Should E-Cigarettes be Allowed in Public Places?

Please note that the following article is a contribution of one of our readers and does not necessarily reflect the opinions of e-cigarettedangers.com.

Here in 2012, most of the country has realized that smoking is bad. States that allow any type of indoor smoking in public places are becoming more and more rare. Smoking has been banned on airplanes for quite some time now. Should e-cigarettes be treated similarly? In our opinion, definitely.

Despite the fact that e-cigarette makers claim that the “water vapor” emitted by their devices does no harm to people that are subjected to it (a claim still not verified by the FDA), it is undeniable that e-cigarettes send a bad message to children. Smoking anything is a negative habit and one that most reasonable people try to keep out of the lives of their children. If we allow people to smoke electronic cigarettes in restaurants, shopping malls, public parks, etc, won’t our message to the children become diluted?

It’s not like the makers of e-cigarettes package their products as if they are the habit-breaking miracle they advertise them to be. In fact, they try to make them look exactly like traditional cigarettes. The tips of them even light up or “glow” when the user inhales its vaporized liquid nicotine. The replacement packs are usually colored to look like the filters of actual cigarettes. Doesn’t it seem like smoking is being glorified?

Modern society has no need for people puffing away on every street corner. Employers don’t need their employees taking additional “smoke breaks” on company time. The smoking culture contributes little to nothing to our society. Why give it any wiggle room by allowing the users of electronic cigarettes to use and flaunt their devices wherever they please?

Not to mention it can be very frustrating for workers to enforce the non-smoking policies of their workplace when they are confused by electronic cigarette smokers, some of whom take pleasure in reminding them of the lack of regulation associated with e-cigarettes. Why not just ban them altogether?

My two cents.

This entry was posted in Guest Writer and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Should E-Cigarettes be Allowed in Public Places?

  1. david says:

    I disagree, when a child see’s an adult in public smoking an e cigarette, most likely they will ask they parent, “what is that?”. The parent should simply inform their child on what it is, letting them know that it is a safer alternative for the person who is most likely trying to quit smoking. The e cigarette is an effort to help people ween off smoking in a safer way. There should be no confusion for a work place, as it is not smoking. If the place of business does not feel people should have this work friendly device, (smoke free, scent free) then let them ban if for their business, otherwise the e cigarette in public makes perfect sense to me.

  2. Mimo says:

    I totally disagree. E-cigarettes are a true modern miracle and should definitely be allowed as they have been proven to be harmless. It is a brilliant tool that will keep Millions of weak smoking addicts from returning back to Tobacco.

    ” “Some 50 million Americans continue to smoke, and it’s not because they’re too stupid to realize it’s dangerous. They go on smoking in part because of a fact that the prohibitionists are loath to recognize: Nicotine is a drug with benefits. It has been linked by researchers (and smokers) to reduced anxiety and stress, lower weight, faster reaction time and improved concentration.

    “It’s time to be honest with the 50 million Americans, and hundreds of millions around the world, who use tobacco,” Dr. Rodu writes. “The benefits they get from tobacco are very real, not imaginary or just the periodic elimination of withdrawal.

    “It’s time to abandon the myth that tobacco is devoid of benefits, and to focus on how we can help smokers continue to derive those benefits with a safer delivery system.” ”

    Source: A Tool to Quit Smoking Has Some Unlikely Critics
    By JOHN TIERNEY
    Published: November 7, 2011
    The New York Times

  3. poop says:

    OP, WHY DO YOU HATE FREEDOM?

  4. Tim R says:

    Really? It’s not my job to teach your children. I quit tobacco because I believe electronic is much better for me than tobacco. You may believe what you like and teach your offspring what you want. That is your business. If, at such time, which I doubt will ever come, it is proven worse than smoking cigarettes, I may have to reconsider. I have tried to think of what might be worse than a protracted bout with cancer that kills you and frankly, I am having trouble with that. My advice: Tend to your own business, and if I do something that you don’t approve of that is not harming anyone (probably not even me), MIND YOUR OWN D… BUSINESS!

  5. Nothing this article mentions is a “danger” to anyone. This is the rant of a busybody trying to control what other people do.

  6. Mike says:

    This article proves how selfish people are. This person has obviously never seen someone go through a nicotine withdrawal, they can become extremely nasty and sometimes even violent. Personally, I believe e-cigarretes are a positive message sent to children because it shows the extent to which people go to in order to end an addiction, not a habit(as referred to by the writer) that they most likely began when they were young and immature. Nicotine is no worse for people than caffeine, its the thousands of other chemicals in ciggarettes that kill people. I couldnt wish more for the writer of this article to get run down by a drunk driver tonight, for its people like him or her that are ruining America and continuing the trend of the “pussification of America.”

  7. Betty Newberry says:

    It’s called freedom of choice. You mentioned ” The smoking culture contributes little to nothing to our society”, which is total bull. Tell me what you have contributed to society, then lemme send you a list of many famous people in history who have smoked, and those who are smoking today. You cannot control other people, only yourself.

  8. Peter says:

    “Vaping” is NOT smoking. My VAPORIZER looks nothing like a cigarette. VAPOR is NOT smoke. That’s 3rd grade science. I am under no impression to act according to some mistaken notion, based on ignorance, someone else gets when it “looks like” I’m doing something I’m not. That includes ignorant children. It’s YOUR job to teach them what is, and isn’t, smoking. I refuse to pay for your refusal to do so with my health.

    True, e-cig makers shot themselves in the foot by making them look like cigarettes, to appeal to smokers. If anything should be banned, the junky little cigarette imitators should. They perform poorly and only provide ammunition to those hysterical panty-twisters who shreik out claims of “What about the children?

    Despite the propaganda campaign, launched by the tobacco and pharmaceutical companies, I used a vaporizer to quit a 35 year smoking habit literally overnight. This after years of trying the FDA approve methods, none of which worked. Now I don’t smoke. Nicotine is the least of my concerns. I will not give up nicotine or take up smoking again, just so your children won’t become confused by the deliberate conflation of vaping and smoking.

    As for the water vapor, it’s been analyzed repeatedly, but not by the FDA; e-cigs are not medical devices. It contains water, propylene glycol (a ubiquitous food additive) and barely detectable trace amounts of nicotine and, occasionally, a few other chemicals, none of which are known or suspected of being harmful. It disperses rapidly and poses no long or short term risks to bystanders. Your children inhale more harmful substances while standing in their school cafeteria lines and at their bus stops.

    I’d also remind you that the FDA has approved the drug “Chantrix”, which to date is responsible for hundreds more deaths than all the vaporizers combined, for which the death toll is zero. I’ll not even mention the thousands of deaths caused by other “FDA approved” drugs.

  9. Peter says:

    May I also remind you that their are employers out there who are more enlightened than you on this subject and they allow vaping in their workplaces. Because they don’t make the mistake of conflating vaping and smoking, their vaping employees don’t take “smoke breaks”. Why should they? They aren’t smoking. The emit no offensive or harmful smoke. Their vapor doesn’t stain the walls or ceiling vents. They pay non-smoking insurance rates as well. Employers would be well served to encourage, or even subsidize, the use of vaporizers by their employees.

  10. stacey shaffer says:

    If ecigs are permitted on airplanes(which they are) they should be permitted everywhere. That is all.-

  11. By the same logic, lets ban fat people from appearing in public as well. They are not sending a positive message to our highly impressionable youth. And, while you’re at it, lets ban 90% of what appears on television as well as all non-G rated video games and movies if the concern here is our impressionable youth.

    Who gets to decide these things? The majority? If that’s the case, don’t you think the majority would also ban things like homosexual public displays of affection?

    This is about personal liberty – not about what you feel is objectionable. Since when does a product have to prove itself safe? If you want to ban something, it should be up to you to prove that it is unsafe, not the other way around. The cell phone you are using MIGHT be emitting radio waves that are harmful to me; the perfume you are wearing might be releasing particles in the air that are unsafe for me to breathe; the fluorescent lighting in the room might be causing some harm to my eyes. Have any of these things been proven? Do they need to be? I say they MIGHT BE causing harm so lets ban fluorescent lights, perfume and cell phones!

    Then, there are specific statements made in this article that are, frankly, asinine …

    “It’s not like the makers of e-cigarettes package their products as if they are the habit-breaking miracle they advertise them to be.” [Really? Who is making the claim that they are a habit-breaking miracle in their advertisements? Go ahead ... I'll give you time to find a half dozen examples of this ...]

    “Employers don’t need their employees taking additional “smoke breaks” on company time. The smoking culture contributes little to nothing to our society.” [This seems to be a reason FOR electronic cigarettes. Employees no longer will have to stop what they are doing and make the trek to the "smoking area." A quick two or three puffs at their desk from a (until proved otherwise) harmless e cigarette means far less productivity loss.]

    “Not to mention it can be very frustrating for workers to enforce the non-smoking policies of their workplace when they are confused by electronic cigarette smokers …” [Honestly, stupidity is not an excuse for anything in life. If a manager can't tell the difference between a lit cigarette and an electronic cigarette, I would be embarrassed to have them working for my company, let alone managing employees!]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>