Surprise opposition derails Emanuel’s e-cigarette ban

[Treant]

8. I've always been a little torn

on that one. As it stands, I don't have too many issues making the laws parallel--let's try to keep what we can away from children until their legal majority (nicotine is psychoactive as well as a stimulant so better to err on the side of caution). After that, they're adults and can do what they wish.

I apply the same rule as alcohol, which is certainly obtainable before 21 (I did). However, restricting access as well as we can is a good idea (although personally I'd set the drinking age at 18 in parity with legal adulthood).

On the flip side, if (theoretically) I had a 16 year old child who smoked and wished to try to switch to the e-cig, I'd be placing the order myself and happily presenting my child with a shiny new e-cig and instructions on how to use it. I'm going to go with harm reduction in that instance.

So while I support the law, I'd also consciously break it under some circumstances--where I'm the (theoretical) parent only, however.

0 nic e-cigs? No harm no foul by current air quality and health risk testing, so I see no need for restrictions assuming it contains only PG, VG, and flavoring.

Caffeine? Personally, I don't like the idea of exposing a still-developing neuropsychology to stimulants, but I also don't expect to win that argument and don't feel that strongly about it. I'd probably neither work for nor against such a law.