What is wrong with you?

[Fisheeboy]

I'm really glad I listened to this program. This is a very important lawsuit.

 

[Uma]

As a visitor to another state, either for business, vacation or family matters, you should have the right to not be harassed, fined, or persecuted for not smoking.

As a business owner in the USA, you should have the right to set your own rules, whether it be sections, stealth, polite, full steam ahead, or not at all. (Vs fascist, communism, Marxist, whatever).

As a consumer, you should have the right to purchase when and where you choose. (Vs a monopoly). Think of the handicapped, the elderly, the workers who work round the clock.

And so on.

I love love love the many comments in this thread! Pamdis, that was spot on brilliant and so true.

Personally, I get ribbed about my constant battle over the greedy political agenda. People don't believe me that it's a real concern. They think I'm over estimating the "problem". They absolutely refuse to believe that anybody would be so stupid as to ban vapor. They roll their eyes, and say, "yeh, sure, Uma, tell us another one. They're not going to ban vapor, that would be ridiculous. They're just trying to scare you into stocking up and spending more money.... ".
A few others say "well, they do say you will glow in the dark and all your hair will turn to straw if you switch from tar to vapor".

It's an unbelievable fight. It shouldn't be happening. I will never trust the "expert" ALA, ACS, etc ever again. That alone breaks my heart into a million pieces.

Thank you for this thread DC!

 

[Jman8]

In the end I don't care all that much WHERE they let me vape.
Because I can stealth vape and there is no way they can stop me.

Doesn't mean I'm not going to fight against the growing unreasonableness of such bans though.

But my biggest issue is the growing focus of the ANTZ on attacking nicotine itself...
The fact that my insurance has gone up $50 per month because I choose to use nicotine...
The growing trend towards denial of employment for nicotine users...

These things freaking outrage me.

IMO, all these vaping issues are tied together, and what I got from your OP, is that we ought to be treating them as such.

Like, I'm not a big device/mod user. Not sure if I'll ever be. But if that was being put forth for possible ban/restriction, I would act like it is big deal to me, and act like it is outrageous. And yet, I'm not one that uses such devices, and really don't care about using them personally. Though I see it as opposition as using yet another tactic to chip away.

So, I continue to advocate for vape everywhere. That's my sound bite take on the position that I feel is most reasonable given our opposition's tactics. If I explain this in fine detail, it would allow for some reasonable considerations that amount to 'don't vape all the time everywhere.' Yet, I strongly disagree with idea that there are places where it is inherently wrong to vape, and this includes hospitals, schools, movie theaters and restaurants. I am outraged when fellow vapers roll over on these places as if they are inherently wrong regardless of the circumstances - because of what 'some people might do.' If I applied the 'what some people might do' rationale to 'use of big/mod devices' then I guess I could, hypothetically, go along with 'reasonable restrictions' on those as well. Same with vaping outdoors. Same with taxation. Same with raising insurance rates. Same with denial of employment.

Yet, because of principles, current available science, and reason, I choose to go the other way that deals with current reality vs. 'what some people might do.'

 

[Uma]

First they took away my right to vape indoors in government buildings, and I didn't say anything because I don't visit them often.

Then they took away my right to vape indoors in restaurants, and I didn't say anything because it sounded reasonable.

Then they took away my right to vape in the workplace, and I didn't say anything because I work from home.

Then they took away my right to buy e-cigs if I'm under 18, and I didn't say anything because I'm over 18, and it sounded reasonable, and surely they will stop regulating now.

Then they took away my right to vape in multi-unit housing, and I didn't say anything because I own a single family home.

Then they took away my right to vape outdoors, and I didn't say anything because I know how to stealth vape.

Then they took away my right to vape in my car with minors presents, and I didn't say anything because my children are old enough to drive themselves around now.

Then they took away my right to buy e-liquid without a childproof cap, and I didn't say anything because I have an adult child who can transfer my e-liquids for me into bottles my arthritic hands can use.

Then they took away my right to buy my favorite e-liquid without any special labeling requirements and my local B&M's supplier refused to comply, so he can't carry it, but I didn't say anything because I can buy direct on-line.

Then they took away my right to buy e-liquid at a reasonable price by taxing it to make it more expensive than cigarettes, and I didn't say anything because I switched to DIY and have several years untaxed nic supply in the freezer.

Then they took away my right to buy online, and I didn't say anything because I still have that big supply in the freezer.

Then they took away my right to buy any e-liquid at all, and I screamed because my nic supply ran out and I CAN'T GET ANYMORE! And I just found out my 18 year old has been smoking behind my back for four years, because he wasn't allowed to buy e-liquid but could always get cigarettes much easier, and I can't help him switch because I CAN'T GET ANYMORE!

But no one else cared because they had all returned to smoking.

<3 <3 <3 <3 <3

 

[440BB]

If you live in Illinois, last week was a bad week, but at least they pass bills quickly with little debate.

Illinois General Assembly - Bill Status for HB5689

Provides that electronic cigarette liquids sold and marketed for the refilling of e-cigarettes may be sold only in special packaging. Provides that the Department of Public Health shall adopt rules establishing the standards for special packaging to be used for e-cigarette liquids. Effective immediately.

Until the labeling is defined, eliquid cannot be sold.

Did somebody called these concerns fear mongering?

 

[DC2]

It's an unbelievable fight. It shouldn't be happening. I will never trust the "expert" ALA, ACS, etc ever again. That alone breaks my heart into a million pieces.

What she said.

 

[DC2]

IMO, all these vaping issues are tied together, and what I got from your OP, is that we ought to be treating them as such.

Like, I'm not a big device/mod user. Not sure if I'll ever be. But if that was being put forth for possible ban/restriction, I would act like it is big deal to me, and act like it is outrageous. And yet, I'm not one that uses such devices, and really don't care about using them personally. Though I see it as opposition as using yet another tactic to chip away.

So, I continue to advocate for vape everywhere. That's my sound bite take on the position that I feel is most reasonable given our opposition's tactics. If I explain this in fine detail, it would allow for some reasonable considerations that amount to 'don't vape all the time everywhere.' Yet, I strongly disagree with idea that there are places where it is inherently wrong to vape, and this includes hospitals, schools, movie theaters and restaurants. I am outraged when fellow vapers roll over on these places as if they are inherently wrong regardless of the circumstances - because of what 'some people might do.' If I applied the 'what some people might do' rationale to 'use of big/mod devices' then I guess I could, hypothetically, go along with 'reasonable restrictions' on those as well. Same with vaping outdoors. Same with taxation. Same with raising insurance rates. Same with denial of employment.

Yet, because of principles, current available science, and reason, I choose to go the other way that deals with current reality vs. 'what some people might do.'

I agree with you for the most part, although I do think your position is too extreme to ever catch on.
But I still love that you continue to make the argument and get people to think.

 

[Dave_in_OK]

IMO Vaping bans and taxes on e-juice have nothing to do with what vapers have done or what dangers vaping may be found to have; btw the best information to date puts it in the same category as drinking coffee. Those that call for such legislation do so out of emotional, financial, or control motivations and not based on honest research, logic or for public health. Thus the only place I can see a need for the owner to enforce a restriction of any kind is at a theater where the visual appearance of vapor may distract and interfere with another patrons experience. I do and will continue to self impose a restriction when I'm out in public as to not blow clouds at someone or attempt to fill a room with vapor as I feel it's impolite.

In the past many believed that the actions to ban or restrict smoking was a honest attempt to better public health and those acting to do so had the moral high ground. But when it comes to vaping, bans and restrictions go against the public health thus we have the moral high ground.

As to the FDA setting standards as to what e-juice can be I'd rather keep it the way it is with customers demanding perfection in nicotine levels and zero contaminants as opposed to what the FDA allows in food products. FDA approved has never meant safe.

 

[raspberryblu]

I disagree that it is apples to oranges. When the activity is considered inherently rude, it doesn't matter where it occurs. As I noted, a place could be known for allowing smoking, and vast majority would say that place is inherently obnoxious for doing so. It's the stigma/shame aspect that I think needs to be front and center with what we keep dancing around when we talk about places okay to vape and places inherently not okay.



I vaped in a restaurant about 3 weeks ago. You are implying that my vapor is still there lingering in the air. I mean, if it has no place to go indoors, then it must still be there. Detectable visually, or by smell or some other means. As I know you'll back down, rather easily, from such a preposterous claim, then it stands to reason that vapor does indeed have places to go when vaping indoors. Outdoors has the plausibility of being worse due to wind factor. I could be 30 feet from someone outside, but wind could bring that vapor right into the face of someone regardless of my intentions.

Good ventilation in a small indoors place would go a long ways, and then average ventilation in large place is IMO equal to outdoors. Vaping in a mega store is one of those places I just can't see any issue with, at all. And if issues are being brought up, then I think they equally apply to outdoors vaping. If it is medium to small place (like movie theater or cafe), then I can see why 20+ vapers going to town on their devices might pose an issue to non-vapers. In my entire 2 years of vaping, I'm yet to observe this first hand. Like not even close. But we are discussing on a forum like it happens all the time, and THAT is reason to agree to a 'reasonable indoor ban' or restriction.



Someone owns land/property of the great outdoors. If it is the government, then that doesn't necessarily bode well for vapors.

Given existence of smoking regulations and shaming of that activity and the way vaping is being framed in national dialogue, then I think it is plausible that vaping outdoors in many public places will be treated as shameful, or illegal.

I hear you that there should be no laws on the outdoors, but not sure you or other anti-indoor vapors are hearing me/us who are saying that the indoor restriction stands a very good chance of leading to outdoor restrictions.

For me, that's what this thread is about. Are you contributing to overall position that leads majority to think vaping, like smoking, is deserving of public shaming/scrutiny, or are you standing on side of the debate that says vaping deserves no such scrutiny because it is relatively harmless and as bothersome as people who stand anywhere in public without a filter covering their mouth?[/QUOATE]

Let me make myself a little more clear here. I have no issue with smoking or vaping indoors provided the owners of said premises do not object. However, if they do object that is their right, they own the place. BTW this applies to outdoor OR indoor spaces that are privately owned. I have no right to walk into one of these places and arrogantly proclaim my right to vape.

Public places on the other hand are another matter. Non-smokers have no right to dictate to those of us who do.

To make a statement that vaping is harmless for those who don't vape so they should have to just deal with it smacks of arrogance. No, your vape isn't there weeks later but does take longer to dissipate in enclosed spaces. Even I notice it, doesn't bother me but I notice it.
When you speak of villanizing vaping perhaps it's a product of the complete lack of consideration by some smokers and vapers for those that don't and it's left a bad taste in someone's mouth.

Look, I get it. Some people are going to get their panties in a twist no matter what you do. However I think most people are reasonable and a little consideration goes a long way.

 

[WattWick]

... common ground, people...

Let's not argue semantics and nitpick details... We may not all agree on everything, but none of us want vaping banned or regulated to extinction. Common ground.

I for one would like to see more legislative news and talk about how people can help in the General section. Certainly most ECF members hardly (if) ever venture into the dedicated subsections. I'll be the first to admit I'm failing to do so myself.

 

[Jman8]

Let me make myself a little more clear here. I have no issue with smoking or vaping indoors provided the owners of said premises do not object. However, if they do object that is their right, they own the place. BTW this applies to outdoor OR indoor spaces that are privately owned. I have no right to walk into one of these places and arrogantly proclaim my right to vape.

Public places on the other hand are another matter. Non-smokers have no right to dictate to those of us who do.

I don't see how it is another matter if manager of public place says no and/or objects to the vaper vaping. Chances are very good, IMO, that no private land owner is going to ever forbid vaping outdoors on their property. Chances are around 50/50 that government would restrict vaping on governmental property outdoors. Person managing property for that day would have full authority to bust you for doing so.

I'm saying that'll come about because even some vapers feel vapor being done around non-vapers is obnoxious, rude, wrong. Doesn't matter, really, where it occurs, it'll be deemed rude. End of discussion. Don't vape outdoors on public land.

To make a statement that vaping is harmless for those who don't vape so they should have to just deal with it smacks of arrogance.

My point is that if you are saying it is harmless outdoors, it is harmless indoors. If you (I or anyone) is saying it is harmless outdoors, are we only saying this to be arrogant? I think not.

Just to be clear, I don't think it is 'perfectly harmless' and almost always go with 'relatively harmless.' Like the air you exhale. That is not perfectly harmless. But it is relatively harmless. I think the stipulation is important in this sort of discussion.

No, your vape isn't there weeks later but does take longer to dissipate in enclosed spaces. Even I notice it, doesn't bother me but I notice it.

How much longer are you thinking it takes to dissipate? I'd say seconds, and not minutes. I'm guessing if I went into a vaper's home and they haven't vaped anywhere in the home in the last 5 minutes, I would have no idea that they were a vaper unless I saw gear around or went to place where they steep their juice and could smell that. But in terms of their lingering vapor, in all the enclosed spaces of their home, I'm saying it is unnoticeable. Now, if person smoked in that same space in last 5 hours, I'm fairly certain I'd know it. Possibly not, but if you took chain vaper vs. chain smoker and I come into their house 5 minutes after their last puff, I'm saying it wouldn't be noticeable with the vaper and would be very noticeable with the smoker.

I think if you sat at table of restaurant that I vaped at, right after I left, you would have no idea (at all) that a vaper was sitting there. No idea that a vaper was even in the restaurant that day. But you seem to be suggesting otherwise. That you'd notice it. Only way you'd notice it is if you saw me doing it. Yeah, I grant that. To say it would bother you, a fellow vaper, kinda blows my mind. I say be prepared for ex-vapers to tell you how much they mind you vaping in their presence outdoors in public. I mean how arrogant do you have to be to vape outdoors in public with other people around? That's just rude, no?

When you speak of villanizing vaping perhaps it's a product of the complete lack of consideration by some smokers and vapers for those that don't and it's left a bad taste in someone's mouth.

Or perhaps it is lots of conditioning by antis who see vaping/smoking as an easy target for manipulating the lives of others.

To be fair, I think it could be a mixture of both, but I think it is around 90% hypersensitive people who actually enjoy hating on smokers/vapers and 10% the notion of down right obnoxious vapers/smokers.

Look, I get it. Some people are going to get their panties in a twist no matter what you do. However I think most people are reasonable and a little consideration goes a long way.

In my experience of vaping in the restaurant recently, coupled with all my other public indoor vaping experiences, it is very close to non-issue. Non-vapers do not even care a smidgeon about. Cause they haven't been conditioned (yet) to believe it is inherently wrong. Give them some time, and a bunch of rhetoric from ANTZ and anti-indoor vapers and suddenly I can see these people taking issue with me having the nerve to vape in their presence. How dare I blow a cloud that dissipates in all of 10 seconds while they are 15 feet away from me. Boy, am I uncivil.

 

[DC2]

I for one would like to see more legislative news and talk about how people can help in the General section. Certainly most ECF members hardly (if) ever venture into the dedicated subsections.

That's exactly why every few months I make a thread like this one.

 

[DC2]

Just to be clear, I don't think it is 'perfectly harmless' and almost always go with 'relatively harmless.' Like the air you exhale. That is not perfectly harmless. But it is relatively harmless. I think the stipulation is important in this sort of discussion.

I'd go so far as to say that what vapers exhale is less harmful than what non-vapers exhale.

For example, non-vapers may well be exhaling germs.
The vapor that we exhale kills germs.

And as for nicotine, I always tell my wife that she should be so lucky to get any appreciable amount from my exhale.
If she did, it would improve her memory, attention, concentration and reaction time, among other things.

Unfortunately for her, the truth is she really isn't getting any appreciable amount from what I exhale.

These notions may seem a bit far-fetched on the face of it.
But in fact, science backs up everything I just said.

 

[Purplepeeps]

The least that we can do is to join CASAA, our advocates to vape freely. It's free to join, and any donations you can provide to this volunteer organization will be greatly appreciated.

The link to join is in my sig below.

I just signed up. What we're facing here in NY, is very frightening to me.

I didn't sleep well last night because of it. I'm ready and willing to do whatever necessary, to keep on vaping.

I'm writing letters, tomorrow making calls and signing petitions. Don't know if it will count for much, but I have to try.

 

[CabinetGuyScott]

... common ground, people...

Let's not argue semantics and nitpick details... We may not all agree on everything, but none of us want vaping banned or regulated to extinction. Common ground.

I for one would like to see more legislative news and talk about how people can help in the General section. Certainly most ECF members hardly (if) ever venture into the dedicated subsections. I'll be the first to admit I'm failing to do so myself.

Exactly!

I've written about this very thought, and DC's original post brought this critical topic out where it belongs, and in front of the maximum number of ECFer possible.

Read it people - every day!:Media & General News

 

[CabinetGuyScott]

I have been on this forum for nearly five years.
I have seen every topic discussed, and all arguments presented.

And I have come to a conclusion.

Too many of you don't understand the issues that confront us.
Too many of you are ignorant to who opposes us.
Too many of you don't care yet.

But you will care.

You'll care when they come to your state, your city, or your county.

I am coming to the conclusion that we will all get what we deserve.
Because we ALWAYS get what we deserve.

Make sure you are ready to deserve something better.
And be ready to fight for it.

It you don't fight, you will not only be screwing me, you will be screwing yourself.

Listen to this if you really care enough to care...
https://soundcloud.com/vp-live/lawsuit-filed-lets-talk-to?in=vp-live/sets/the-click-bang-archives

Well done DC!!

Love not only the topic, but the provocative title - masterful indeed, my friend

Bringing this critical conversation out to the General News is what is needed to chip away at the blissful ignorance that infects way too many of our fellow vapers.

Well Done!

PS - and the experience is all the better since I only spotted one troll-like post, and it was nearly 100% ignored! That's a "well-done" to the participants for ignoring the bait

 

[pamdis]

As a visitor to another state, either for business, vacation or family matters, you should have the right to not be harassed, fined, or persecuted for not smoking.

As a business owner in the USA, you should have the right to set your own rules, whether it be sections, stealth, polite, full steam ahead, or not at all. (Vs fascist, communism, Marxist, whatever).

As a consumer, you should have the right to purchase when and where you choose. (Vs a monopoly). Think of the handicapped, the elderly, the workers who work round the clock.

And so on.

I love love love the many comments in this thread! Pamdis, that was spot on brilliant and so true.

Personally, I get ribbed about my constant battle over the greedy political agenda. People don't believe me that it's a real concern. They think I'm over estimating the "problem". They absolutely refuse to believe that anybody would be so stupid as to ban vapor. They roll their eyes, and say, "yeh, sure, Uma, tell us another one. They're not going to ban vapor, that would be ridiculous. They're just trying to scare you into stocking up and spending more money.... ".
A few others say "well, they do say you will glow in the dark and all your hair will turn to straw if you switch from tar to vapor".

It's an unbelievable fight. It shouldn't be happening. I will never trust the "expert" ALA, ACS, etc ever again. That alone breaks my heart into a million pieces.

Thank you for this thread DC!

Thanks, Uma.

You know what reaction I get when I talk to family and friends about my frustration with all these outrageous, unjustified laws and regulations? Well, then you can finally just quit then. Just. Quit. That's they're answer. Doesn't affect them, they could care less, and in their opinion, if I would Just. Quit., then I could calm down and stop being so frustrated about it all.

They roll their eyes when I try to explain the 'follow the money' stuff, and roll their eyes like I was talking about aliens. This stuff doesn't happen in their world.

I swear, if I have to return to smoking, I will start my own crusade to outlaw sugar. See how they like it. (And yes, I know, this crusade has already started, and I have tried to tell them, "They're coming for you next", but they don't listen.)

And yes, thank you for this thread DC.

 

[pamdis]

If you live in Illinois, last week was a bad week, but at least they pass bills quickly with little debate.

Illinois General Assembly - Bill Status for HB5689

Until the labeling is defined, eliquid cannot be sold.

Did somebody called these concerns fear mongering?

Only passed the House, still needs to get through the Senate. So if you live in Illinois, call/write your Senators! CASAA has a call to action that can help you with what to say.

 

[Bernard Marx]

I have to confess I have only read about half of the previous replies but the last one pretty well sums it up as far as I am concerned. Most people really couldn't care whether we vape or not. They also couldn't give two hoots for legislation regulating vaping but if asked to ban or not they will vote to ban. I can't imagine very many non-smokers/vapers giving it/us any consideration at all. It's not like we're some kind of freedom-fighters or something.

 

[pamdis]

I agree with you for the most part, although I do think your position is too extreme to ever catch on.
But I still love that you continue to make the argument and get people to think.

I don't think it's extreme at all.

Banning it is some locations means that it must be harmful or dangerous to either ourselves or others. It is not.

If we agree to some bans, we may be doing it because we think it's a nuisance, but others will receive the message that it's because it's dangerous. And they will agree to tax it excessively and extend the bans, of course for the reason of encouraging us to quit something that's harming both us and them.

What other thing do we ban just because it's a nuisance? And ONLY because it's a nuisance?

I won't give them an inch, because they WILL take a mile.