Banning real progress

Begging government to ban vaping makes as much sense as begging government to ban car brakes.

No, vaping isn't totally safe. It's safer than smoking.
Your car having brakes won't make driving totally safe. But it's still safer than driving without brakes.

Banning, or heavily regulating, either one is going backward. Kind of like banning (or heavily regulating) suppressors.

That doesn't mean I want government to mandate vaping as an alternative to smoking-- it should be a personal choice. You do your life, I'll do mine.

As a tangent-- I'm always shocked at the amount of dishonesty involved in trying to fool people into joining the prohibitionists (or any statist cause, for that matter).

I saw a "public service" [sic] ad against the JUUL vapers recently, where the woman was horrified that the JUUL "contains as much nicotine as 20 cigarettes!" What is this, standard-capacity magazine hysteria aimed at a different tool?

I'm supposing you don't get all the nicotine the device contains in one inhalation. Even if you did get all the nicotine in one sitting, wouldn't it be just like chainsmoking 20 cigarettes? I've seen smokers do that (OK, I didn't count, but you know what I mean). How many cigarettes come in a pack? 20 or 25? Are you going to shove them all in your mouth at once and smoke them together? I guess you could, but I don't think there's a way to get the entire contents of nicotine from a JUUL in the amount of time it would take to smoke one cigarette-- unless you broke it open or something. But it sounds scarier to lie. Scared people are lemmings you can lead to cry for the privilege of being governed harder. So that's what prohibitionists do.

_______________

Reminder: I could really use some help.

-

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.