We're outmatched.

[bigdancehawk]

I watched the Minneapolis city counsel meeting. They have health officials, physicians, nurses, restaurant association representatives, hotel association representatives, building owner association representatives, and all other kinds of other reputable and seemingly knowledgeable people spouting nonsense about the horrible effects of 2nd and even 3rd hand exposure to e-cigarette vapor. The proponents of public vaping do not have impressive credentials, are not persuasive, are not particularly articulate, are not well organized, have no apparent constituency, and are not well prepared. The mantra, "it's all about the chiiiildren" is working. "We don't know what's in them is working." "They are not regulated" is working. "Gateway effect" is working. "Middle school and high school use has tripled" is working. "The flavors appeal to chiiiildren is working." "There are toxins in the vapor" is working. "Nicotine is highly addictive" is working. "Normalization" is working. It's all working extremely well for the ANTZ, it's superficially persuasive, and nothing we say seems the least bit effective to rebut it.

Watching all of this unfold almost brings me to tears when I think of the millions upon millions of smokers who face continued marginalization and ridicule if they dare to try e-cigarettes.

 

[Nate760]

I'm not saying your points are without merit, but these are pretty broad conclusions to draw from one council meeting in one city.

 

[JustJulie]

While it's easy (and understandable) to focus on the losses, it's also important to remember that we don't lose them all. For example, while I don't have any details, I heard last night that we won in Crystal Lake, Illinois. In Baltimore, local advocates were able to obtain a compromise position which, while not ideal, was certainly better than an all-out ban wherever smoking is prohibited.

Yes, we're taking a bit of a beating at the local level, but it'd be far worse if we were to not show up and fight.

I personally think our best strategy is for brick and mortar shops to become responsible, active, engaged corporate citizens in their cities. Much of the local action is fueled by fear and misperception . . . a vague feeling that what we're doing is kind of shady and that vape shops are really glorified head shops. I think that type of misperception can be put to rest by vape shops becoming more involved in the local community. It won't completely forestall bad ordinances being introduced, but it will take some fuel off the fire, imo.

And although we're seeing some losses, it's also important to recognize that those losses aren't the sole measure of our success. I have heard many, many stories of local doctors urging their patients who've had no success with traditional quit smoking routes to go to a vape shop (and many doctors are giving out the names of the shops to their customers, so this isn't just a casual suggestion). So clearly some doctors are getting the message, and, at the end of the day, more devices are getting into the hands of those who can benefit from them. That is no small thing.

 

[bigdancehawk]

I have heard many, many stories of local doctors urging their patients who've had no success with traditional quit smoking routes to go to a vape shop (and many doctors are giving out the names of the shops to their customers, so this isn't just a casual suggestion). So clearly some doctors are getting the message, and, at the end of the day, more devices are getting into the hands of those who can benefit from them. That is no small thing.

It's too bad none of those doctors showed up at the Minneapolis council meeting. ANTZ doctors did, and their distortions and outright lies were not effectively challenged.

 

[bigdancehawk]

The ANTZ have the same 9 or 10 points and they have been repeating them for years. They are all easily anticipated and refuted if you are organized. Pro-vapers only have a few minutes per speaker. Each speaker should be assigned the task of rebutting an ANTZ point. In a city the size of Minneapolis I would hope that someone with medical, academic or scientific credentials could bother to show up.

This is somewhat like a product liability, condemnation or medical malpractice lawsuit. They are all a battle of experts. If you don't have credible and persuasive experts you'll inevitably lose.

 

[JustJulie]

The larger cities are very difficult, primarily because we know that an incredible amount of backdoor lobbying has been going on for quite some time before they get to the point of actually voting on an ordinance. I'm honestly not sure what else could have been done in Minneapolis other than a local doctor testifying. But that's not easy . . . many doctors are afraid of getting caught up in the politics of it all or coming under negative scrutiny by professional boards.

But in the smaller cities, places where the legislators tend to be more responsive to their citizens and where local businesses are a part of the community, we have a much better shot. Here's a piece about the Crystal Lake win from last night:

Person after person told story after story to the Crystal Lake City Council, hoping to sway the council members against imposing regulations that would treat e-cigarettes like combustibles – known as analogs in the vapor community – in public places like restaurants and bars.

More than 30 people turned out for the meeting to show their opposition to the regulation.

However, whether e-cigarettes help people quit isn’t the question before the City Council, Mayor Aaron Shepley said.

“The only real question before us is: What does it do and what impact, if any, does it have on people who are not vapors?” Shepley said. “That would be the only reason why we would want to intervene in this. ... Based on all the studies that we’ve been provided, the jury is, in fact, still out.”

Most of the council members took Shepley’s position on the issue, and in a 6-0 vote with one abstention, the council voted to not take up any of the proposed amendments.

Councilwoman Ellen Brady Mueller abstained, saying after the meeting that she had just “decided not to voice an opinion” on the issue.

Her only comment during the debate was that she “find it interesting that [the council] is suddenly worried about putting our businesses at a disadvantage.”

Councilman Cameron Hubbard added there has been “no public outcry to regulate” e-cigarettes, and Councilman Jeffrey Thorsen said businesses can always choose to ban e-cigarettes in their own establishment.

Crystal Lake votes to not further regulate e-cigarettes | Northwest Herald

But also note that this doesn't appear to have been an issue that was pushed by the ANTZ . . . "The idea had originally come before the council as part of routine proposals by staff based on issues they think the council might want to weigh in on, Shepley said."

 

[Nate760]

I personally think our best strategy is for brick and mortar shops to become responsible, active, engaged corporate citizens in their cities. Much of the local action is fueled by fear and misperception . . . a vague feeling that what we're doing is kind of shady and that vape shops are really glorified head shops. I think that type of misperception can be put to rest by vape shops becoming more involved in the local community. It won't completely forestall bad ordinances being introduced, but it will take some fuel off the fire, imo.

There are a couple things (some) shop owners are doing that probably cause us more harm than good:

1) Not being fully apprised of the political situation and having no desire to get involved. Many are taking the attitude of "These things are probably going to get banned soon, so I'm just going to keep my head down and make as much money as possible before the government puts me out of business." This only feeds the perception that they're engaged in a shady enterprise that operates within a moral/legal grey area.

2) Being interviewed in local media and coming off looking and sounding like a complete buffoon. Some of the most cringe-worthy factual misstatements you'll ever hear come from vape shop owners giving interviews on local TV. Also, feel free to put on a decent shirt (or, Xenu forbid, a tie) and trim your neck beard if you're going to be on television representing an entire industry. The reporters, as reporters are wont to do when engaged in sensationalist coverage, will always seek out the most potentially sinister-looking shop owner they can find, but let's not make their job too ridiculously easy.

 

[bigdancehawk]

^^^^

Vapor shop owners like to talk about all the people they've helped quit smoking. Most of them are ex-smokers themselves. That's fine, but people fear second-hand vapor and "re-normalization" of nicotine addiction for the chiiiildren. So, the response will be, "We think it's great that you've quit smoking, we're not putting you out of business, and you and your customers will still be permitted to vape in all the places where you used to smoke. What's your problem with that? Why should we allow you to expose non-vapers and non-smokers to your exhaled vapor? It has diacetyl, nicotine, particulates and God only knows what else in it."

 

[Kent C]

There are a couple things (some) shop owners are doing that probably cause us more harm than good:

1) Not being fully apprised of the political situation and having no desire to get involved. Many are taking the attitude of "These things are probably going to get banned soon, so I'm just going to keep my head down and make as much money as possible before the government puts me out of business." This only feeds the perception that they're engaged in a shady enterprise that operates within a moral/legal grey area.

2) Being interviewed in local media and coming off looking and sounding like a complete buffoon. Some of the most cringe-worthy factual misstatements you'll ever hear come from vape shop owners giving interviews on local TV. Also, feel free to put on a decent shirt (or, Xenu forbid, a tie) and trim your neck beard if you're going to be on television representing an entire industry. The reporters, as reporters are wont to do when engaged in sensationalist coverage, will always seek out the most potentially sinister-looking shop owner they can find, but let's not make their job too ridiculously easy.

I'd say that from the interviews I've seen (quite a few posted here) that represents less than 50% of the shop owners. And of course, the media will seek them out.

As for: "1) Not being fully apprised of the political situation and having no desire to get involved."

Politicians rely on that. They did with Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. Too bad that we don't live in a society where the shop owner could say to both politicians and the media - Get the ... out of my shop, and mind your own business.

That said, in the current 'we know what's best for you' society, they should recognize it's now part of their business to do what you suggest, although I can fully agree for those who don't - even if they're are informed.

 

[Nate760]

I'd say that from the interviews I've seen (quite a few posted here) that represents less than 50% of the shop owners.

I'd say it's probably quite a bit less than 50%. But in terms of the balance between good PR and bad PR, one ill-informed, inarticulate, slovenly looking shop owner appearing on people's TV screens has the power to largely undo whatever positive effect is created by 20 other shop owners who are professional in appearance and well-informed on the issues.

 

[skoony]

in Minneapolis and apparently 3 or 4 other cities here there were what appears to be unannounced
council meetings all in regards to e-cig regulation.
if what happened in Minneapolis happened in the other cities it can only mean one thing.
a coordinated and deliberate attempt to stifle any debate. we have some very fine hard
working advocates here who would have not let that dog and pony show by the ANTZ
in Minneapolis go unmolested.
apparently the media is in on it as i can not find any local media coverage about any of this.
regards
mike

 

[Nate760]

in Minneapolis and apparently 3 or 4 other cities here there were what appears to be unannounced
council meetings all in regards to e-cig regulation.
if what happened in Minneapolis happened in the other cities it can only mean one thing.
a coordinated and deliberate attempt to stifle any debate. we have some very fine hard
working advocates here who would have not let that dog and pony show by the ANTZ
in Minneapolis go unmolested.
apparently the media is in on it as i can not find any local media coverage about any of this.
regards
mike

When government goes out of its way to avoid being accountable and transparent, it's because they know full well they're engaged in malfeasance and they don't wish to be caught.

 

[skoony]

When government goes out of its way to avoid being accountable and transparent, it's because they know full well they're engaged in malfeasance and they don't wish to be caught.

i am not certain if anything at all is happening here.
i can find no local media references any where.
i PMed the OP on the minneapolis thread trying to get clarification
on some points.
when it comes to these type tactics minnesota wrote the book on them.
we also led they way to why now there are laws against this in most parts of the
country. there has to be sufficient public notice.
still trying to sort this out regards
mike

 

[Davey59]

When government goes out of its way to avoid being accountable and transparent, it's because they know full well they're engaged in malfeasance and they don't wish to be caught.

Yes, that and possibly hiring actors to "play" experts for the meetings, like they did with the Obamacouldn'tcare town meetings. Unfortunately tracking this kind of stuff is difficult and expensive when one is spending their own money.

 

[skoony]

apparently the health and happy thoughts committee of the council
unanimously recommended regulations that would effectively make vaping
the same as smoking and banned the same way. it passed its recommendations
on to the full council for a vote Dec. 5th.
i am still taken aback as there seems to not have been any fore warning
of this meeting. from descriptions i've gleaned it was an ANTZ show case.
regards
mike

 

[Kent C]

I'd say it's probably quite a bit less than 50%. But in terms of the balance between good PR and bad PR, one ill-informed, inarticulate, slovenly looking shop owner appearing on people's TV screens has the power to largely undo whatever positive effect is created by 20 other shop owners who are professional in appearance and well-informed on the issues.

Look, I don't really know who it is you're describing, but yeah, any of the type of which you describe on any issue (except for perhaps Occupy types which seem to be (or were) the darlings of the media).... would tend to detract from it. That should be so obvious it doesn't need pointed out - except perhaps to the individual themselves and my guess they'd tell you to take a hike.

That said, people's looks can fool you. I'd rather have some of who you describe than some slick hand-rubbing, yes-nodding, fixed smiling type, but that's just me.

 

[Uma]

They are heavily involved with the UN unmentionable lest we be called conspiracy theorists. I'm so tired of people hiding from the facts. UN begets ICLEI, ICLEI promotes for agenda-21, agenda 21 hides behind catch phrases such as "sustainable, urban renewal, smart growth, blablabla". The basic ideas are awesome, & everyone is on board, of course, but that's where it stops. They go on from there. That's where it's completely evil. It's really up to every citizen to investigate this monster. Even congressmen are fighting it wherever they notice it.
With that said, the Minneapolis website has a ton of info with a great search engine. You will find they are smothered in ICLEI agenda 21 stuff. But, for the sake of this thread, you can search their site for tobacco grants & other interesting phrases.
Here's a start. Search - City of Minneapolis
Tobacco grants. Search - City of Minneapolis
Google search exposes RWJf etc. https://www.google.com/#q=Minneapolis+healthy+community+award

They are well funded, by your tax dollars.

 

[Uma]

There are groups dedicated to fighting them. Perhaps if we joined resources, somehow, I dunno. Here's one such group with archives up the ying yang. Minnesota Property Rights

Unless we the people wake up and join the fighters, these bans that pop up overwhelmingly will only get worse. We not only need to fight each local, we need to fight the ROOT of the problem.

Many states are nullifying any Fed govt involvement that destroys our rights. Arizona, for instance. Nullify. Visit the Tenth Amendment Center to learn how to nullify. http://tenthamendmentcenter.com

Other states are so corrupt, we have to fight county by county. How? By creating our own constitutions, via the constitutional sheriffs & peace officers association. Ask YOUR sheriff to protect your constitutional rights, like he was elected to do. If he's on board, then have him join the cspoa.
Here is an example. http://tabublog.com/2014/11/05/mend...asses-law-establishing-local-self-governance/
"Just this year, in 2014, CSPOA wrote their own constitution which in part states:

The people of these united States are, and have a right to be, free and independent, and these rights are derived from the “Laws of Nature and Nature’s God.” As such, they must be free from infringements on the right to keep and bear arms, unreasonable searches and seizures, capricious detainments and infringements on every other natural right whether enumerated or not (source).

As of November 4th, 2014, over 650 police officers, sheriffs and public officials have put their signature to the CSPOA constitution. Sheriff Allman, of Mendocino County is a member of CSPOA."

There are so many ways to fight.
KrisAnne Hall is a constitutional lawyer who travels the nation teaching the constitution. I highly recommend visiting her site, videos and podcasts. http://krisannehall.com

This all goes together like bacon & eggs. Local to fed. The local are the most corrupt, as you all well know by now. Everything is linked. They can't force their agenda, so they create ways to make you want to volunteer. (CLS & Duke u) http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1037&context=dflsc. (How to over regulate America into poverty, basically)

Our personal rights, our personal property rights, ...
Ok, I'll shut up for now. But please, wake up beyond the vaping bans. It's all tied together!

 

[Nate760]

That said, people's looks can fool you. I'd rather have some of who you describe than some slick hand-rubbing, yes-nodding, fixed smiling type, but that's just me.

I wasn't casting aspersions on anyone's character or competence, and I know as well as anyone what it's like to be dismissed or disparaged based on appearance alone (though this can wind up being a great advantage if you play it right). I was speaking solely in terms of public perception, and public perception is quite often wrong, but you still have to cater to it to some degree if you're trying to prevail in a PR battle.

 

[fogging_katrider]

When government goes out of its way to avoid being accountable and transparent, it's because they know full well they're engaged in malfeasance and they don't wish to be caught.

and...

and davey59 wrote...
Yes, that and possibly hiring actors to "play" experts for the meetings, like they did with the Obamacouldn'tcare town meetings. Unfortunately tracking this kind of stuff is difficult and expensive when one is spending their own money.

They're taking a page or two out of the "Gruber" playbook imho.