Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by takyon on Wednesday June 26 2019, @02:16AM   Printer-friendly
from the vape-nay dept.

Submitted via IRC for Bytram

San Francisco bans e-cigarette sales

San Francisco has become the first US city to ban e-cigarette sales until their health effects are clearer. Officials on Tuesday voted to ban stores selling the vaporisers and made it illegal for online retailers to deliver to addresses in the city.

The California city is home to Juul Labs, the most popular e-cigarette producer in the US. Juul said the move would drive smokers back to cigarettes and "create a thriving black market".

San Francisco's mayor, London Breed, has 10 days to sign off the legislation, but has indicated that she would. The law would begin to be enforced seven months from that date, although there have been reports firms could mount a legal challenge.

Anti-vaping activists say firms deliberately target young people by offering flavoured products. Critics say that not only is more scientific investigation into the health impact needed, vaping can encourage young people to switch to cigarettes.

Also at CNET.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Wednesday June 26 2019, @01:37PM (1 child)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday June 26 2019, @01:37PM (#860074) Journal

    and nobody cared, because after all, why the fuck would you still be smoking?

    "Nobody" is probably the same fraction as anywhere else in the US, 14% currently. California towns aren't that virtuous.

    I get that cigarette smoke in public is a public nuisance. But I find it interesting how so many of these appeals are to apathy rather than the common good. If nobody really cares, then there's no point to the banning and thus, it shouldn't be done. Meanwhile, like most of the US, this town could have adopted rules that allow their minority of smokers to continue to enjoy the habit in set smoking areas.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by ilPapa on Wednesday June 26 2019, @04:26PM

    by ilPapa (2366) on Wednesday June 26 2019, @04:26PM (#860145) Journal

    "Nobody" is probably the same fraction as anywhere else in the US, 14% currently.

    When I say nobody cared, I mean nothing changed. There wasn't a mass migration of the 14% out of town and life didn't really change.

    Plus, a lot of people took the opportunity to drop the habit. We have one of the lowest rates of smoking in the US at the moment, less than 3%. So that means this one law has saved many lives. Of course, you could still smoke in your back yard or in your house, but not on the street, in parks, on the beach, or any other public place. But people got the hint it appears.

    --
    You are still welcome on my lawn.