Why Vapers are getting a BAD NAME.
- Thread starter LEDBETTER122
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Middle school and high school kids who don't want to smoke a real cigarette but still think its cool to have something that looks like smoke come out of their face - so they get an e-cig. Hopefully they don't find out about sub ohm vaping, but if they do I hope they use a high resistant battery on a .1 ohm coil...
I've seen you try to have an earnest discussion. This isn't it. I find anyone suckling on the teat of any device, like it provides life-blood, revolting. So what? I think a lot of things. Doesn't mean they should be decreed as law. That's why I intentionally differentiated between in-and-out establishments like convenience stores, and establishments like grocery stores - that take longer.
I think people should be free to not do something, as well as to do it. Good for those vapers who follow their own beliefs in what is considerate. If someone thinks vaping around kids is douchey - mmmmm. Oh well. Maybe it is. Another reason to be glad that I don't have kids. Keep your kids away from my vaping then. Of course, I'd be more diplomatic about it.
I've got no qualms about civil disobedience. I just want to make sure my ire is directed at officials, not the public that we need on our side.
You really believe that just reading up on an issue over the period of one day is enough deliberation to form a stance? Okay. Maybe that's part of the problem with politics today. People skim over issues then produce an opinion that they defend with more fervor than they put into actually forming that opinion.
I see ANTZ (I feel stupid just using the term) as a direct result of "people scared of change". So, in my mind, it works perfectly for eCigs. The entire foothold of ANTZ (derp) is based on fear and ignorance.
Please point to anywhere in the entire history of humanity that a technology has been publicized then eradicated from existence.
Your civil disobedience vs a lobbyist - which do you think would be more effective?
This place is rich on fear, but sparse on action or organizing. Just sign up. Then talk in a forum with all these die hard vapers that spend all their time cutting each other down instead of building a resistance up. We know this is a farce. Let's stop pretending.
Yes, ANTZ (derp) has set etiquette for everyone who behaves differently from your expectations. They're all brainwashed ....... I wonder why they wouldn't be motivated to listen let alone be on our side?
My PV would cloud a doctors office. It might be a good thing - being antibacterial and all. But I'd have to follow the sentiment of the room. If a vapor prefers not to vape in a doctors office, I don't see them as some ignorant, brainwashed trader. I see them as someone trying to be considerate. Good for them.
Last edited:
Well, your reply just cut to the heart of the matters at hand...
Well done. So let's get busy then.
I say I hope because I know there are some/many who might feel that way about whatever they find revolting.
There are many things I find revolting in daily life.
But I'm not about to suggest that there should be a law against those things.
And I know for a fact I do some things that others find revolting.
I'll pull a slice of pizza out of the trash and eat it without hesitation, even if it has been there awhile.
Pizza. Yum!!
My wife is not so thrilled, but after $20,000 of fertility efforts, it turns out it was never going to happen anyway.
As previously noted, I'm good with that since I never wanted kids.
My wife, not so much, but at least it ain't my fault.
I had to make sure to throw that part about it not being my fault in there.
Because I'm a guy, so I have to make this clear, and because it really wasn't my fault.
Sorry sweetheart... I hope you're not reading this.
And I might mention here that I applaud the efforts that will take place in Los Angeles this weekend.
I wish I could be there myself.
Generally speaking, I draw that line at bans on vaping outdoors.
Intellectually, I feel quite certain that the line should be drawn at vaping anywhere, but I know that dog ain't gonna hunt.
And if it eventually turns out that dog won't hunt outdoors either, that is a concept that I intend to refuse to accept.
And that goes for vaping in your residence, vaping in your car with children, and many other places the ANTZ want to restrict us as if we were smoking.
We aren't smoking, we are vaping.
And that NEEDS to be understood by the entire public some day.
Maybe it always was a given.
And then there is this new thing about "we have to pass it before we know what is in it" thing.
I don't know if that was accurately portrayed, but just the very thought of such a concept is disturbing beyond words.
Their foothold over public opinion is certainly based on fear and ignorance.
That much is hard, or even impossible to argue.
But their argument is based on crap.
And we have to poke holes all over that argument.
Otherwise, we won't be vaping in beaches, parks, parking lots, college campuses, government property, our residences, or in a car with children present.
And that's probably just for starters.
Not to mention employment issues, insurance issues, and various other legally sanctioned inequalities they continue to heap upon us.
Civil disobedience is a last resort, and I would much prefer lobbyists before we go there.
I question the feasibility of using lobbyists to further our cause, but if it can be done then I am all for it.
One of the main problems that I see is that we can not all agree on how to approach these issues.
And then of course, there seems to be rampant inaction, indifference, and lack of knowledge on what we face and how to effectively combat it.
And that may be the case.
But brainwashed they are, due to decades of ANTZ propaganda.
I don't know what exactly to do to combat that particular issue.
We don't have the media on our side, so we are left with almost no way to spread our message.
It's person by person, until we have either lobbyists, media, or both.
We have neither at this point though.
That, again, goes to our media disadvantage.
And it goes to various other issues such as differing views on courtesy, scientific fact, and overly-protective parents.
Well, at least I think they are overly-protective, but that's another discussion entirely.
Well done. So let's get busy then.
I think we should hopefully all be able to agree that what someone finds revolting is not a reason to make a law about it.
I say I hope because I know there are some/many who might feel that way about whatever they find revolting.
There are many things I find revolting in daily life.
But I'm not about to suggest that there should be a law against those things.
And I know for a fact I do some things that others find revolting.
I'll pull a slice of pizza out of the trash and eat it without hesitation, even if it has been there awhile.
Pizza. Yum!!
I have no kids either, and I'm thrilled that this outcome I had hoped for has actually come to pass.I think people should be free to not do something, as well as to do it. Good for those vapers who follow their own beliefs in what is considerate. If someone thinks vaping around kids is douchey - mmmmm. Oh well. Maybe it is. Another reason to be glad that I don't have kids. Keep your kids away from my vaping then. Of course, I'd be more diplomatic about it.
My wife is not so thrilled, but after $20,000 of fertility efforts, it turns out it was never going to happen anyway.
As previously noted, I'm good with that since I never wanted kids.
My wife, not so much, but at least it ain't my fault.
I had to make sure to throw that part about it not being my fault in there.
Because I'm a guy, so I have to make this clear, and because it really wasn't my fault.
Sorry sweetheart... I hope you're not reading this.
I am quite certain civil disobedience SHOULD be in our future, but the question is where do we, as vapers, draw that line.
And I might mention here that I applaud the efforts that will take place in Los Angeles this weekend.
I wish I could be there myself.
Generally speaking, I draw that line at bans on vaping outdoors.
Intellectually, I feel quite certain that the line should be drawn at vaping anywhere, but I know that dog ain't gonna hunt.
And if it eventually turns out that dog won't hunt outdoors either, that is a concept that I intend to refuse to accept.
And that goes for vaping in your residence, vaping in your car with children, and many other places the ANTZ want to restrict us as if we were smoking.
We aren't smoking, we are vaping.
And that NEEDS to be understood by the entire public some day.
That's appears to be a given in the world today.
Maybe it always was a given.
And then there is this new thing about "we have to pass it before we know what is in it" thing.
I don't know if that was accurately portrayed, but just the very thought of such a concept is disturbing beyond words.
I noticed you used the term "foothold" here, and in that case I can agree to some extent.
Their foothold over public opinion is certainly based on fear and ignorance.
That much is hard, or even impossible to argue.
But their argument is based on crap.
And we have to poke holes all over that argument.
Otherwise, we won't be vaping in beaches, parks, parking lots, college campuses, government property, our residences, or in a car with children present.
And that's probably just for starters.
Not to mention employment issues, insurance issues, and various other legally sanctioned inequalities they continue to heap upon us.
That's a big question.
Civil disobedience is a last resort, and I would much prefer lobbyists before we go there.
I question the feasibility of using lobbyists to further our cause, but if it can be done then I am all for it.
There is some truth in what you say here.
One of the main problems that I see is that we can not all agree on how to approach these issues.
And then of course, there seems to be rampant inaction, indifference, and lack of knowledge on what we face and how to effectively combat it.
You clearly feel that calling people brainwashed makes them turn away from us.
And that may be the case.
But brainwashed they are, due to decades of ANTZ propaganda.
I don't know what exactly to do to combat that particular issue.
We don't have the media on our side, so we are left with almost no way to spread our message.
It's person by person, until we have either lobbyists, media, or both.
We have neither at this point though.
There is currently no "sentiment of the room" because there is no consensus or knowledge base for the public to consider.
That, again, goes to our media disadvantage.
And it goes to various other issues such as differing views on courtesy, scientific fact, and overly-protective parents.
Well, at least I think they are overly-protective, but that's another discussion entirely.
Last edited:
There's no organized PR campaign.
There's no coordination between various groups that exist and/or prosper solely due to the production and consumption they supposedly want to protect.
Lobbyists aren't wood nymphs. They're not inaccessible. You don't have to meet them in a crossroads at midnight. Have you ever seen any pro-vape community, vape shop or vape consumer group promote donating to a fund for retaining a single lobbyist?
Vape-ins are free. Minus a possible municipal fee for using a public space. Cloud contests would give exposure. DIY flavor competitions? Anything being organized that would provide a higher profile? What is all this talk for?
I'm frustrated too. I'll admit to taking some of that frustration out against fellow vapors. Something I think should be a cardinal sin...
There's no coordination between various groups that exist and/or prosper solely due to the production and consumption they supposedly want to protect.
Lobbyists aren't wood nymphs. They're not inaccessible. You don't have to meet them in a crossroads at midnight. Have you ever seen any pro-vape community, vape shop or vape consumer group promote donating to a fund for retaining a single lobbyist?
Vape-ins are free. Minus a possible municipal fee for using a public space. Cloud contests would give exposure. DIY flavor competitions? Anything being organized that would provide a higher profile? What is all this talk for?
I'm frustrated too. I'll admit to taking some of that frustration out against fellow vapors. Something I think should be a cardinal sin...
If someone doesn't like the term "ANTZ" they could always call them "Tobacco Control", "Public Health", "Anti-Nicotine/Tobacco Zealots", unless they're dragging bait behind a moving boat to see if they can get fish to bite that is, then they should probably throw in some derps to attack those who use the term without directly attacking them.
I only use ANTZ here and at CASAA because nobody else knows what it means. Even though I suspect some of the ACS and ALA people I talk to would know exactly what it means I don't use it with them.
I only use ANTZ here and at CASAA because nobody else knows what it means. Even though I suspect some of the ACS and ALA people I talk to would know exactly what it means I don't use it with them.
I liked your post. Didn't love it, but liked it enough that you cared to go beyond the simplistic.
The idea of not vaping in a place you won't be in long makes good sense to me. But seems like personal decision based on time, rather than one based on say moral considerations for others. As I advocate for vape everywhere, you can guess whether or not I'd vape in a convenience store and/or grocery store.
When I vape openly in an indoor place, I believe at all times I am being considerate. For it to not be deemed considerate, the lies about second hand vapor would have to be way more permeating our culture and not disputed. I haven't blown vaper in anyone's face in public ever. My cigalikes don't produce big clouds. My vapor doesn't linger.
Yes, possibly far less than that if it is ANTZ slanted and making vain attempt at presenting other side. If I go to CASAA site, it goes into lots and lots of detail about what opposition may say and speaks to that. ANTZ articles tend to have one or two sentences that would be from "pro vaper" position couched in context of just how evil eCigs are.
But apart from the spin pieces, if there was Wikipedia type page that presented say 20 bullet points that are on side of Tobacco Control and then 20 more on side of Vaping Advocates, I think a non-vaper could be reasonably caught up with the big issues on vaping. They might not understand why a Provari is a much better product than a cigalike, but they'd probably have some idea that there is more than one type of device that people vape with.
This isn't to say that their stance won't be shaped over time, but I honestly think it wouldn't take all that long to catch up with politics of eCigs, especially from a piece that was (somehow magically) presented with little to no bias.
Which is also why us vapers educating in the public ought to work wonders. Demonstrate the use, and explain what's going on and encourage listener to go to various sites, some of which may fit our bias, and others which may be more middle of the road. I think reading about vapor and eCigs simply doesn't compare to demonstration of it in first person. Heck, my multitude of experiences reading about big ol' mod devices hasn't moved me from continuing to use a cigalike. Hearing umpteen vapers brag about a device like Provari doesn't do much for me. But I'm guessing once I see a Provari in use, I'll suddenly have a much different stance than I do today on that topic, which I feel fairly familiar with.
We agree on this perhaps, but perhaps disagree on influence at work? I dunno. With internet, there wasn't a vocal group hating on it in the early going with obvious goal of decimating the technology/industry. I can think of many examples of people scared to change, but that doesn't compare to the propaganda that ANTZ has taken on eCigs to intentionally scare people.
All my non-vaping friends and family are currently not scared, even a little bit, by my vaping around them. Some have heard ANTZ lies and communicate them to me, only to have me educate them via both demonstration and rather simple updating or debunking. But I wouldn't put it past ANTZ to invoke a tactic whereby they point to some 'major scientific breakthrough' that 'proves' vaping causes (insert fatal condition here) and then running million dollar ad campaigns to get the word out. Then, I think friends and family will suddenly be like, "absolutely no way you are doing that around me." And if that should happen, I reckon it could take months or years to overcome the deceit. To the point where person just feels it is better it is not done around them at all, even while all my friends and family engage in some thing or another that if it had same propaganda battle going on, would mean everyone would be isolated from everyone else. And I do mean all legal stuff that people are engaged in.
I call non-sequitur to what my point was. My point was about usage bans and how vapers are quickly moving into a world where using their product, even outdoors, in public is disallowed.
For my point, smoking is prime example of what we are up against. When public indoor bans first started happening, smoking wasn't then a huge deal to use or not to use. Now, it is a really huge deal, and it is not bad to shame the heck out of a smoker just for smelling like smoke. Doesn't matter if they are using it in front of anyone, but just that smell is enough to send people into a tizzy.
Also probably wouldn't matter now if ANTZ came out and admitted, "yep, a lot of the SHS so called science was made up for our political purposes. Ooops." I don't think it'll ever come back to the golden era it got to enjoy for decades. Vaping didn't even get one decade before it started being outlawed from public usage.
And yet, there's still hope in the galaxy. Some places aren't at the extreme yet. And reality is with vaping that it kinda sorta doesn't matter what the law is, people will vape in public and very very likely won't get busted for doing so unless they are just blatantly dumb in how they go about it.
Depends. On principle, I'd go with the civil disobedient who is peaceful and otherwise respectful.
And yet some of us are organized and making a difference. I guess you could call us the non-pretenders?
And you might as well tell me you're a "cell phone anywhere advocate". Can't say I won't be hoping for you to get zapped by your electronic device if I get stuck in a line behind you. Sorry.
I'll take your word for it. Or, maybe even agree to disagree. I think it's a lot easier to take credit than to make an actual difference. I'm not really "in the know" on those successes. Have there been reversals of legislation or something?
There are dozens of examples where legislation was defeated, removed, changed or softened due to organized action.
The problem is that there are too many of them now.
And they are coming too fast.
And lately they have often been coming without any notice, or at least not enough notice.
And you might as well tell me you're a "cell phone anywhere advocate". Can't say I won't be hoping for you to get zapped by your electronic device if I get stuck in a line behind you. Sorry.
Apology accepted.
Cause I know you don't really mean to say you hope indoor eCig users get hurt in the process of using their device, but are using this tactic as some last ditch appeal to have ones like me think twice about possible "consequences." And needing to grasp for straws to make your point.
I live in state that had hearings this week where 2 members of CASAA were able to handle, possibly even own, opposition during this hearing about using eCigs in public. There were other vapers there speaking on the pro side, and I would say visibly organized to counter what is opposition's take on the matter. This is a proactive bill in Wisconsin that is diametric opposite of bills recently passed in L.A., Chicago and N.Y. Wisconsin passes this bill, and it could signal a tide turning, or it could be a small drop in a very large bucket.
I hear your point as we seem to be a lot less organized and motivated than our opposition. I think it is a valid point and one that can't be flip flopped in say next day or so.
But just as opposition is going for the "ban now, wait for science" approach, we can, and pretty much are going for the "allow now, and wait for industry to dominate" approach. Cause 10+ years from now, we could be in a world where eCigs are king on the planet, having played its role in decimating smoking industry, and our lobbyists are very well known as paid by companies that are as wealthy as Apple. And in a world that has some states, even nations that do allow eCig use in many places, not giving into junk science. Or, we could live in a world where industry was set to take off, but was stifled because some truly believed these things were just as bad as smoking, and their use was discouraged from every conceivable public place and in most private situations as well. And even fellow vapers were advocating for that, believing that these things should only be used to quit smoking and never ever used outside of your own residence. Heck, way back in 2014, some vapers were even secretly hoping that fellow vapers who dared to use their devices indoors would be harmed in some way from the device. Yeah, it was that ludicrous.
We have a similar bill pending in TN. It got tabled the last time it came up for a vote, ostensibly due to the work of an Altria lobbyist.
It just happened in Utah. I think one of the tipping points in the most recent defeat of a bill was ANTZ claiming our locally made eJuices don't have labels or child proof caps... one of our vapers at the meeting happened to have a bottle to show the senate committee.
One of the senators actually remarked that they had been led to believe there were no labels and yet was shown proof that we have them.
If anyone believes that they can't make a difference, they will get the laws they deserve.
The ANTZ are lying so much (which is coincidentally the REAL reason vapors are getting a bad name) it's only the truly brainwashed or paid off politicians that believe their crap. I think after this year's wins and losses (can't believe how they're racking up already) we'll see them turn their focus to smaller city councils where they can push their weight and money around easier.
One was saying how you can't tell an ecig from a cigarette, I posted a picture of my pocket with a Vamo and eVic. Oh really?
In this case it's really not us, it's them.
We do have to make some noise though, for sure
I'm amazed at some of the ignorance. They want so badly to equate cigarettes to vaping that they are trying to regulate nicotine and labeling as if vaping was the same as a cigarette. I think they're trying desperately to create a basis for taxation on them.
So they aren't even prepared to regulate things like nicotine strength although they are attempting to do so. Someone needs to tell them for example there is no such thing as "an eCigarette" as a unit of consumption. Next, the ANTZ need to understand that 5 minutes of vaping is NOT the same as 5 minutes of smoking, not in nic absorption rate and certainly not in chemical composition. If their little darlings are vaping for 5 minutes a couple of times a day, the risks of getting addicted are probably considerably lower than if they were sneaking tobacco cigs -- just by sheer absorption of nicotine alone and not even considering what else is in most cigarettes that make them so addictive.
As we know, 99% of the similarities between eCigs and tobacco cigarettes are figments of the tobacco control freaks. We need for people to calm down enough to understand the facts... our work is cut out for us.
We do have to make some noise though, for sure
I'm amazed at some of the ignorance. They want so badly to equate cigarettes to vaping that they are trying to regulate nicotine and labeling as if vaping was the same as a cigarette. I think they're trying desperately to create a basis for taxation on them.
So they aren't even prepared to regulate things like nicotine strength although they are attempting to do so. Someone needs to tell them for example there is no such thing as "an eCigarette" as a unit of consumption. Next, the ANTZ need to understand that 5 minutes of vaping is NOT the same as 5 minutes of smoking, not in nic absorption rate and certainly not in chemical composition. If their little darlings are vaping for 5 minutes a couple of times a day, the risks of getting addicted are probably considerably lower than if they were sneaking tobacco cigs -- just by sheer absorption of nicotine alone and not even considering what else is in most cigarettes that make them so addictive.
As we know, 99% of the similarities between eCigs and tobacco cigarettes are figments of the tobacco control freaks. We need for people to calm down enough to understand the facts... our work is cut out for us.
I'm more amazed at the arrogance. They boiled the frog slowly with cigarettes and got away with it, now they think they can instantly jump on vapers and say and do anything they want and get away with it where ever they want.
Like lying in Utah about childproof caps and labels. Something so easy to prove them wrong and they're sure they can get away with lying.
It's funny, this forum is completely open. They could easily come here and learn everything they ever wanted to know. Instead of "how many times do you use your ecig" they'd know "how many ml" and "what mg" are better questions. Instead it's the arrogance, we're nothing, we can't teach them anything.
They're kind of making our jobs easier. Anyone but the squishy minds just has to be exposed to a vaper and they instantly discover they've been lied to. Sadly there's plenty of squishy minds, including some vapers.
Im only commenting because im stuck at work on a sunday and bored. Im still new and have only been vaping a little while. I haven't read every single comment, so I don't know if the conversation has evolved or into what direction it has gone, but to the OP's original issue: If Vapers police themselves and exercise some common sense, then the outside perception will be more positive, meaning less painful regulation (although tax is tax, and Uncle Sam likes money).
In the Army, it is a very common thing for one @$$clown to ruin something good for the rest of us... so we generally police eachother up...harshly.
There are places where common sense tells you that it would be innapropriate. case in point, we visited my elderly aunt last night for dinner, and I went out to the front porch to vape. Its her house and her space and she didn't invite me to do it inside. I wont do it at the office, I wont do it in front of my kids, and I sure as hell wont do it in front of other peoples kids. Just my .02 though. opinions and all that jazz.
In the Army, it is a very common thing for one @$$clown to ruin something good for the rest of us... so we generally police eachother up...harshly.
There are places where common sense tells you that it would be innapropriate. case in point, we visited my elderly aunt last night for dinner, and I went out to the front porch to vape. Its her house and her space and she didn't invite me to do it inside. I wont do it at the office, I wont do it in front of my kids, and I sure as hell wont do it in front of other peoples kids. Just my .02 though. opinions and all that jazz.
Interesting. I visited an elderly aunt on Friday evening. Hadn't seen her in years.
She was delighted that I was off the cigarettes and had absolutely no problem with vaping in her home, encouraged it actually.
Mine thought it WAS smoking... beforehand I was actually a smokeless tobacco user, so she didn't even realize I had an addiction. in her mind, I took a step back. ha. I'm sure if I was a full on smoker before and she was accustomed to the smell and smoke, it would have been viewed differently though.
I don't mean to come off any certain way with what I said, and re-reading it now, I realize that my feelings on what I do around children may make other's feel like I am judging the way they conduct themselves. that isn't my intent. Please know that I don't mean to offend. I have 6 kids to look after and I am SO PARANOID that I will screw one of them up, that I am extremely cautious with what they see me do... I am there hero after all.
This is good to know. That your intent is not to judge the way others conduct themselves. Cause when you said:
It seems like the "you" is general and about others. Also appears that these others who do not agree with your take on what is appropriate and inappropriate are not exercising common sense (aka good conduct).
And then if you go on to say or imply that 'vaping anywhere around other people's kids' is inappropriate, it reads as a very broad judgment that could be used to say vaping in a whole bunch of outdoor locations (where kids may be present) is something that is ruining vaping for everyone else, and is why vapers ought to be policing other vapers. Harshly, if need be. Publicly scolding a fellow vaper who dared take a puff, or ten, while on a public beach, where kids are present.
Glad your intent was not in that direction, even if your words clearly are.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
