Have not read the whole thread, but am deciding to speak to what I consider the adversarial position to the pro-vaping side of things.
But nobody is debating that parents should be responsible for their kids, but the reality is that accidents happen and most of the time those accidents are due to irresponsible parenting. You can keep sweeping that fact under the rug all you want to defend your want for papa smurf on your bottle, but that doesn't change the fact that children do not always have responsible parents and therefore we should do everything we can to minimize harm in those situations by putting protective measures in place. I agree there is inconsistency of standards on other dangerous products as well, but those products are not what's on the table under scrutiny when the gavel comes down folks.
The protective measures being put into place will not have the effect of protection toward those perceived as vulnerable. It actually stands a very good chance of having the opposite occur, to tempt minors to conceal their activity and engage in (what most adults would consider) more dangerous activities. I think this speaks directly to the issue you are raising (continuously) and is the item I find routinely ignored from those who are espousing what you are advocating. That minors will intentionally circumvent adult authority when "protective measures" are mostly to entirely all that adults could come up with. I'm not sure why, but adults do routinely downplay this, while many of them (I would say overwhelming majority) have own experience as minors who did the exact same thing.
There is a principle at work here that I don't find challenging to understand, but admittedly could be challenging to implement and stay consistent with because of how adults choose to live their lives. The opposite of the principle is (as simple as): don't do this, because it will harm you. I find that to be the norm and how "protective measures" are most often implemented. The principle that works is: do only this. And while I am very much up to the task of elaborating on this point, I would just note for now that this sort of teaching works best from example rather than from mere words. Yet, is confounded if children are sent a mixed message as in, "okay for me as an adult to do something different (and experience harm, joy, pain, pleasure), but not okay for you to do similar." To me, that is the temptation aspect and is sending a mixed message. It is hypocrisy plain and simple, from adult perspective. The message of "don't do this, or you will be harmed" goes right out the window when a peer minor engages in that behavior and is not (visibly) harmed. Add in some social networking via instantaneous communication and suddenly lots and lots of minors realize adults are essentially lying to them, and treating them like they are little idiots. With (more) temptation to demonstrate otherwise from the minor perspective.
While the marketing and packaging is not only attractive to innocent little children, it's also attractive to teens because they see it as cute harmless fun for kids because it is marketed and packaged with that impression. Do we really need a study to determine that papa smurf catches the interest of a child..do we really need a study to determine that cool colorful cartoon images are attractive to teens and therefore leave a harmless image and impression in the mind of a teen.
I know of no one that has engaged in this discussion that would dispute that cartoon characters on eLiquid labels are attractive to minors. Yet, I know of very few to none who espouse the visibly biased position that seems to ignore the fact that cartoon characters are attractive to (at least some) adults. Thus, it becomes a game of moving the goal posts to appease the adversaries of pro-vaping position. And playing that out to its logical conclusion means there is no label (literally none) that would appease the adversaries of pro-vaping. Thus, if one puts their feet in the anti-vaping position, then end-game considerations must be conceived of to understand what that position actually desires, as compared to what is 'currently on the table.' End game is that vaping should be banned from all users, regardless of age. But as many know that would be impractical, then a more reasonable political position is sought whereby the only situation where users do engage in the activity is in secret places where presumably only adults would have opportunity to visit. And never mind the mixed messaging that would inevitably result from this should any minor learn of these secret places. The message would be clear to a minor who isn't a little idiot, "do this, but do it in secret, and don't get caught by the adult authorities."
Yet, since we are nowhere near end game for anti-vaping position, then it is about chipping away, based on the principle of (teaching minors) "don't do this because it will harm you." And as adults who are in the game, observing the chipping away, then one would have to be a 'grown up little idiot' to not take a firm stance against the chipping away. Partially, to perhaps mostly because of how the activity will be treated in society among adults, but also partly to perhaps mostly because of the message this will inevitably send to minors who are observably being sent mixed messages. And, if adults are being honest (with themselves and with each other) minors will at some point realize they were lied to, intentionally, by so called "authority."
I have a 7th grader and a 10th grader. Do you know what they both tell me...actually it was the 7th grader that brought this to my attention...she wondered why i didn't buy the stuff that makes big colorful clouds like the kids out in the school yard do at outdoor evening events. Apparently kids stand in a circle and blow their big colorful clouds into the middle so the colors merge. When i spoke to my high schooler she confirmed this as well. Now i mentioned this once before on this forum and someone replied and said that there was only a couple ways that this could be accomplished and both methods were extremely harmful.
Oh but wait it's gets worse. I was telling them about the controversy regarding marketing and packaging and i was told that many of the devices kids are using....they put stickers on them or make their own stickers and print them out. Here are some examples. Pretty pink burning hearts with big colored clouds simulating blowing a kiss of clouds, rainbows, roadrunner leaving a trail of big clouds of vapor as roadrunner is vaping, tasmanian devil spinning while vaping and creating a tornado of vapor. One girl had one that had a jazzy chick from the cartoon character Bratzs imitating vaping. I was told everybody decorated their devices in this way.
The key part in the first paragraph is the lack of supervision. Other than ANTZ end game being in effect, I can think of no 'protective measure' that could be implemented that would prevent the activity found in that first paragraph. Having zero cartoon labels or even having only a market of entirely bland labels would not prevent such activity (among minors).
The second paragraph is clearly the type of thing that (some) adults will do and there are threads on many vaping forums that make this observable for anyone that cares to look. Hard to see the harm in such actions of the second paragraph, and not sure why anyone would care to note it as harmful other than to chip away toward end game.
But with the first paragraph, lack of supervision is the takeaway, and I very much would like to discuss / debate this with any adult who feels there is a discussion to be had. I would just note that from my perspective supervision would not equate to "don't do this because you will be harmed." Again, that sort of message given way the world works (as of yesterday) would amount to telling kids, "don't do this where we can see you, instead do it in secret where 'supervision' can not observe you."
Please don't tell me we need studies to confirm that teens are attracted to cartoonish characters and symbols...face*palm!!!! Do you think the regulators are not already well aware of what is going on and gathering this info to use against us if it doesn't stop. I have this imagine in my head of the part in that super hero movie where the incredible hulk has had enough of Loki....ehem!!! but by all means, you guys keep up with defending papa smurf, Mr. Cookie and teddy bear shaped bottles.
Given current playing field, I'll gladly defend papa smurf, Mr. Cookie and teddy bear shaped bottles and do so based on reasoning rather than emotion and lack of reasoning that has clearly not been thought through.
) but more the norm. I have no clue how old you are but I am in my early 50's. I now find much more fun in quiet enjoyment but I used to love to be part of the scene so to speak. Guess what....young adults still do and their entertainment is somewhat different then my generations was. It is more extreme I would say, less confined, and way more social. These youngins live in a generation of social media, that sometimes makes meeting up with people you have never met, but share a common interest with easier so if this is what gets them off cigs and into a much healthier thing I say Wonderful. I also don't know the last time you have gone into an actual vape shop vs gas station/tobacco store. I have to tell you that many times you will see Dad Mom or even Gram or Gramps come in with their younger relative to learn about this new world. I went to a cloud comp recently and was amazed at the wide age range there. One of the gals with us brought her Mom so that she could experience the fun first hand. A week later I was in the shop and they happily told me that the Mom came in and got a nice beginners set up. She saw firsthand a large group of people that were actually having fun with the very thing that helped them to quit cigs. Go figure!! If that isn't great, I don't know what is. 
