Why Vapers are getting a BAD NAME.

[jpargana]

Our politicians are not doing "the voters will" because the public is outraged over vaping. There is no public "outcry" against vaping. That is an irrational fear that many vapers hold to and justifies their self righteous anger when they see someone else do it...."they'll ruin it for everyone" is the common clarion cry.

No, the overwhelming evidence is that the politicians and policy makers are responding to $$$$. When the tobacco Master Settlement Agreement was done in 1998. Big Tobacco agreed to pay 10 BILLION dollars to states as part of the settlement in perpetuity. This money is SUPPOSED to be used for public health initiatives and to prevent tobacco use in kids.

The idea was keep kids from smoking and let existing smokers die out. States soon realized that if there were no new smokers, then their settlement funds would dry up. After all, the settlement is based on percentage of sales. So a majority of states have done NOTHING to prevent youth smoking with the exception of public service announcements and the creation of organizations of groups like Tobacco Free Kids. Also, the states continue to pass groundless legislation that restricts WHERE you can smoke, but not where you can buy them. This is why you don't see State run Tobacco stores. The idea is keep them readily accessible, so that you can continue to collect your settlement funds.

Now comes e-cigs, which have grown into a 1 Billion dollar industry and our elected officials are now looking at a product that not only negatively impacts CURRENT tobacco sales, but has the potential to negatively impact future tobacco sales. Here is a product that could actually fulfill the goals set out by the MSA. Here is a product that actually could replace smoking, AND effectively shut out 46 states of roughly 10 Billion dollars a year.

And SHOCK...Youth smokers are turning to e-cigs as well. OH OH....10 BILLION Dollars per year to the 46 member states is now in jeopardy... AND don't think Big Tobacco isn't reminding states of this as well. If we don't sell our product, you don't get your money. So now we hear the "Save The Children" cry regarding e-cigs.....

So now the states are pressuring their local communities to ban e-cigs wherever smoking is banned and telling local communities if they don't pass these restrictions, they don't get a share of the Tobacco money because they are "non compliant". Meanwhile, States are attempting to ban internet sales, because a large part of the Billion dollar industry is based on internet sales.

As a result, towns and states are trying to kill the industry that can effectively cost them 10 Billion dollars a year alone in settlement money, not to mention the tobacco tax they receive based on sales, and vapers think that public vaping is the reason.....Wake up!!!

Follow the money.

 

[zoiDman]

Odd that this keeps coming up.

Nicotine is definitely addictive. It's as addictive and as dangerous as another compound I and millions of other Americans consume on a daily basis - caffeine. Main difference? Nicotine isn't marketed to and widely available to minors.

There are some who Believe that putting Nicotine (Not from Smoking) into the body can have Adverse Effects that are Significantly Greater than Caffeine.

And that Dosage and Frequency should be Considered when Comparing any two Chemical Compounds. Do you know Anyone who Drinks a Cup of Coffee every 10 Minutes Every Waking Hour of Every Day?

Yes.

But I have noticed in this thread that you seem to feel there is a large percentage that are growing their addictions.
If so, that would certainly help me understand some of the viewpoints you appear to hold.

So I ask for your opinion on the matter to help me understand.

Yes… I do feel that Many People have become More Addicted to the Act of Using an e-Cigarette than they Act of Smoking Analogs. Try doing an Google ECF Search for “Chain Vaping”.

And I see First Hand more and More people who can Not sit thru an Hour and Half Lecture or go 2 Hours at their Desk at work without Having to Take a Hit off their PV.

I was Very Careful to Not say that they are Addicted Nicotine. Because we All know where that will lead. But there is Something in the Act of Using an e-Cigarette that Appears to be More Addictive then the Act of Smoking was for Many People.

I’m Done with this Thread.

It has gotten down to a Core Group of People who do Not Want to Discuss Anything but their View of what is Right.

 

[zoiDman]

BTW – If would Nice to see Some of the “Passion” that people poses here directed towards something that has more Far Reaching Effects on the Vaping Community as a Whole. Perhaps a Thread like this…

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ipment-e-cigarettes-anyone-california-24.html

Instead of Relying on a Very Small Group of Dedicated Individuals to help Spread the Message.

 

[LDS714]

There are some who Believe that putting Nicotine (Not from Smoking) into the body can have Adverse Effects that are Significantly Greater than Caffeine.

And as well, there are some who believe in the Easter Bunny.

And that Dosage and Frequency should be Considered when Comparing any two Chemical Compounds. Do you know Anyone who Drinks a Cup of Coffee every 10 Minutes Every Waking Hour of Every Day?

You've obviously never worked with a Master Chief, LOL!

Yes… I do feel that Many People have become More Addicted to the Act of Using an e-Cigarette than they Act of Smoking Analogs. Try doing an Google ECF Search for “Chain Vaping”.

Yeah. So?

And I see First Hand more and More people who can Not sit thru an Hour and Half Lecture or go 2 Hours at their Desk at work without Having to Take a Hit off their PV.

Yeah. So? When I went to college we had ashtrays on the desks. For particularly boring classes I'd sometimes go through three cigarettes.

I was Very Careful to Not say that they are Addicted Nicotine. Because we All know where that will lead. But there is Something in the Act of Using an e-Cigarette that Appears to be More Addictive then the Act of Smoking was for Many People.

Again, why is that an issue? So what? It's well established that the act of smoking is something that a lot of people enjoy, me being one of them. Hopefully you too, or you should set down the PV.

I'm not trying to harangue you. I'm really curious as to why these things are issues to you.

Nicotine - addictive. Check. No argument. So is caffeine. It's also been proven to help cognitive function (hmmmm... That could be a big point against it as far as the Politicos are concerned).
The Act of Smoking (or vaping) - addictive. Check. No argument. It's also very enjoyable for many people.
People want to vape wherever they happen to be - Check. No argument. It harms no one, so the real question is, "who stands to gain from suppressing vapers?" See the posts by p.opus.
People may think it's smoke - Check. No argument. I'm not responsible for their feelings nor their ignorance. I'd be happy to educate them if they asked, as a matter of fact have done so a multitude of times.
Vaping in public will get vaping in public banned - What? Don't go in the water until you learn how to swim. If you refrain from doing this, we, uh, won't have to tell you not to do it.

Honestly, a lot of people see you and your posts as wanting to suppress vaping. I'm on the fence, could be convinced to lean either direction.

 

[Myk]

From the public's eye on appearances alone.
1. I have no idea what chemicals or drugs are in your gadgets.
2. That plume of smoke may smell sweet but so does antifreeze
3. The FDA/Government has not told me it's safe to my family or I to breath in the vapor you exhale.
4. Secondhand does not just come from the cherry of a cigarette it is also what ones lungs do not absorb and is exhaled.

The majority of the public's eyes are not reading/studying information all over the net on these devices. Most pepole at first sight don't see a vapor they see a smoke in a public place. That is connected with what they read or see in the media.

What we do in the public's eye WILL shape the publics and officials vote and make the bed we will have to lay in. Unfortunately because people can not be persuaded that vapping etiquette will save there freedom, we will inevitably loose that freedom.

I don't think that women was right to vape in the doctors office but I also don't think calling her out to the attention of the doctors office was the best idea ether. Discrete confrontation maybe. However in the heat of the moment we all make poor judgments often.

The polls have between 60%-70% of that public eye in favor of us using ecigs. Besides the stuff you should've looked into before making such a claim (follow the money covered by p.opus) that alone renders your claims void because you base it all on majority.
Gosh darn it, the public likes us not smoking.

 

[LDS714]

BTW – If would Nice to see Some of the “Passion” that people poses here directed towards something that has more Far Reaching Effects on the Vaping Community as a Whole. Perhaps a Thread like this…

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ipment-e-cigarettes-anyone-california-24.html

Instead of Relying on a Very Small Group of Dedicated Individuals to help Spread the Message.

Total agreement. Acted on it as soon as it went out in the Daily Action Plan.

 

[Jay-dub]

And as well, there are some who believe in the Easter Bunny.


You've obviously never worked with a Master Chief, LOL!


Yeah. So?


Yeah. So? When I went to college we had ashtrays on the desks. For particularly boring classes I'd sometimes go through three cigarettes.


Again, why is that an issue? So what? It's well established that the act of smoking is something that a lot of people enjoy, me being one of them. Hopefully you too, or you should set down the PV.

I'm not trying to harangue you. I'm really curious as to why these things are issues to you.

Nicotine - addictive. Check. No argument. So is caffeine. It's also been proven to help cognitive function (hmmmm... That could be a big point against it as far as the Politicos are concerned).
The Act of Smoking (or vaping) - addictive. Check. No argument. It's also very enjoyable for many people.
People want to vape wherever they happen to be - Check. No argument. It harms no one, so the real question is, "who stands to gain from suppressing vapers?" See the posts by p.opus.
People may think it's smoke - Check. No argument. I'm not responsible for their feelings nor their ignorance. I'd be happy to educate them if they asked, as a matter of fact have done so a multitude of times.
Vaping in public will get vaping in public banned - What? Don't go in the water until you learn how to swim. If you refrain from doing this, we, uh, won't have to tell you not to do it.

Honestly, a lot of people see you and your posts as wanting to suppress vaping. I'm on the fence, could be convinced to lean either direction.

I think part of the problem is some people are speaking on an interpersonal level while others are speaking on a legal/political level. Plus, a lot of general statements being used to discredit or establish specific points and vise-versa.

 

[DC2]

No, the overwhelming evidence is that the politicians and policy makers are responding to $$$$. When the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement was done in 1998. Big Tobacco agreed to pay 10 BILLION dollars to states as part of the settlement in perpetuity. This money is SUPPOSED to be used for public health initiatives and to prevent tobacco use in kids.

The idea was keep kids from smoking and let existing smokers die out. States soon realized that if there were no new smokers, then their settlement funds would dry up. After all, the settlement is based on percentage of sales. So a majority of states have done NOTHING to prevent youth smoking with the exception of public service announcements and the creation of organizations of groups like Tobacco Free Kids.

One correction...

Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids (CTFK) was started with 84 million dollars from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation...
The Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids - Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids - An RWJF national program

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, for those who don't know, is Big Pharma...
FORCES International - News Portal

 

[LDS714]

One correction...

Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids (CTFK) was started with 84 million dollars from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation...
The Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids - Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids - An RWJF national program

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, for those who don't know, is Big Pharma...
FORCES International - News Portal

Johnson & Johnson - in the tradition of M&M Enterprises, LOL!

 

[DC2]

Yes… I do feel that Many People have become More Addicted to the Act of Using an e-Cigarette than they Act of Smoking Analogs.

I'd say it was a topic for another thread, but if you are right then it clearly is a topic for this thread.
And as you know, I would disagree that vapers are more "addicted" in general.

I think in many, if not most cases, it's just more because they can not because they need to.
But I'm sure you are well aware of my thoughts on nicotine and addiction.

 

[DC2]

It always amazes me when I see how polarized these threads become.

It seems to me the following things are facts...
--We will be able to educate more people about vaping if they actually encounter us vaping
--We will reinforce a fear of vaping by allowing ourselves to be forced to vape only where smoking is allowed
--There are certainly people who will not like us exhaling vapor for whatever reasons
--People who do not like us exhaling vapor for whatever reasons may work towards restricting where we can vape
--It is likely that the less courteous a vaper is, the more likely someone might not like them exhaling vapor
--The larger clouds you blow, the more likely you will be perceived as being discourteous

Assuming everyone agrees with the above statements, we are all really on the same page.
So why does this topic always become so polarized?

I guess it comes down to how people define being courteous...
And what people feel is the cause of the various vaping restrictions sweeping the country...

 

[Jay-dub]

It always amazes me when I see how polarized these threads become.

It seems to me the following things are facts...
--We will be able to educate more people about vaping if they actually encounter us vaping
--We will reinforce a fear of vaping by allowing ourselves to be forced to vape only where smoking is allowed
--There are certainly people who will not like us exhaling vapor for whatever reasons
--People who do not like us exhaling vapor for whatever reasons may work towards restricting where we can vape
--It is likely that the less courteous a vaper is, the more likely someone might not like them exhaling vapor
--The larger clouds you blow, the more likely you will be perceived as being discourteous

Assuming everyone agrees with the above statements, we are all really on the same page.
So why does this topic always become so polarized?

I guess it comes down to how people define being courteous...
And what people feel is the cause of the various vaping restrictions sweeping the country...

Defensive Reasoning.
More on defensive reasoning
and there's even more but I don't want to link you to death. Just kind of thought some of it may be apt to the overall point you were making.

 

[jwoode]

It always amazes me when I see how polarized these threads become.

It seems to me the following things are facts...
--We will be able to educate more people about vaping if they actually encounter us vaping
--We will reinforce a fear of vaping by allowing ourselves to be forced to vape only where smoking is allowed
--There are certainly people who will not like us exhaling vapor for whatever reasons
--People who do not like us exhaling vapor for whatever reasons may work towards restricting where we can vape
--It is likely that the less courteous a vaper is, the more likely someone might not like them exhaling vapor
--The larger clouds you blow, the more likely you will be perceived as being discourteous

Assuming everyone agrees with the above statements, we are all really on the same page.
So why does this topic always become so polarized?

I guess it comes down to how people define being courteous...
And what people feel is the cause of the various vaping restrictions sweeping the country...

It becomes polarized because people have distinct opinions on the wheres and whys of vaping.
These opinions are simply unacceptable to some with opposite opinions, and it very quickly escalates to personal attacks. Rather than consensus, we get loss of interest.

"A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?"

 

[p.opus]

The problem is that some folks cross the line when they think that their opinion should be the blueprint on how others should think and live.

If you don't think you should vape where you can't smoke, I'm fine with that, that's your opinion and you are more than welcome to live by your principles.

However, If I am minding my business and you try to apply your standards of decorum to me, or worse, you try to blame my behavior for the reason that vaping is being banned, then you and I will have a passionate discussion.

I know for a fact why vaping is under attack, and it has absolutely nothing to do with the lady in the doctors waiting room who vaped in front of the children.

I and others have spent several posts outlining exactly how and when e-cigarettes came under attack, and why now, at the height of their popularity (and effectiveness) they are being vilified rather than praised for the life saving devices you and I know them to be.

Zoid....If you have it, Give me link to the representatives who are looking to ban internet sales of e-cigs in Cali. Most of my vape supplies are shipped from there. I definitely have skin in that game, and let me know what else you think we need to do. I need to let the California reps that they are affecting many the livelihood of many local California businesses that pay California taxes.

 

[Jay-dub]

I've had the opportunity to be an acquaintance of a lobbyist or two here in Missouri. If we were serious about fighting I don't see how that can be accomplished without utilizing them. No politician is going to listen to a cause if there's no lobbyist providing a per$ua$ive "argument".

 

[Myk]

I've had the opportunity to be an acquaintance of a lobbyist or two here in Missouri. If we were serious about fighting I don't see how that can be accomplished without utilizing them. No politician is going to listen to a cause if there's no lobbyist providing a per$ua$ive "argument".

I agree, it's all about "show me the money".

How do you propose we get that $$$$$$ when CASAA can only have 10,000 members and it costs nothing to join?
If there's any lobbying to happen it's got to come from BT or an ecig shop/manufacturer organization. By the time consumers have that many people willing to pay for representation it will be too late.

 

[aceswired]

My two cents - vaping is a hobby/habit that I choose, and I accept any possible risks that go with it. As such, I don't impose that onto others. I vape at home. The day I can't step out into a public place without taking a hit, is the day that I have to call it quits. I control my vape, it doesn't control me. I think more people should adopt that stance.

Sent from my SM-T210R using Tapatalk

 

[DC2]

I've had the opportunity to be an acquaintance of a lobbyist or two here in Missouri. If we were serious about fighting I don't see how that can be accomplished without utilizing them. No politician is going to listen to a cause if there's no lobbyist providing a per$ua$ive "argument".

SFATA lobbies, but I am pretty sure it's only at the Federal level.

 

[Jay-dub]

I agree, it's all about "show me the money".

How do you propose we get that $$$$$$ when CASAA can only have 10,000 members and it costs nothing to join?
If there's any lobbying to happen it's got to come from BT or an ecig shop/manufacturer organization. By the time consumers have that many people willing to pay for representation it will be too late.

So, trying to convince me that I'm an extremist, and others spending their time and efforts in calling fellow members names, isn't hopeless or non-productive - but trying to establish a network of lobbyists is a waste of time? Sorry if I'm putting words in your mouth. I just don't understand why we expel our energy in the ways we've chosen.

 

[Myk]

So, trying to convince me that I'm an extremist, and others spending their time and efforts in calling fellow members names, isn't hopeless or non-productive - but trying to establish a network of lobbyists is a waste of time? Sorry if I'm putting words in your mouth. I just don't understand why we expel our energy in the ways we've chosen.

What????????????????????????????????????????????

I'll let everyone else judge whether that is the voice of an extremist or not.