$-
Please check box to confirm your age.
By checking this box I confirm that I am at least 21 years old or older and of legal age to buy tobacco products in my jurisdiction. All orders are age verified through our third party system at checkout, as is required by law.
Please check box to confirm.
By checking this box I confirm that I use these products at my own risk.
Due to state legislation we are not currently shipping any products to the following states: RI, MA, IN, AR, UT, NV, VT, and ME, and no longer shipping flavored e liquid products to NJ, and no longer shipping any e liquid to NY.
Go to Cart
Free Shipping on Qualifying $100+ USA Orders.

Proposed Ban on Public Use Frustrates Harford Vapers

Proposed Ban on Public Use Frustrates Harford Vapers

 

Proposed Ban on Public Use Frustrates Harford Vapers

Vapers nationwide have become increasingly hamstrung by laws that have banned using vapor products in public. Some of the most frustrated and vocal vapers are in Hartford, Connecticut, which has been embroiled in debate after a city councilman introduced - you guessed it - a proposal to ban public vaping


A recent article from the Hartford Courant provides a snapshot into this national debate, finding members of the vapor community “confused” and angered by a proposal from councilman Larry Deutsch. The councilman’s proposal included a blanket ban on vapor use in public and raising the minimum age from 18 to 21.


Most vapers can get behind raising the minimum age, especially given reports about underaged use. However, it’s the use of vapor in public that’s the most problematic for most local vapers who like to use vapor products in parks, at restaurants, and in places of business.


“It makes no sense,” Javier Llantin-Cruz told the Courant. “You can’t get secondhand smoke from vaping … And it’s a good thing to get into, because it’s healthier. I just don’t see why they’re trying to ban it.”

There have been numerous studies that have come out arguing that there are no negative effects from secondhand or passive vapor. We’ve covered this topic here at Breazy in numerous articles before, but for a refresher here are a couple pertinent examples...


First, a review conducted by the Royal College of Physicians and Public Health England, Nicotine Without Smoke, dismissed the issue of secondhand vapor. "There is, so far, no direct evidence that passive exposure is likely to cause harm…[while bystanders may be] exposed to passive nicotine..there is no plausible mechanism by which such deposits could enter the body at doses that would cause physical harm."


Second, Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos finds that "indoor air and normal exhaled breath contains more volative organic compounds (airborne toxins)  than the e-cigarette aerosol," based on a study conducted by the Spanish Council of Scientific Research.


Returning to Connecticut, people in the vapor industry including Michael Boyea, a manager at Songbirds Vape and Smoke in West Hartford, argued against the measures. He said that the councilman’s proposal was “preposterous.”

“There is no logical reason to ban using a product that’s been proven to be safer than smoking cigarettes in a public place,” he said. “When it comes to any of these products, it’s helping people get away from something that is proven to kill them.”

A tricky aspect of Deutsch’s proposal is enforcing it. A spokesman for the police department said officers don’t issue tickets for smoking in city parks and other public spaces, though a Hartford ordinance permits them to hand out $99 fines, according to the Hartford Courant.





acuity