Sunday 3 November 2013

So Much Ignorance

This, from Australia:
A RETIRED builder has ­become possibly the first Australian to be fined for allegedly smoking an electric (sic) cigarette in a public place.
Erm, how does one 'smoke' an e-cig?
Producing a zip-lock bag containing the ciggy and a small charger, Mr Campo told the magistrate "it was only an electronic cigarette''. Amid chuckles from the galler, the bemused magistrate said, "That's a good one.'' 
The prosecutor said irrespective of whether it was an e-cig the regulations defined the offence as including "any tobacco or any other product intended to be smoked". 
Mr Railton said there was nothing the court could do but enforce the fine.
Well, actually, the court could have said that as it was not 'smoked', it wasn't covered under the law. But then, judging from the magistrate's 'bemused' comment when Mr Campo produced his device, it's probably the first time they'd seen one.

It's good to see that Australia is no different from the UK in admitting that smoking bans are just a sham, though. Bans were apparently brought in on the basis of {cough} serious scientific assessment of the harm caused by second hand smoke, which is entirely absent in this case.

It's never been about health at all really, has it?

Meanwhile in the Isle of Man.
A prisoner's appeal to be allowed to smoke e-cigarettes in jail has been rejected by the Manx government on health and safety grounds. 
Minister Juan Watterson said: "Medical opinion is that these products are still something of a lottery."
What, you mean they might be dangerous? You know, with {cough} serous scientific assessment of the harm to back it up?
He added that the decision was taken only "after considerable research, debate and scrutiny," and may be reviewed "if e-cigarettes are properly regulated in the future".
Oh right. So this isn't about health either. Just whether they get a green light from the tobacco control industry or its equally confused and frightened state poodles.

And just to lay another level of crass ignorance on top of all that ...
Draft legislation in the EU - including a UK version - plans to restrict the sale of e-cigarettes and bring them within medical regulation. 
Really BBC? Because last I heard, the EU had rejected the idea of medical regulation for e-cigs.

It is quite astounding how little legislators, the judiciary, and news outlets actually know about e-cigs. Yet also astonishing how arrogant they all are in pronouncing on them when they haven't actually got a clue what they are talking about.

The western world increasingly appears to be run by self-aggrandising simpletons.


Junican said...

I'm a bit curious about whether or not Mr Railton could appeal, but I do not know how the Australian legal system works, or how much it would cost. Even so, you would think that the Vapers of Australia would rally round, since this seems to be an important matter. Is an ecig a cigarette? Does it produce smoke? Is anything that a person might suck 'smokable'.
If an appeal is possible, then this a huge opportunity for the Vaping Industry to get the law clarified without the intrusion of tobacco control. It is a straight-forward matter of the interpretation of the law.

Dick_Puddlecote said...

Those were my thoughts too. If an e-cig is smoked according to Aussie law, then so is a Nicorette inhaler and an asthma puffer.

Rursus said...

In germany, smoking is defined as "inhaling burned parts of plants" - so vaping is NOT smoking within the meaning of the law. For this reason, vaping
did not fall under any "Non smoking law" in germany.

moonrakin said...

Yeah... I think it'd be interesting to find the exact law... - because in my experience (more than once) - asking for chapter and verse results in a certain amount of harumph-ing and the disappearance of the charge - the dispensers of summary justice have something of a reputation for winging it.

Lisabelle said...

(...."Minister Juan Watterson said: "Medical opinion is that these products are still something of a lottery."...) This Minister along with the ANTZ CRONIES WISH IT WAS A LOTTERY AND THEY WISH TO BE THE WINNERS OF ALL THE PROFITS, LOST FROM PEOPLE NOT SMOKING!!!!!!!!

Lisabelle said...

...... and when they get their filthy hands on all the money in the future, they can call it the miracle they discovered and they approve of and they own... to be continued!

Lisabelle said...

It's better to feign ignorance than to have to admit... the truth... which is... they are waiting to see how to own and profit from e-cigarettes!

Ivan D said...

Obviously and absolutely correctly. Germany is way ahead of the Anglo-Saxon countries and distinctly more liberal. Over here we are governed by intellectually challenged cowards in the thrall of intellectually inadequate authoritarians. My only comfort is that it is actually worse for those unfortunate enough to be born in Australia. New Zealand, Ireland or New York. Hmmm???

afrazier5 said...

The Aussies are just starting to get organized and get things rolling down there. I'm going to be there late this week and am offering my assistance with what little free time I have, to give them some help where I can.

Hani said...

As an Aussie, I am pissed off that this has happenend. This poor guy probably did not have the information he needed to get off - ecigs are neither a 'tobacco product' not do they produce 'smoke'. That law only prohibits the use of tobacco products and the magistrate probably had never seen an ecig before or recognised the distinction.

Even though this incident occured back in April, we have just learned of this injustice. I'm a member of Australia's vaping forum ( and obviously we are all annoyed that this has occured as it sets a precidence for future similar cases.

We are in the process of forming an Australian Vapers Association to help deal with such incidents and future issues we vapers will face when it comes to legislation and regulation.

Junican said...

Credit to you, Hani!
But it really ought to be the ecig manufacturers who are taking this matter forward.
It would be understandable for Mr Railton to be somewhat confused, especially if he was not 'computer literate'. He may not have known, or even thought of, the support which might have been available had he known how to ask for it.
It is only in retrospect, when these things come to light, that their importance is perceived.
Is it too late to contest the judgement? I do not know.

Hani said...

From what I understand he can still appeal the ruling if he so chooses. I hope he does and I think had he been properly informed and equipped with the relevant information prior to his hearing the charge would have been dropped.

Threthny said...

It has a hearing on Dec 19

Junican said...

Interesting that all the names seem to have changed around!
If ecig manufacturers do not support this guy to the hilt, with the best barristers available, they deserve to be put out of business.
I hope that you chaps keep track of this case and advise us all of the result.

SteveW said...

For some more ignorant, unadulterated gash, have a read of this...

I'll be dismantling it momentarily :-)


Will the Vapers stand up to be counted?Dont make me laugh.
No chance,they will slither and slide down the path of yellow bellied
cowardice just like the smokers .
The chickenlivered ,spineless,pathetic,yellow streaked publicans and their pathetic smoking clientele just crawled into the gutter like rats and lepers,occasionally having a subdued squeek on the web,unheard ,unheeded and taken for idiots. Just look around and
observe the human left overs who loiter in doorways like dark age
deviants and gutless serfs.Had these creeps and bonelss baboons been around in 1914 and 1940 I would have been dining on
Shnitzel and Bratwurst or carted off to a NICHTRAUCERLAGE
Carry on twittering and dont forget the yellow paint and white featers
Room with a view ! ! !

Furor Teutonicus said...

Hmm. Debatable.

Just because it sais that now, does NOT mean it will say that next week. Or even tomorrow.

"Public consultation" may be a joke in the U.K, but here I have NEVER seen it even attempted, before a law is changed, or introduced.

You go to work in the morning, quite within the law, and as you come back in the evening, you find something you do with, or in your car, is all of a sudden illegal.

As to Rursus. Our local hospital has declared that until more "research" is done, E-Cigs will be under the same restrictions as any other smoking "device," within the hospital grounds.

As the local hospital is owned by the Senate, ie the Berlin Government, I assume ALL Government buildings/areas, are under the same restrictions. (I KNOW the police stations are.)

I would also like to see what would happen if someone was prosecuted for "smoking" an E-cig on the U-Bahn.

Dick_Puddlecote said...

Sounds very much like the UK approach to hospital 'bans' - driven by dogma but without primary legislation to back it up. More test cases to be had there too, I reckon.

Dick_Puddlecote said...

That would be my approach too, which is why the reported case is so irritating. But it looks from later comments that the guy is pending an appeal, so I hope he takes them all the way.

Dick_Puddlecote said...

Good to hear. :)

Dick_Puddlecote said...

Good luck with the new association, hopefully you can help him turn the judgement over on appeal.

Dick_Puddlecote said...

You're on form today, RSRD. Though I think the optimism pills you were taking in Manchester in September were more potent than your latest batch. ;)

RSRD said...

Worry not, "Dick" my own chalice doth overflow with
nought but optimism,tis the empty silence that abounds which is of grave concern.I still seek the "few"
"the merry few"mentioned in Henry Vth but where?
Still Silent and Deeper

Legiron said...

Since our 'brightest and best' happily accepted USB sticks from the Russian government and plugged them in to find they were set up to ransack their hard drives, it's not really surpriasing that the gimboids we have as judges and lawmakers are unable to spell IQ. As for journalists, read the papers,. They can't spell anything.

The vapers will get treated the same as smokers. More and more are realising this but there are a hard core who will not accept it.

Heck, those who like a McDonald's are getting the same treatment as smokers as are those who like salt on their chips.

In the 'us against them', the 'them' are few and they generate more of 'us' every day.

There's only one result on the horizon, in the end.

Manx Gent said...

Might interest those here to know the calibre of Manx politician taking these weighty decisions....
A couple of Christmases ago, it was widely reported in the Manx media that Mr Watterson 'over-indulged' at the Department of Home Affairs Xmas do and was violently sick on the bus home. There's some confusion as to whether he paid personally for the clean-up or if the cost came from public funds. A quick Google should be enough to get you the grisly details!

Dick_Puddlecote said...

Thanks for the local knowledge. I really should look these people up before just quoting them, shouldn't I? Plenty of interest, especially amongst local politicians I should think.

Arnold Brame said...

I feel pity for the person who "smoked" e-cigarette in public. I just understand why it is illegal to use e-cigarette, it is safe and it doesn't give smoke.

Arnold Brame
Health And Safety Consultant Norfolk

Lisabelle said...

Your very wrong, for the first time in history smokers/vapers are uniting against your PIMP DADDY BIG PHARMA!