Widgets Magazine
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 43
  1. Arrow Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    More and more people are quitting smoking the hazardous and costly cigarettes in exchange for the safe and affordable cigarettes. How long do you think until the government will start to unlawfully and unconstitutionally tax liquid nicotine? How long do you think until the government and businesses will start to unlawfully and unconstitutionally ban harmless cigarettes from restaurants, hospitals, retail stores, and public places (OKC Zoo for example)?

    We all know about the dreadful No Smoking signs, but do you think we will also be seeing No Vaping (dictionary do not consider this a word....yet) signs anytime soon?

    Once this happens, we might as well ban humidifiers. When a person complains (most likely when they are not educated), I find that example explaining the use of humidifiers help them to understand the harmless vapor.

    For now, I will enjoy "smoking" everywhere in hospitals, while shopping, visiting animals, and everywhere quite comfortably.

    Do you vape? The dictionary also consider this not a word....yet, but it will soon be.

    Vape = Smoke
    Vapor = Smoker
    Vaping = Smoking

    On a side note, I just learned that the deaf club recently banned smoking in the bar/poker/pool/dance area upstairs (2nd level). For the New Year party, I feel so fortunate to vape while drinking and playing pool without the hassle of going outside in the cold.

    How Much Money ($$$) Thunder is Saving

    Due to high prices, Thunder switched from Marlboro to Carnival. The cost averages $35 per carton. Thunder used 4 cartons, plus a few packs, monthly. The total cost were on average $140 for the cartons plus additional packs to around $175 monthly.

    With the liquid nicotine, there are typically 5 in a pack and the cost averages $10 each. Thunder buys 4 or 5 packs monthly making the cost a tiny $40 to $50 monthly.

    This is why everyone must (as ordered by Thunder) switch from filthy to clean. We are all smoking/vaping for the nicotine, so the tobacco and tar is not what we need. It will taste so much better and really fresh. There is even no nasty smell, too! Its real simple to use. Just do the switch without any hassle or suffering. There will be zero withdrawal.

    Thunder recommends Clean Cigs (found at Smokin' J's in Del City) or Blu Cigs (disposable at Walgreens or rechargeable online).

  2. Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    So we like to speak about ourselves in the 3rd person now huh?

    Well, I for one am glad to see smoking bans and would like to see it banned at all public places. Just because you want to smoke, doesn't mean i have to be subjected to it. Remember that part of the consitution about your freedoms doesn't including smoking. AND it only covers your rights and freedoms up to the point where they interfere with those of others.

    But rather than answer the question above (which i doubt has any real chance of coming up), i would pose the question of why smoke at all? Nicontine is highly addictive, so you really have become reliant on that product, but you know you could save that much more money if you quit. My grandfather smoked for 30 years and gave it up only after he had a heart attack and had a bypass. He's been free of them now for 20 years. Imagine how much he saved over the span of 20 years by not smoking.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    Special taxing will likely depend on how people use the cigarette replacements. While less harmful than cigarettes, prolonged use is still likely to lead to more health issues that often end up being payed by other tax payers. If people are predominately using them as a phase to quitting then it probably will not have similar taxes as cigarettes, if it becomes predominately recreational then it is possible since these are only healthy by comparison to smoking. The taxes on cigarettes do not even come close to the additional medical costs incurred by the state due to people smoking.

    Things and behaviors are banned from places all the time that are not 'harmful' for various reasons and in this case that is not unconstitutional. Just because the manufactures say you can use them anywhere does not mean businesses or states will allow it.

  4. Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    Quote Originally Posted by bombermwc View Post
    So we like to speak about ourselves in the 3rd person now huh?

    Well, I for one am glad to see smoking bans and would like to see it banned at all public places. Just because you want to smoke, doesn't mean i have to be subjected to it. Remember that part of the consitution about your freedoms doesn't including smoking. AND it only covers your rights and freedoms up to the point where they interfere with those of others.

    But rather than answer the question above (which i doubt has any real chance of coming up), i would pose the question of why smoke at all? Nicontine is highly addictive, so you really have become reliant on that product, but you know you could save that much more money if you quit. My grandfather smoked for 30 years and gave it up only after he had a heart attack and had a bypass. He's been free of them now for 20 years. Imagine how much he saved over the span of 20 years by not smoking.
    Hi, can you reread the original post again, please? We're not talking about smoking. The topic is basically about vaping. So far, its not banned anywhere in the nation.

    And does anyone know where to get the actual law text regarding smoking must be of age 18? I believe there is no law on the record regarding vaping and that anyone can actually vape as soon they are old enough themselves to be able to make a decision on their own to start vaping as young as 16 (maybe younger, since kids are becoming smarter much earlier). However, stores are only selling Vaparettes to customers of 18+ age...most likely being on the safe side to avoid unlawful arrest by the police and unlawful charges by the DA. I do think that customers of legal age can buy Vaparettes for those younger vapers. Most importantly, I'd like to see the specific text of the law for both state and national.

    Okay, Pete just did a change. We can't edit our posts anymore after 180 minutes. LoloL So, I want to include another new word to the above. :-)

    Vaparette = Cigarette

    So we have Vape, Vaper, Vaping, and Vaparette.

    Also, a correction to Vaper (misspelled Vapor in original post.) Yes, vapor is correctly spelled for the mist part, but vaper is the spelling for smoker as in "er" meaning a person active in that.

    Who do I contact to add these words to the official English language dictionary?

  5. Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    Snowman, I've researched many hours regarding the health of using Electronic Cigarettes, which will soon be known as Vaparette and I could not find any health issues or complications whatsoever. We do know that tobacco is harmful to our health and to others (as second-hand-smoke), but what do we know about nicotine? After all these years, there is nothing from the medical experts about any risk from nicotine usage other than overdose with death potential (such as too many nicotine patches and/or the use of nicotine patches while smoking). Is it possible for nicotine to cause cancer? Then again, everything causes cancer, heck there are more legally allowed things and consumables that cause cancer than banned products. And what about the vapor mist? We do know that Vaparettes produce vapors that quickly dissolves and do not stain on material (such as white turning yellow). Most importantly, I am curious if there are any mass studies currently ongoing to produce the result regarding the safety of Vaparettes.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    There is no uniformity of product or risk with the new cigs, and they change constantly right now, so any studies would be unable to really grasp the situation.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
    Snowman, I've researched many hours regarding the health of using Electronic Cigarettes, which will soon be known as Vaparette and I could not find any health issues or complications whatsoever. We do know that tobacco is harmful to our health and to others (as second-hand-smoke), but what do we know about nicotine? After all these years, there is nothing from the medical experts about any risk from nicotine usage other than overdose with death potential (such as too many nicotine patches and/or the use of nicotine patches while smoking). Is it possible for nicotine to cause cancer? Then again, everything causes cancer, heck there are more legally allowed things and consumables that cause cancer than banned products. And what about the vapor mist? We do know that Vaparettes produce vapors that quickly dissolves and do not stain on material (such as white turning yellow). Most importantly, I am curious if there are any mass studies currently ongoing to produce the result regarding the safety of Vaparettes.
    Anything conclusive will be a long ways out and if everyone acts like it is their right to do this everywhere with nothing to back up it is really significantly better to other around them or damage to buildings, that only increases the likelihood of bans.

  8. Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    I do not see how it can damage buildings. The atomizers are thrown away in the trash with zero fire hazard. The vapor mist do not cause any yellowish stain and quickly goes away (the same as humidifiers' vapor mist). The only hazard that I could see is plugging the product to an outlet for a recharge, but the same risk applies for all other electric merchandises.

    One suggestion, I do think that Electronic Cigarettes need to be in black and other colors only instead of white. The lights need to be in any colors other than orange. This is to prevent an uneducated person from escalating to an argument and/or fight initially before realizing their action is wrong. Blu Cig is the best, because theirs is in black with blue light.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    FWIW, there are places which do not permit the e-cigs. Warren Theater comes to mind right off. I don't think they are out on a limb all alone by any means.

  10. #10

    Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    Perhaps the people who do the analysis will be a little more thorough than simply basing their results off of what Thunder can see?

  11. Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    Quote Originally Posted by kevinpate View Post
    FWIW, there are places which do not permit the e-cigs. Warren Theater comes to mind right off. I don't think they are out on a limb all alone by any means.
    I don't see how that is possible. Can you provide evidence? I think this will cause an uproar, because there is no basis on not allowing it.

  12. #12

    Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    As to proof, visit their website. You'll see they have notices for no cell phones and for no e cigs.
    As to how they can do it ... their shop, their rules. Nothing more complicated than that. No different than banning outside food and drink.

  13. Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    I guess movie theaters is an acceptable exception since the temporary mist can get in the way of screen viewing. No other places should ban it without logical basis.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    T, see
    http://www.warrentheatres.com/faqs32.asp

    As to how they can, that's easy. It's their house, so it's their rules. They could require semi-formal attire by all movie goers if they thought they could get enough business to sustain them. No real biggie there.

  15. #15

    Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
    I guess movie theaters is an acceptable exception since the temporary mist can get in the way of screen viewing. No other places should ban it without logical basis.
    You're suggesting that private property owners shouldn't be allowed to exclude you from their property for any legal reason? Vapers need the same protections as racial minorities then?

  16. #16

    Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    Quote Originally Posted by Midtowner View Post
    You're suggesting that private property owners shouldn't be allowed to exclude you from their property for any legal reason? Vapers need the same protections as racial minorities then?
    Private property is allowed to have rights just as long as they don't interfere with Thunders LOL

  17. #17
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    13,229
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    Why are people taking up smoking these days? I mainly didn't because trying to smoke irritated my throat and made me cough. It certainly didn't feel cool. It felt stupid.

  18. Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bunty View Post
    Why are people taking up smoking these days? I mainly didn't because trying to smoke irritated my throat and made me cough. It certainly didn't feel cool. It felt stupid.
    You need to drink plenty of required water daily and you won't have a problem with irritated throat. Vaping is so kool!!! :-P

  19. #19

    Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
    You need to drink plenty of required water daily and you won't have a problem with irritated throat. Vaping is so kool!!! :-P
    Yes! I totally agree!! Spending $50 a month to get addicted to nicotine!! It is cool...

  20. Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    Quote Originally Posted by ZYX2 View Post
    Yes! I totally agree!! Spending $50 a month to get addicted to nicotine!! It is cool...
    Yup. It works wonderful for all sort of reasons, including ease of stress, calm the nerves, etc. Its also wonderful to prevent impulse eating.

  21. #21

    Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    Quote Originally Posted by zyx2 View Post
    yes! I totally agree!! Spending $50 a month to get addicted to nicotine!! It is cool...
    Lol +1.

  22. #22

    Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
    Yup. It works wonderful for all sort of reasons, including ease of stress, calm the nerves, etc. Its also wonderful to prevent impulse eating.
    Buy a gym membership instead. You'll live longer and you'll be happier.

  23. #23

    Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
    Yup. It works wonderful for all sort of reasons, including ease of stress, calm the nerves, etc. Its also wonderful to prevent impulse eating.
    reading, walking, painting, romancing, biking, fishing, assorted non-clothed activities, collecting, writing, composing, singing, yada, yada, yada are other ways to ease stress and keep calm w/o the expense of vapid vaping on a vaperette, the functional equal of a crutch for one's addiction.

    You're a grown up, and you're probably better off than you were when you were smoking. Yet I'm fairly confident you're not as well off as you would be if you could also set aside the nicotine monkey once and for all.

    From a pure financial standpoint, add up a month worth of your vaping expenses. Multiply that amount times 12. That's how much further along on paying off your trailer you could be next Christmas eve, with next to no extra effort on your part after the first 72 hours. Something to think about T, but it is up to you to make it happen.

  24. #24

    Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    Quote Originally Posted by kevinpate View Post
    reading, walking, painting, romancing, biking, fishing, assorted non-clothed activities, collecting, writing, composing, singing, yada, yada, yada are other ways to ease stress and keep calm w/o the expense of vapid vaping on a vaperette, the functional equal of a crutch for one's addiction.
    Could have used that in V is for Vendetta lol

  25. #25

    Default Re: Could going forward also bring unfortunate backward?

    I had honestly never heard of these things before. It's amazing the things people will do to make a buck. First of all, in this country it seems that anyone can claim something is safe and that is what people believe until rigorously, and scientifically proven otherwise. Really no one knows if these things are safe. So let's just stop calling them safe right there... their safety is unknown. Until recently there was no regulatory body that had authority over them to verify these claims (see next paragraph). But you know what, if eating salty potato chips for 40 years is enough irritation to cause colon cancer in old age you will never convince me that something like this isn't very likely an inhaled carcinogen.

    Just because something is a vapor doesn't make it safe. I can think of so many vaporized or aerosolized products that are deadly when inhaled it isn't even funny. Come on.

    The claim that these things have no smell appears to be incorrect, although it does sound like the smell is much more faint depending on the cartridge flavor, etc.

    I just read that in 2010 the FDA won a legal ruling giving them the power to regulate e-cigs as tobacco products. In theory it should now be an age-restricted product, although a quick online search certainly doesn't give me that impression and I can't find any evidence of the FDA cracking down on this industry yet.

    I am guessing that someone is going to have to challenge smoking restriction rules to get some legal determination that "vapeing" an e-cig is the same as smoking and therefore banned. I would think that the federal governments recognition that e-cigs can be regulated by the FDA would go a long way in favor of lumping them all under the same ban, but who knows I'm not a lawyer and the law isn't always that black and white.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Forward Foods
    By foodiefan in forum Retail & Services
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 12-27-2013, 01:48 PM
  2. Replies: 28
    Last Post: 06-11-2011, 02:34 PM
  3. Flash Forward
    By so1rfan in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-25-2009, 10:33 PM
  4. Looking forward to 2005 Legislature
    By okcpulse in forum Politics
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-31-2008, 01:57 AM
  5. La unFortunate
    By Decious in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 09-11-2005, 07:05 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO