The great e-cig ban begins

[Luce]

Re: The great e-cig ban begins

it is still putting out harmful chemicals..

That remains to be seen.

[thalassa]

Re: The great e-cig ban begins

If polypropylene glycol had serious risks, we'd know about it from 30+ years of rescue inhalers.

Actually, propylene glycol is known to be a respiratory and eye irritant for some people. Also, it is known to cause a number of serious heath problems in children that are overexposed via IV medications. Toxicity is a function of dose, not presence. Compared to a ecig being use in place of a regular cig (for, say, a pack or pack and a half a day smoker), the propylene glycol in an inhaler dose (2 puffs) is negligable. All I'm saying is that there isn't enough data to make a conclusion.

[okoserce]

Re: The great e-cig ban begins

A big part of it, atleast in public spaces and a lesser extent private spaces as well..is willful negligence/providing an environment that will knowingly cause harm..While I agree, the e-cigarettes are way better then traditional cigarettes by far..it is still putting out harmful chemicals.. Often businesses don't want to deal with those kinds of ramifications as they could easily face criminal charges and suits so the reaction is to ban.. as someone who has issues with asthma and is allergic to smoke I'm all for it..but while I disagree with poisoning your body it is your own choice within the confines of your own home.

[Luce]

Re: The great e-cig ban begins

Unless you live in a lawless society, there are always boundaries.

Yep. But if you have boundaries strictly for the purpose of having boundaries, you may as well be a puritan.

- - - Updated - - -

Ok, bringing it back to the ecig topic - as though my opinion weren't perfectly clear by now

Ecigs should not be banned (legislatively) any more than cigarettes should be banned (legislatively). Obviously I feel that the business owner should have the decisionmaking power in both scenarios.

That being said, since regular cigarettes are already banned pretty much everywhere I don't see any reason in the world why they would allow ecigs.

Because there is no actual evidence that they have any ill effects on anyone else.

[Maria de Luna]

Re: The great e-cig ban begins

I worked as a security guard at a hospital in Wilmington DE, we did not allow smoking in rooms. People do not care that there is oxygen, and explosion risks and fire alarms and sick people, people that wanna smoke, wanna bloody smoke. We did not allow e-cigs either, we didn't wanna nitpick, or feel like making sure thats what it was and crapola. The guy watching the camera saw a cigarette we made em get rid of it.... people inevitably complained, but it is what it is, NO smoking on the property, it was a pain to enforce that too, because people think that walking down sidewalk (that the hospital maintains BTW) they are on public property, they are not, they need to be a block down or standing in the street...

Legislature supported our stance (In Delaware smoking must be at least 50 feet from entrances to public buildings and not indoors in public buildings or restaurants.) but legislature did not make our lives easier. So I dunno how much it matters.

[Roknrol]

Re: The great e-cig ban begins

Ok, bringing it back to the ecig topic - as though my opinion weren't perfectly clear by now

Ecigs should not be banned (legislatively) any more than cigarettes should be banned (legislatively). Obviously I feel that the business owner should have the decisionmaking power in both scenarios.

That being said, since regular cigarettes are already banned pretty much everywhere I don't see any reason in the world why they would allow ecigs.

[DanieMarie]

Re: The great e-cig ban begins

Yeah I think it sort of got derailed by the fact that what is acceptable and what you can and can't do differs from place to place. Let's get it back on topic. It's not even about smoking...it's about e-cigs and whether or not THOSE should be banned.

This is my fault. Sorry :/

[anunitu]

Re: The great e-cig ban begins

Not sure how e-cigs ban became also about gun rights...But perhaps this thread became just about ALL rights ?

[B. de Corbin]

Re: The great e-cig ban begins

Sorry...I misinterpreted your point

I was just making a joke with the AK-47 comment.

It's OK - I don't have an AK-47, but my friend Monk does, and it's a hoot to shoot. I do have a nice SKS though.

[DanieMarie]

Re: The great e-cig ban begins

Sorry...I misinterpreted your point

I was just making a joke with the AK-47 comment. But I'd like to point out that you -are- allowed to have rifles here and in a lot of other European countries. You probably need more permits for them than you do for the US, but you -can- have them and you're even allowed to use them to shoot deer and wild boar and stuff. I think there are also a bunch of shooting ranges kicking around, but sport shooting just isn't that popular (hunting is).

We can all do and not do different things in our countries. I might not be able to carry a concealed handgun, but I can sunbathe nude in the park (I don't....but I -could-). You might not be able to drink a big, open bottle of wine in the middle of a crowded street, but you can go shopping on a Sunday. My point is, we all have different laws based on our values.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: The great e-cig ban begins

LOL like polish your AK-47 collection?

Nope - clean my rifle collection after a day shooting in my back yard range.

Lotta fun, Olympic sport, ya know...

Is it really wrong to speak up for what I believe in? In this country (and in yours) we have the freedom to speak our minds and say what we think. I recognize that you have the right to your opinion, but somehow I get "1984" quotes for speaking mine?

Oh my.. ouchy, ouchy ouchy!

I quote 1984 to make a point about believing two opposite things are true at the same time, and you play the "poor little me" card, as if I am somehow shutting you up by doing so...

[DanieMarie]

Re: The great e-cig ban begins

LOL like polish your AK-47 collection? At the end of the day, there's not -that- much you can't do in your own home that we can't do. It's what you can and can't do in public that has much different boundaries. And at the end of the day, y'all banned smoking in most states much sooner than most countries on this side of the Atlantic did.

I do think rules should generally accommodate the largest number of people. That's actually -why- I'm for smoking bans (aside from personal reasons). Most people -do not- smoke. Most people -do not- like breathing smoke.

I'd also like to point out that we do not live in a dictatorship and that we elect the government that makes the laws. Here, we also have coalition governments (there are so many parties that it's rare that we get a single party government), so there has to be some sort of compromise in order for a law or regulation to even take place. I might not always like the result (I'm super pissed about all the exceptions that are getting made for our minimum wage bill and the fact that people who naturalize can't be dual citizens, for example), but I think it's better than the alternative. We also have a lot of referendums in my state (not as many as the Swiss, but quite a few). We've missed a few steps in talking about process, but ultimately I'm not in favour of the government just starkly introducing legislation either. I think it works better when public opinion is mostly for it. Is it really wrong to speak up for what I believe in? In this country (and in yours) we have the freedom to speak our minds and say what we think. I recognize that you have the right to your opinion, but somehow I get "1984" quotes for speaking mine?

[B. de Corbin]

Re: The great e-cig ban begins

War is peace.
Ignorance is strength.
Freedom is slavery.

It seems to me that when the choices one makes depend wholly on what the government allows or does not allow, when one has to check with a rule book to find out if one's actions are permitted by a Byzantine government bureaucracy, or when small minorities can make the rules that large majorities have no choice but to follow, the word "freedom" is ill applied.

Yes, people have to follow rules in a civilized society - I don't care for the idea of anarchy at all, since "anarchy" simply means that the most brutal and ruthless rule - but, to have the maximum freedom, the rules should be the bare minimum.

But I'm just a crazy American. What do I know?

(I'm gonna go into the privacy of my own home and do something that Europeans aren't allowed to do to celebrate my madness)

[DanieMarie]

Re: The great e-cig ban begins

To me freedom is simply being allowed to live life your way with minimal interruptions from higher governments, unless you do something bad. I think a lot of freedom lovers in north america would agree that none of us are free here. Can't complain however, we're some of the most free countries on earth for sure. It could always be worse.

Unless you live in a lawless society, there are always boundaries. You could always be more "free" technically. Where those boundaries are set depends on the people and what they value. Some feel it means that you should be able to do whatever you want, but others feel that it means that your rights should be protected. If that society values rights such as employee protection and equal access to education, there are going to restrictions in the rights of other people. That's just how it is.

You mention "freedom" in terms of North America, but I think you and I can agree that Canada and the US are very different countries in terms of how things are done and what people generally value.

[Doc_Holliday]

Re: The great e-cig ban begins

To me freedom is simply being allowed to live life your way with minimal interruptions from higher governments, unless you do something bad. I think a lot of freedom lovers in north america would agree that none of us are free here. Can't complain however, we're some of the most free countries on earth for sure. It could always be worse.