The following, is something I posted in a CASAA thread, but think that it applies here as well. Please read it, and feel free to discuss the points I raise.
Greetings:
I am new to this forum, but have read a lot in my short span. Personally, I am on my own mission to eliminate the evil specter of government control, looming over us, which threatens our lives, or will render us as criminals if we persist in using our personal vaporizers. But I do believe that my success can be enhanced or furthered by assisting others with similar goals.
I believe that an approach that you guys at CASAA would be wise to consider is a principled approach, as opposed to the overwhelmingly "pragmatic scramble" that you seem to be doing. Specifically, citing case studies, proving that electronic cigarettes are safer than cigarettes, or demonstrating that the blue LEDs won't harm the eyes of children, might work if this were a simple matter, where the Fed was not being financially influenced by Big Tobacco, or the pharmaceutical giants who manufacture and distribute “the patch,” and nicotine gum. Under such circumstances, it would be perfectly rational for those concerned, to simply send in all relevant data, and then a predictable decision would be made: the substance would be approved; after all, it’s perfectly safe.
However, we are not living and fighting within the circumstances previously described. Under our circumstances, we are threatening the interests of overwhelming wealth and power, who—obviously— have begun their campaign to control the market, through the use of governmental coercion.
Hopefully, you will now concede that fact sheets and glossaries are helpful, and perhaps something useful, but fall too short of the mark, and are like automatic windows on cars—at best. Can you imagine a “car,” where all you have, are the windows and motors that make them go up and down, but no door or anything else to connect them to? That would be utter absurdity!
We (vapers) are a “fringe group,” and few in number. This is the overwhelming danger of a pragmatic approach. No matter how many statistics or data points we offer, the ULTIMATE statistic, is that only a fraction of a percentage point of voters will be affected. Moreover, if you haven’t noticed that the public at large has become rather numb to issues regarding smokers, then I have to assume that you live in a shack on top of a mountain, hidden within a state park somewhere. In short, no one gives a **** what the government does in regards to our issue. Smokers won’t even grumble, because they’ll still be able to continue smoking—and paying through the nose. Only ex-smokers/current vapers, know and appreciate how horrific it would be for the Fed to squelch us in exchange for their lung money.
Since it has become a tradition here in America that the “majority rules,” what we have to do is increase our numbers. Period. Make no mistake about it; anything else is suicidal—literal suicide—for vapers. One approach, under this stated objective, would be to recruit existing smokers, and convert them. I have several models for accomplishing this, but my plan has not yet gotten to that financial plateau. But, I am not very concerned with that, since the most powerful thing we can do costs nothing, or damned near nothing.
Our situation is not unique—in principle—to the plight of so many other groups—more specifically, individuals—within this country; individuals, whose rights as human beings have been, and are violated by “the majority.” Right here, if you are still reading this, think to yourself; how many times you have felt in favor of “regulations” that violate someone else’s rights, but didn’t care; you were not affected, and whatever the violation, it was congruent with your personal preference.
Essentially, your honest answer to the previous illustration, should serve to give you an understanding of how “they get us;” this epiphany is not one of doom, but is the essence of how we can, and hopefully, will win.
The overall method used by America’s power hungry megalomaniacs, is to divide the population into pragmatic oppression camps. Each “issue” is presented as a unique phenomenon that is to be voted on, and weighed against public opinion. Instead of Americans being taught to question whether or not any “issue” violates the rights of any other individual, or more clearly stated, threatens to force human beings into an action or harm; or, threatens to present a false impression upon the minds of human beings, in order to control them, we are conditioned to think about an action, as if because someone else does something, that we are obligated to join in. Essentially, that we should force others to prefer our own preferences, to the extent that we can within our power. “Do what I do, and don’t do what I don’t do—or else!”
We are taught to respect authority, not for the sake of good reason—just because. Authority is granted to a collective intelligence, that forces abstinence or action, in virtually all matters of preference, which is in total contradiction to America’s founding. America began as a nation where authority was given to protect the citizen’s right to exercise their own preferences, in all matters, in regard to all things. Force and fraud precluded. What else does “liberty” mean? Duh.
In my view, and in my own personal crusade against the specter of government control in regard to electronic cigarettes, I have begun the process of education and unification under the principle of individual rights. I am sure that this is the best platform for a fight all the way to the Supreme Court—if necessary. If our numbers are to be enumerated to the extent needed in order to push off this attack on our very lives, then, the only thing that we can do to grow fast enough is this approach.
The ironic thing about all this, is that we don’t need to “fudge,” or lie in order to accomplish this mission. There are millions of people fighting for their freedom on various issues: Women who believe they have a right to choose, people who wish to inhale marijuana, people who are gay and want the rights of straight people, people who own a home or business, and the government wants the property, people who don’t want to be taxed anymore, etc.; the list goes on and on.
However, even more ironically, the only thing that could possibly stop such a movement, is the very thing that is threatening us on this particular concrete: the need for some people to control the lives of others. Every time you are guilty of this, you threaten your own personal freedom.
For more information: www aquatiq com/history html <--insert dots in spaces (3)
Charles E. Lester, II
