Okay, Jenny Durkan, Let's Talk About Banning Vapes in Seattle

Comments

1

But burning marijuana leaves and inhaling that smoke, that’s just fine!

3

I'll be more than happy to support a ban. I can't stand walking behind somebody generating an industrial smokestack worth of toxic vapor that smells like cheap, artificial candy flavors. It's unfortunate a bunch of sociopaths show zero restraint and discretion within congested public settings in a rush to display their weaknesses.

4

You were doing good, but the veer into "any policy is meaningless because some people will get around it on the internet" is unworthy.

I like your ideas on flavor policy. Maybe all vape juice should be slightly bitter since we're told the youth are more sensitive to bitter. Or taste like Pepto-Bismol and denture cream.

Oh, bring in previous anti-loitering news stories, every vaping device plays classical music that the youth find uncool. Or 18 kHz tones only they can be annoyed by.

5

It's this kind of thing that give the left the reputation for being in favor of a nanny state.

6

"P.S. If you really want to take your municipal policy cues from San Francisco, please consider taxing large corporations"- because that's worked so well there?

7

Vaping smells like shit. Drug addicts should do their drugs without making a public stink.

8

Great, so she'll ban vaping but blowing weed smoke everywhere as you walk down the street and shooting heroin in public and leaving needles everywhere, that will still be A-OK!

10

One of the main ingredients in vape oil is vegetable glycerin...and it tastes sweet. You'll find it in almost every granola bar as a natural sweetener. Vape flavors are sweet, not because they are attracting kids, but because it is made with a natural sweetener. Hence, fruit flavors and no pizza flavors.

11

" It's unfortunate a bunch of sociopaths show zero restraint and discretion within congested public settings in a rush to display their weaknesses."

You're talking about the junkies who leave "exchange" needles everywhere, right?

By the way, why do they call them needle exchanges if most of them wind up dumped in public spaces afterwards?

But hey, let's go after vaping because of all those people who have OD'd while vaping.

12

"One thing that's certain: banning vapes will not stop kids from vaping. It'll shut down small businesses, sure, but it won't stop kids from vaping."

No law will prevent someone from breaking the law, Rich. See, e.g., every single person who has ever plead guilty to or been convicted of a crime. Shit, murder is illegal, but folks still get killed. That doesn't mean we need to scrap state law criminalizing homicide.

13

Jenny, Your not my mommy. Your not anybody's mommy.

14

If we're banning shit that inconveniences us can we also please ban smartphones? I'm pretty sure social media is causing more harm to Seattle's youth than e-cigarettes.

15

This is the definition of fucking tyranny. The same as fake conservative hypocrites supporting an unconstitutional Drug War. I like you Durkan, but this shit is fucked.

16

Right. 100+ years of cigarettes and butts polluting every square inch of the planet and its air, but now vapes are the problem. Smdh

18

we have MORE IMPORTANT THINGS TO DO, like building affordable housing!

I prefer the vapor smell to cigarette smoke. crimony, doesn't anyone remember 15 years ago? it was fucking awful. ecigs are NBD.

19

@14, Ha, x2. Banning cell phone on sidewalks will save lives and bodily harm. No wait, don't ban them, just ban the sale of them in City Limits.

22

Tobacco companies are neck deep in the vape industry. They love e-cigs because they carry the illusion of being a less toxic alternative to cigarettes, and they are turning the tobacco industry around after years of declining sales.

It’s great that some people are able to transition off of cigarettes to a (probably) less toxic vehicle for their addiction but e-cigarettes are creating more addicts than they are “helping.”

23

I never thought I'd be speaking out in defense of vaping of all things, but it's strange that the push to criminalize e-cigarettes is coming from much the same places that the push to legalize marijuana came from.

The soundest argument in favor of marijuana legalization is not that pot is this wonderful thing that's good for you. There's plenty of evidence that it's bad for some percentage of smokers. The real core argument is that legal-age adults should have the right to consume things that are bad for them, up to a certain reasonable limit, and if we haven't set that limit at tobacco or alcohol, then it's hypocritical to set it at pot.

Not to mention, as Rich Smith recounts here, e-cigarettes are actually less bad for you than regular cigarettes. And I say this as someone for whom cigarettes (e- or not) are a nasty, disgusting, vile vice.

Yet more evidence that the previously unelected Jenny Durkan is unprepared for the position she holds; yet more evidence of her lack of any governing philosophy. But hey, at least she's better than Cary Moon or Nikkita Oliver. (In this respect, I guess Jenny Durkan was the e-cigarette of 2017 mayoral candidates.)

25

Here’s a thought, let’s recriminalize heroin In Seattle before we criminalize vaping.

26

@24, That’s not how science works. It’s impossible to know the long term effects of something that has only been around a few years, let alone to assign a fixed percentage of injuriousness to it. But yes, it’s probably very likely that they are less toxic than smoking for a whole host of reasons. Combustion alone generates all sorts of toxins and carcinogens.

This doesn’t mean they are risk-free, but as long as this is the general perception, more people will take up a nicotine habit via e-cigs and many of them will end up smoking. People are just looking at this from one direction — as a form of harm reduction for smokers — but few are considering that this relationship moves in the other direction, too.

27

If vaping didn't create a bunch of nicotine addicts there wouldn't be a problem. Other than the fact that vaping makes you look like a tool. and it stinks like bad stripper perfume.

28

Ban the stuff I personally don't like! But don't you dare restrict the stuff I personally like!

Jesus... the fucking Onion couldn't come up with better satire.

29

FFS, just ban the goddamned cotton candy-flavored shit.

30

@29 Yes, but keep personal heroin possession legal!

31

This is going to seem pretty far out to some of you, but here goes:

I think vaping, homelessness, and heroin are three different issues, and I don't think making changes to the law about one of them means we have to refrain from making changes to the laws about the other ones, nor do we need to make changes to the laws about one before making changes to the law about the others. Finally, I don't think making changes to the laws about any of them in any way diminishes the importance of the laws about the others.

OK, right, deep breaths. I know it sounds outlandish, but try to keep the criticism constructive if you can?

32

@31 You sound like someone defending why weed should be illegal but alcohol shouldn't.

Tell me, how many people die in Seattle from opioid overdoses now that heroin possession under 3oz (30 hits) is legal, vs. vape deaths?

I think the main problem is that most vapers are 1. working class and 2. the stores look like trash. Yet people who look at a camp full of junkies under I5 and say "let's stop arresting them for heroin possession".

34

@30- I'll gladly go along with banning candy-flavored smack fumes.

35

@32 Did you know 3 oz is 85 grams? Or about 85 times the amount for possession to be classified as except from prosecution. (it's not legal to possess but you don't seem to be big on nuance so we'll save that for another time). 30 mg is enough pure heroin to kill someone. So yeah, someone that's hooked could get 30 doses out of a gram but if you tried to get 30 doses out of 3 oz you wouldn't make it past the first dose. This math thing is pretty cool. You should try it sometime...

36

@31 I see it took exactly 17 minutes for it to seem way far out to some guy.

37

Congratulations Rich -
Now you know what it's like to be on the wrong end of a backwards, science-refuting policy that's meant to make Durkan (or whomever) look like they're "doing something". Maybe you can stop inflicting your backwards, science-refuting ideas on others.

38

You can make pot illegal again and you can ban vaping, but I AM NOT GIVING UP MY ARIZER SOLO AND MY WEED. The clouds of vapor exhaled by me and by those using nicotine vapes are nearly invisible and have little to no scent. Why is government so hell-bent on making life hell for the Little People, who have, lets face it, few joys left in this expensive interfering world. Kids should not drink and use drugs and there are rules for that already. Leave us alone, Government.

39

Sure, let's add vaping to the list of things that are functionally legal only for the rich. You know, like the way it's legal to smoke, but only in the house you own?

40

If you have switched from cigs to vape, you haven't given up anything. Just switching from one crutch to another. You are simply deluding yourself.

41

But kids aren't vaping root beer float candies in 220w box mods. They are vaping Juul Mint.

The UK has a cap on nicotine and a much lower rate of teen vaping- despite the fact the NHS actually promotes vaping as a cessation too. Its all about the nicotine level. Cap that and the problem goes away. Maybe that takes away from the efficacy of the device, but it sure beats a ban. Maybe nicotine levels over 2.5 percent require a prescription and FDA approval?

There are a lot of obvious options- the most obvious being age verification and education. You know, the things that cut the smoking rate in the first place.

42

Rich be all like "You can take my Juul when you pry it from my cold, dead, hands." Ironic? Addicted to nicotine?

43

@41 -- excellent ideas.

Also -- "And while you're at it, why not treat cigarettes the same way? Get them out of the convenience stores and into some more heavily regulated facilities, and levy big fines against store owners who break the rules."

By God, you're onto something, Rich:

Let's treat the most dangerous drug on the market like it's thee most dangerous Drug on the market. Well, second-most, thanks to the Sackler Crime Fambly's Enormously Successful (for the opioids Profiteers) drug-pushing machinations giving us the . . . Opiod Crisis.

44

There are many, many adults who smoked for years and are using a vaporizer to quit. I've done it myself several times (I keep going back to the butts but I keep on trying to quit). Nothing else worked for me. Not paying $10/pack daily, not gum, not patches, not Zyban.

With vaping, I am able to choose my nicotine level. I can start relatively high (for me) at 12mg, drop it down to 9mg, drop it down to 6mg (or mix them up for 7.5mg), drop it down and down and down until I'm vaping 0mg and forget to do it for 12 hours at a time and then I'm done. I don't have a giant rig, I have a small vape pen, I don't do it on the sidewalk, it's discreet and helpful.

If you ban vaporizing it will push people like me right back to smoking. I hate smoking. I hate the smell, I hate the way I feel in the morning (and the evening, tbh), I hate the coughing. I hate having to have my windows open all winter to alleviate the stank. I hate dealing with the butts. I hate the cost. All of which is ameliorated by vaping.

Vaping has a lot going for it for people who already smoke. I'm sorry that parents and children can't work something out, that's not my deal.

45

@44 Yet you admit, in the first paragraph, it has not actually worked for you.......

46

As a non-smoker with allergies, I'm quite glad that many smokers have taken up vaping. It doesn't stink, and it doesn't provoke migraines like tobacco smoke does. I'm sure it does have adverse health effects, but we've long trusted adults to make decisions about cigarettes, so we can trust adults to make decisions about vaping. Banning it is needlessly infringing on people's freedom (freedom includes the freedom to make poor choices).