Inevitable nationwide ban on vaping

[wasab]

1 hour ago, MoonSpot said:

 

Wow.  I don't even know what to say to such complete and utter bullshit so hypocritically provided.

 

 

Weed has no additive chemical. Go do some research

[steelo]

1 minute ago, wasab said:

Weed has no additive chemical. Go do some research

Although not as addictive as nicotine (or caffeine), it can be somewhat addictive.

 

https://www.cdc.gov/marijuana/health-effects.html

[wasab]

1 hour ago, steelo said:

You do realize caffeine is an addictive drug that can be more harmful than nicotine, right? 

You ever get withdrawal symptoms from one week of not drinking coffee or coca cola? 

[steelo]

Just now, wasab said:

You ever get withdrawal symptoms from one week of not drinking coffee or coca cola? 

Definitely, if I go without caffeine for a day I will have a massive headache.

[wasab]

1 minute ago, wasab said:

You ever get withdrawal symptoms from one week of not drinking coffee or coca cola? 

Not the legal ones sold in regulated retailer. 

[steelo]

3 minutes ago, wasab said:

Not the legal ones sold in regulated retailer. 

I'm not sure what  you mean by 'regulated retailer' Is there a caffeine 'black market'? LOL

[wasab]

2 minutes ago, steelo said:

I'm not sure what  you mean by 'regulated retailer' Is there a caffeine 'black market'? LOL

Not talking about coffee, talking about weed, and your claim your body will become dependent on it is just riddiculous. 

[steelo]

16 minutes ago, wasab said:

Not talking about coffee, talking about weed, and your claim your body will become dependent on it is just riddiculous. 

I didn't make such a claim regarding marijuana. I think you may be replying to the wrong poster. I posted a CDC link that shows 1 out of 10 people can become addicted. Yes, it is possible to become dependent on marijuana, I guess... but not likely.

 

Anyways, I'd think it would be safer to inhale water vapor versus heavy marijuana smoke.

[dalekphalm]

7 hours ago, Ergroilnin said:

So ban cigarettes and alcohol too. Do not cherry pick just the stuff you personally are against if you truly mean what you just wrote.

The problem here is that we are comparing cigarettes, vaping, alcohol, and cannabis as if they're all the same. They aren't.

There are some health benefits of minor amounts of drinking. Most problems with alcohol are dose related. Heavy drinking is super extremely unhealthy.

 

Cannabis has a very high potential for medicinal benefits, and the drawbacks are fairly minor for the vast majority of people.

 

Frankly, Cigarettes probably should be banned. There are quite simply no health benefits to cigarettes.

 

Do I personally think they should be banned? No. But I also fully support expanded restrictions around where you can smoke. No indoors, no public spaces that are confined. I'd even like to expand no smoking so that you can't smoke around other people (within a certain distance) at all, since if I walk past a smoker on the side walk, I'm still getting some second hand smoke.

7 hours ago, Sauron said:

Didn't they just release a study showing that vaping greatly increases the risk of lung infection? It *might* be healthier than cigarettes (though as more things are discovered that's less and less clear) but don't delude yourself into thinking there are no health consequences.

Vaping has also not been around for that long, so we quite simply don't know about the long term effects (talking about 20+ years of usage).

7 hours ago, Sauron said:

As for whether they should be banned, I don't think it makes a lot of sense to ban it when "normal" cigarettes are legal and sold by the government...

With the not-so-small difference that cigarette smoke and vape vapour don't just affect the person choosing to inhale them. Alcohol, if nothing else, only makes you drunk. Alcohol also has no permanent consequences if used in moderation, unlike cigarettes.

Agreed - with alcohol, you're not harming others with "second hand smoke".

8 hours ago, steelo said:

And those who assume vaping is safer than cigarettes are 100% correct. This is very well proven and documented in Europe, but also information our media and government doesn't want the general public to hear.

We can ONLY say that vaping is safer than cigarettes in the short term. We can infer that this trend will continue into the long term, but that's yet to be proven, since vaping hasn't been around long enough to see the effects of lifelong vaping, for example.

8 hours ago, steelo said:

Interestingly enough, states like Michigan (where a person can be imprisoned for 6 months for vaping flavored juice) have recently legalized marijuana.

 

Would you consider that to be a 'healthy' habit to replace vaping?

I would 100% consider smoking cannabis to be healthier than vaping. More studies need to be completed with cannabis, but there are definite upsides to it, and the harm seems to be far less, for most people*

 

*There are some people that have a larger psychological risk to cannabis. Most normal people don't have this risk though.

5 hours ago, steelo said:

Seriously, if you're that paranoid about inhaling toxins may I suggest you never step foot in any city. You do realize that your average passenger car probably emits 10 times more pollutants than the smoker who just blew a cloud in your face. For the record though, I am very cautious when in public where I exhale.

That's a crap argument and you know it. Just because cars pollute does not mean I consent to second hand smoke. Not to mention that polluting cars IS a problem that we are working to fix, with things like Hybrid cars and EV's.

4 hours ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

The thing is, cars are a "necessary evil". People need to be able move around quickly, people don't need to vape.

 

With that being said, I think banning vaping is BS. I could potentially understand banning vaping and smoking in public spaces only, because "secondhand" smoke and vape are proven to be unhealthy. But even then, I think you should be allowed to do whatever you want in private/at home.

I agree that this is the most practical solution.

4 hours ago, steelo said:

LOL. Absolutely one can become addicted to junk food. That is a perfectly valid comparison.

As mentioned, there's a difference between a mental addiction and a physiological addiction. Mental addictions are typically only for people who have a certain susceptibility to addiction in general (I'd suggest some kind of chemical imbalance in the brain).

 

Physiological additions literally change your brain, and create a substance dependence. Junk food doesn't cause this (nor does Cannabis, for that matter).

4 hours ago, steelo said:

Addiction is addiction my friend. I won't feel physically sick and break out into cold sweats if I stop vaping, but I am not going to be in a very good mood for about 2-3 days.

This is simply untrue. There are different types of addiction, that cause different reactions, and at different severity.

2 hours ago, steelo said:

Also, many soft drinks (which often contain caffeine) are so acidic, they will eat through metal. Imagine what it does to a human stomach.

Imagine what they'll do to your stomach? Nothing. Stomach acid will eat through metal. Stomach acid, as previously shown above, is generally significantly more acidic than soda pop.

[Donut417]

2 hours ago, steelo said:

 

"Some studies show nicotine, like caffeine, can even have positive effects. It's a stimulant, which raises the heart rate and increases the speed of sensory information processing, easing tension and sharpening the mind."

 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-nicotine-all-bad/

Which increases your blood pressure. All fun and games until you pop an artery. Or you end up on medication like I take. 

 

 

[Donut417]

2 hours ago, steelo said:

don't you think?

People are being taken to the ER due to vaping. Kids are getting ahold of vaping products and becoming addicted. If the retailers followed the rules this wouldn’t as much of an issue. But it’s being done for the children and public safety. 

 

Also the same could be said about piracy. You can get 5 years and or pay a $500,000 fine. The fact is the law is the law. Don’t like it then call your elected representatives. Personally I’m for the ban. Because people who vape don’t follow the law. As they like to say “it’s not smoking”. So they vape in areas that they shouldn’t. 

[dalekphalm]

28 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

People are being taken to the ER due to vaping. Kids are getting ahold of vaping products and becoming addicted. If the retailers followed the rules this wouldn’t as much of an issue. But it’s being done for the children and public safety. 

 

Also the same could be said about piracy. You can get 5 years and or pay a $500,000 fine. The fact is the law is the law. Don’t like it then call your elected representatives. Personally I’m for the ban. Because people who vape don’t follow the law. As they like to say “it’s not smoking”. So they vape in areas that they shouldn’t. 

And when they blow a vape cloud out, it's like 5 meters long.

 

I'd be in favour of a ban in which you can't smoke or vape within x meters of anyone without their consent. If they want to smoke or vape at home, or alone in the park with no one around? Sure - I don't care. But I shouldn't have to inhale second hand smoke or vapor when, for example, crossing the street at a crosswalk, or while waiting to get on a bus.

 

Some smokers and vapers are considerate of others, and will walk away from others to smoke without blowing smoke in others faces. Those people are okay. They're not the problem. But a lot of smokers and vapers don't follow that "code of honour".

[wasab]

3 hours ago, steelo said:

I didn't make such a claim regarding marijuana. I think you may be replying to the wrong poster. I posted a CDC link that shows 1 out of 10 people can become addicted. Yes, it is possible to become dependent on marijuana, I guess... but not likely.

 

Anyways, I'd think it would be safer to inhale water vapor versus heavy marijuana smoke.

i meant coffee 

[Drak3]

1 hour ago, Donut417 said:

Because people who vape don’t follow the law. As they like to say “it’s not smoking”. So they vape in areas that they shouldn’t. 

In quite a few states, vaping and smoking are legally different.

[Andreas Lilja]

So everyone is freaking out because of 8 deaths in a 320 mil country? Aren't they using non-legit thingies as well?

[Donut417]

2 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

In quite a few states, vaping and smoking are legally different.

Thats where the issue is. E-cigarettes should be regulated like tobacco and weed and alcohol. It seems selling vaping products to minors is against Federal Law. Our Governor in Michigan wants to create a law governing vaping, but im my opinion they should just classify the products under tobacco and use the same rules. They both contain nicotine and such are both addictive. 

 

https://www.michiganradio.org/post/whitmer-signs-ban-minors-vaping

 

Found this, because I wanted to know what Michigan is doing. Personally if you want to vape, fine, but I DONT vape around me. I dont want to breath in any of those cancer vapors. 

 

But to be clear, the ban is about Minors smoking. Flavored vaping products kinda target kids and get them in to the who nicotine addiction thing. Maybe the ATF needs to kick down a few doors at retailers and set an example. The ban basically allows local law enforcement in the state to act and deter minors from vaping, it helps schools keep vaping out. As it stands I stand by Governor Whitmer in this case. At least she is doing something, maybe not fixing the DAMN roads like she promised, but trying to fix what is being called an "epidemic" by our schools. 

[Drak3]

Just now, Donut417 said:

But to be clear, the ban is about Minors smoking.

No, it isn't. The """Children""" is a convenient excuse for the government to infringe upon the freedoms of citizens.

[dalekphalm]

2 minutes ago, Andreas Lilja said:

So everyone is freaking out because of 8 deaths in a 320 mil country? Aren't they using non-legit thingies as well?

While some people are freaking out (since there will always be someone that freaks out over everything), most aren't freaking out about it.

 

But, with that in mind, Vaping has been seen as "safe" - 8 deaths means maybe it's not that safe. 8 deaths means it should be investigated and researched. Maybe it was just some bad batches - or perhaps there might be more to the dangers than previously thought.

 

Consider Cannabis - it has caused zero confirmed deaths... ever. To overdose on Cannabis, you'd need to consume about 10,000 times the amount of THC in a typical joint. Even super concentrates might only have 2-5 times the THC amount. It's not even clear that Cannabis can cause lung cancer (there was one study from Sweden in 2013 that said yes, Cannabis causes lung cancer - but 91% of participants also smoked cigarettes). Most evidence actually goes towards Cannabis not causing lung cancer.

 

So even 8 deaths is really concerning. If it turns out it was only bad batches that were maybe tainted or something? Good. But if there's a risk that vaping actually can kill you - that's something we need to research and confirm.

[Donut417]

Just now, Drak3 said:

No, it isn't. The """Children""" is a convenient excuse for the government to infringe upon the freedoms of citizens.

Well if retailers followed the FUCKING LAW it wouldn't be an issue. But schools across Michigan have issues with Children vaping. Its not like she banned them all, they only banned the flavored variety. You can still get your nicotine fix. There are 50 states in the great nation. If you dont like the law in one, move. Because as it stands, the Feds are not doing their job on enforcing the law. When the federal government fails at life, which is has been doing for a long time. The states have to pick up the slack. 

 

If you read the article, the governor states the new law is just for now. She would like vaping to be rolled in to tobacco regulations. Which would be just fine. Once its properly regulated and law enforcement has the tools it needs to regulated, then they can sell all the bubble gum flavored vape juice you can buy. But when it falls under tobacco regulations that will mean, NO PUBLIC VAPING. Which means I dont have to deal with this in stores and restaurants and the like. 

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, Donut417 said:

Well if retailers followed the FUCKING LAW it wouldn't be an issue.

They do.

 

1 minute ago, Donut417 said:

But schools across Michigan have issues with Children vaping.

And for decades, schools across the US have had issues with children smoking.

 

2 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

Which means I dont have to deal with this in stores and restaurants and the like. 

A better solution would be to not go to stores and restaurants with policies that allow smoking/vaping.

But that requires personal responsibility, and we can't have that when there's government to make the "difficult" decisions for us.

[Donut417]

1 minute ago, Drak3 said:

smoking/v

Thats illegal now at any place. You can only smoke outside, in your car or at your home. Under the current Michigan law. I think you can still smoke at the casino, but they have special areas where you can. 

 

1 minute ago, Drak3 said:

decisions for us.

Well too many people who vape and smoke dont give a fuck about the ones who dont. My mom smoke for 16 years of my life. I find that is a nasty habit and I shouldn't have to suffer for your addiction. 

 

Also according to the Detroit Free Press the CDC is investigating 450 cases of lung disease they believe to be caused by vaping. So clearly something is wrong. Michigan's department of Health may have stumbled on a case here in Michigan as well. https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2019/09/18/michigan-ban-vape-flavored/2363590001/

 

The fact is there needs to be a national ban to let the CDC sort this shit out. Because I dont want Lung disease  caused by someone else vaping gasses. This is part of the reason I think the smoking ban went in to effect so people didnt have to suffer lung cancer because of people smoking. 

 

Again. You dont like the law? MOVE. Im sure there will be states that wont enact any type of ban or regulation on these products. Move to those states. 

 

 

[Drak3]

Just now, Donut417 said:

You dont like the law? MOVE.

You should follow your own advice. Instead of trying to control people to do what YOU want, instead of taking responsibility for your own life.

 

1 minute ago, Donut417 said:

I shouldn't have to suffer for your addiction. 

Then don't go to the same places. There have been plenty of non-smoking places for a few decades before laws came around.

But that wasn't good enough for people like you.

2 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

The fact is there needs to be a national ban

No, far from it.

[Donut417]

3 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

No, far from it.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

 

See that part about promoting general Welfare. Considering the lung disease issue.  The Government has the right. But I would be willing to put it up to a vote. Michigan does allow the citizen to vote on changes to the state constitution and this could be put on the ballot. 

8 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Then don't go to the same places.

The law is on my side: 

 

Smoking will be prohibited in all public places and indoor workplaces including restaurants, hotels and bars under the Michigan Smoking Ban. Under the law, the “workplace” is defined as any place that serves food or drink and has at least one employee.

[Donut417]

5 hours ago, steelo said:

Caffeine commonly found in soda actually increases stomach acid production, so that's not entirely accurate.

 

https://www.uhs.umich.edu/caffeine

Not only that Caffeine makes you poop. 

[Drak3]

Just now, Donut417 said:

See that part about promoting general Welfare. Considering the lung disease issue.  The Government has the right.

No, they don't. For two reasons:

1. It contradicts the clause that comes right after it.
2. Promoting the general welfare does not mean taking draconian measures in attempt to try to insure physical health. It means not inhibiting the efforts of the citizens to improve their own lives and their communities as they see fit. It means providing legal recourse and punishment for those that actively harm their neighbors, that's not something smokers and vapers are doing.