. Why would they care if I smoke my e-cigs in my home? It seems to be an all or nothing here.
The law of no vaping in public places is still a better alternative to no seller or purchasing of e-cigarettes and its components period. What is Canada and Thailand and maybe now UK in the future vaporers doing to cope with their country's laws of prohibition? Going back to smoking a known harmful means of nicotine i.e, cigarette. There is no logic in prohibiting a safer device.
It boggles me that people smoking cigarettes have a choice but us e-cig vaporers are threatened and disbanded in some countries. What happened to common sense?
It seems to be all about "regulation" and the tobacco producers stronghold on our government by way of lobbying and cash payouts for campaign funding.
It sickens me that America was founded on freedom and the more I live, the more I see our freedoms taken away.
Rant over.
Even if a study could prove to those that are obsinate that e-cigs are indeed safer than smoking tobacco, that would be leverage to at least let us have the freedom to chose a safer alternate to smoking cigarettes. They are violating our rights as humans to choose. Why would they care if I smoke my e-cigs in my home? It seems to be an all or nothing here.
The law of no vaping in public places is still a better alternative to no seller or purchasing of e-cigarettes and its components period. What is Canada and Thailand and maybe now UK in the future vaporers doing to cope with their country's laws of prohibition? Going back to smoking a known harmful means of nicotine i.e, cigarette. There is no logic in prohibiting a safer device.
It boggles me that people smoking cigarettes have a choice but us e-cig vaporers are threatened and disbanded in some countries. What happened to common sense?
It seems to be all about "regulation" and the tobacco producers stronghold on our government by way of lobbying and cash payouts for campaign funding.
It sickens me that America was founded on freedom and the more I live, the more I see our freedoms taken away.
Rant over.
It's gotten to the point now where those of us who still have common sense left inside our brains may have to choose to go against the grain of the ignorance, opportunism and intransigence that has strangled our political system -- just to save our health and our lives. Martin Luther King said that it is a moral imperative to ignore laws that are unjust.
After all the legal dust has settled, we may end up having to get our supplies underground just to do the right thing by ourselves and our familes and friends. Unfortunately, like most things in life, the informed and the educated are the only ones that have the true ability to protect their lives and their interests in the current political environment. Everybody else will simply follow these socio-political terrorists and economic royalists off a cliff.
NBC 12 in Virginia ran a story about PVs and a study being done by VCU this evening. Here is a link to the link.
Yeah, I watched the segment. Instead of having a vendetta against e-cigs, Hagy should switch his efforts to banning fast food outlets. This Kentucky Fried Chicken eating MF makes Luther Vandross look like a stick insect.
I just read the article and the comments. The pro e-ciggers make good, valid points. Thanks for posting.
I spoke to my Delegate's office today. They were supposed to send a letter to the new AG, requesting a ruling on the use of e cigs under the Virginia ban.
They haven't even sent the letter yet (spoke to them in early January). The woman said she's been too busy with the current legislative session and e cigs aren't a priority.
When I spoke to her in January, she told me a ruling would take 6 to 8 weeks. Today, she told me it would take 3 to 6 MONTHS. Apparently, it's hard for them to keep their stories straight.
Anyway, she assured me they would send the letter after the legislative session ends on March 13th - ironically, the date of the east coast meeting. If the wait time is accurate, it will be up to 7 or 8 months before we would get a ruling. If there is any other way, including legal action, I think it should be considered.
They haven't even sent the letter yet (spoke to them in early January). The woman said she's been too busy with the current legislative session and e cigs aren't a priority.
When I spoke to her in January, she told me a ruling would take 6 to 8 weeks. Today, she told me it would take 3 to 6 MONTHS. Apparently, it's hard for them to keep their stories straight.
Anyway, she assured me they would send the letter after the legislative session ends on March 13th - ironically, the date of the east coast meeting. If the wait time is accurate, it will be up to 7 or 8 months before we would get a ruling. If there is any other way, including legal action, I think it should be considered.
WOW..
Am I the only one who realizes the cited vague definition of smoke includes breathing? After all, do you not breathe out particles suspended in gas?
No, several others have made that point as well. It's a non-argument, however, since the law is not about banning smoke (whatever definition is used), it's about banning smoke coming from a cigarette, cigar, or pipe.
thanks for the update, Storyspinr. Too bad the political process prevents anything being done speedily, eh? Ah well, your following up on this will have ensured it gets done eventually, I hope.
SJ
SJ
SJ, smokers and anyone like them (including vapers) are at the bottom of the priority list. You can be sure I will continue to pursue the matter, as are others. The Va. Dept. of Health, or any government agency, should not be allowed to get away with such nonsense.
I believe oil on a burner would be a combustion reaction not vaporization. Completely unrelated.
Although I could be wrong.
Also it depends on what is in the oil, the temperature of the combustion and how much oxygen is available. In theory oil is purely hydrocarbon, so if it is burnt completely, water and carbon dioxide are the only products.
Those were my thoughts, as well.
Jan
An update on the situation in Virginia. I spoke to my Delegate's office today, and they did send a letter to Attorney General Cuccinelli two weeks ago, asking for a ruling on whether e cigs violate the smoking ban. They said it could take three or four months to get a ruling, simply based on the number of requests the AG's office receives from all lawmakers on various issues.
They promised to notify me as soon as they receive a response. Let's hope the AG's office is more reasonable than the Va. Dept. of Health....
They promised to notify me as soon as they receive a response. Let's hope the AG's office is more reasonable than the Va. Dept. of Health....
Thanks for the update, Storyspinr - let's hope we hear back in the 3 rather than 4 month timespan. Seems to be the best we can hope for!
Have there been any updates? Is the "ban" being enforced? I'm going to be in Alexandria for a couple of days and am wondering how just stealthy I need to be.
I haven't been bothered by anybody. A large group of us vaped in Fredericksburg, VA for two days last month at VapeFest with no problems.
I've been vaping at a bowling alley in Alexandria for over a year. The smoking ban took effect on December 1. Three of us vape openly every Sunday night.
I believe that it is the VA Dept of Health that has to enforce the smoking ban. It probably doesn't have the personnel to be running around to every bar and restaurant in VA to check on this.
I've been vaping at a bowling alley in Alexandria for over a year. The smoking ban took effect on December 1. Three of us vape openly every Sunday night.
I believe that it is the VA Dept of Health that has to enforce the smoking ban. It probably doesn't have the personnel to be running around to every bar and restaurant in VA to check on this.
Thanks! I generally try to be pretty low-key anyway, but it's good to know I don't have to be paranoid.
CES, if you're concerned about vaping in nonsmoking restaurants, check a website called smokefreelyva.com - it lists restaurants in various cities with smoking rooms where vaping should also be allowed. I just ate at a restaurant on their list, located in Spotsylvania County, and the owner was thrilled to see an electronic cigarette; she had heard of them, but had never seen one.
/ironyfilteroff
If we're going to really access the meaning of words in the English language, then I defer to the great wise man Gallager, to whom the following quip is credited:
There's a reason "Congress" begins with the word "con". Because "con" is the opposite of "pro", so "Congress" must be the opposite of "progress".
If we're going to really access the meaning of words in the English language, then I defer to the great wise man Gallager, to whom the following quip is credited:
There's a reason "Congress" begins with the word "con". Because "con" is the opposite of "pro", so "Congress" must be the opposite of "progress".
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
