Federal regulators to formally ban e-cigarette use on planes

[The Straight Story]

Federal regulators to formally ban e-cigarette use on planes

The U.S. Department of Transportation plans to issue an official ban of smokeless electronic cigarettes on airplanes this spring, according to the Associated Press, citing a letter from Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.

E-cigarettes are plastic and metal devices that heat a liquid nicotine solution in a disposable cartridge, creating vapor that the "smoker" inhales.

In the letter to Sen. Frank Lautenberg, LaHood said the department has been informing airlines and the public that regulations banning smoking include e-cigarettes, AP says. Lautenberg, who wrote the 1987 law that banned smoking on airplanes, had asked the department to clarify the rule because some air travelers are still confused over their use.

Many airlines already have begun informing passengers that the devices are not allowed on flights. But some e-cigarette distributors continue to claim that their product can be smoked anywhere traditional cigarettes are not allowed, AP says.

http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/post/2011/02/federal-regulators-to-formally-ban-e-cigarette-use-on-planes/142656/1

[rucky]

1. This is such BS

but it proves that the anti-smoking thing isn't only about health risks, or even the offensive smell. I guess that leaves us with "control".

[The Straight Story]

3. For some reason, some folks love to have a controlling person making (many) choices for them

I guess freedom of choice (like, leave it up to the airlines and passengers) is something we don't feel comfortable with.

Next up - abortion, bamboo, type of car you drive, what you eat, how many text messages you send a month (could lead to problems with carpal tunnel and such, which will cost us all money in health care), etc and so on.

No one seems to want to make a stand - and when they do, they get labeled as biased or a libertarian.

Unless it is abortion related, then people seem to stick to their principles (but only on one thing....)

[Doremus]

2. Federal regulators must have lots of spare time of their hands. nt

[Curmudgeoness]

4. I always carry an e-cig when I fly.

I haven't had to use it, but I will say one thing---if you leave me sitting on the tarmac for hours before my flight even starts, I had better have an e-cig.

So does this mean that I will have to use it as a tampon to smuggle it on the plane??? There is no sense to this ban, and it will only make a law abiding citizen (me) a criminal.

[GKirk]

6. Quit joking or...

...that will be part of the next enhanced pat down.
But seriously, wouldn't nicotine gum make more sense?

[Curmudgeoness]

9. Oh god, I am so so sorry for even mentioning it. Who knows what

they will come up with next. But really, I doubt that I am the first one to think that is a place to hide something. I often wonder when they will get to the point where checks like this will be acceptable.

I have never tried the gum or lozenges, but I may have to go in that direction. If you read the directions on the boxes of those products, it will scare the bejeezes out of you. The one I love is that you are not supposed to swallow much when you are using them, but seems to me that I would swallow more with a lozenge or gum than I ordinarily do. So they just didn't seem like the right fit for me.

[Nevernose]

11. The lozenges are damned near miraculous

Occasionally, if I've used too many in succession, the nicotine on the inside of my mouth will give me the hiccups. However, one or two swigs of water, swooshed around, immediately relieves the problem.

[Earth_First]

5. Let's go, smoking nazis...recommed this to the greatest page (and beyond...) n/t

[Matariki]

7. Because why?

Oh yeah, no reason.

[Bonhomme Richard]

8. I don't understand, from a business view, why smokers are treated...

so badly by the airline industry. No smoking in planes...I get that, no smoking in the terminal...I get that, but not allowing smokers one area they can use while they sit for hours on end in a terminal makes absolutely no sense. Unless their attitude is just Screw Them. I have had to sit in the Seattle airport terminal for 10 hours. The only place you could smoke was at each end of the terminal. The way to do that was to leave secure area, get on the tram and take it to either end of the terminal and go 20 feet outside the door. To come back you repeat the process and then go through security again. From a business point of view why would they want to pissoff 20% of their potential customers by having such a crazy policy. For Gods sake all they would have to do is put a enclosed cyclone fence outside of the flight terminals that people could use. As a woman sitting next to me said "there are a lot of employees here that smoke and they are going somewhere". Why go out of your way to make customers uncomfortable.
By the way, I'm not one of those people that get crazy if I can't smoke. For some reason it doesn't really bother me but watching others in the terminal, I feel for them.

[Curmudgeoness]

10. One trip I went through security checkpoints five times.

My flight was cancelled, and I had to take a different flight, with two stops. Each stop was a rather long layover, so I went out at those stops too.

Now will someone please tell me the sense of this? The lines are long enough with people entering just for their flight without having several of us smokers making trips outside and back again.

Well, at least they knew I was safe by then. :)

[GeorgeGist]

12. Assholes agree:

farting on airplanes is OK.

[beevul]

13. MMM

:popcorn:

[Odin2005]

14. This is DUMB, and I'm for indoor smoking bans!

:grr: