Anybody vaping at the beach?
- Thread starter PeachPitDee
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Smoking has been banned at local beaches for years - for the most part it doesn't stop anyone, especially at the little twin cove beaches by my house where police only swing by once or twice a
day. I've never had a problem vaping, though I never had problems other than a little paranoia and a drive to pick up 3 butts for every one I stubbed to make karmic amends for being an ...... as a kid.
Then again I'm a unique case - People's Republic of Ocean Beach, where the debris meets the sea!
Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk
day. I've never had a problem vaping, though I never had problems other than a little paranoia and a drive to pick up 3 butts for every one I stubbed to make karmic amends for being an ...... as a kid.
Then again I'm a unique case - People's Republic of Ocean Beach, where the debris meets the sea!
Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk
How can they ban vaping on a beach? :O
I can understand why smoking cigarettes is banned due all the cigarette butts people leave behind.
But vaping doesn't leave anything behind, and we all know secand hand vapour isn't dangerous. Moreso when it's outside, the vape will dissipate way before someone else would be inhaling it. :S
I can understand why smoking cigarettes is banned due all the cigarette butts people leave behind.
But vaping doesn't leave anything behind, and we all know secand hand vapour isn't dangerous. Moreso when it's outside, the vape will dissipate way before someone else would be inhaling it. :S
I've been vaping at the beach, and no problems with that. No one complains at all, about my vaping. Fishing is another matter. People don't like having to walk around me and give me grief about it, they want to walk in a straight line right through where I'm sitting and fishing, and will walk right into my line and give me a hard time about it. I guess they can't be bothered with showing some consideration and walking around behind me, and I'm just in their way on their beach.
They will also come and camp right next to me in five miles of empty beach and go in swimming right where I'm fishing.
That's how society has become anymore I guess.
They will also come and camp right next to me in five miles of empty beach and go in swimming right where I'm fishing.
That's how society has become anymore I guess.
According to several posters on ECF, you should never vape where smoking is prohibited. You may offend someone.
MA just banned vaping (and smoking) on all of the National Seashore beaches (on Cape Cod mostly). Not sure how that works, exactly, since they're NATIONAL parks.
Let's hope some of the prominent ECF posters, who support vaping bans where smoking is prohibited, show up in this thread, to applaud this decision by the politicians of MA. Something tells me they will just hide.
Dont't be so sure, dear. They are showing up in force in another place, as we speak.
So, I am fully prepared to see them show up in this thread, jump up and down and clap their hands and holler with joy at the vaping ban that twgbonehead has mentioned.
And I fully agree with SleeZy:
That sounds perfectly reasonable. On the other hand, such piddling things as reason, common sense or science have never stopped true fanatics.
I don't go the beach very much, but I've been wondering the same thing as you: It's usually, if not always, quite breezy on a beach. Seems to me vapor will dissipate so quickly in a breeze that no one would see it (unless, of course, they're hawk-eyed ANTZ on the prowl for transgressors...)
Doesn't the National Park Service set regs and enforce them on all federal public lands?
I used to smoke on the beach, and I will be vaping on the beach this summer. I have never and will never abide by any smoking or vaping ban outdoors. Nor have I ever seen these bans enforced. I think deep down, everyone knows that those bans are ridiculous and over reaching, not to mention a complete waste of time, money, and effort to enforce. Such outdoor smoking bans exist for one reason only. They are merely another thing a politician hoping to get reelected can list as something he or she did "for the children". Smoke dissipates quickly enough and vapor dissipates faster. The only time I'll restrain myself is if I'm at an outdoor event and everyone is literally on top of each other. When I do that, I'm not doing it because of any existing, ridiculous, ban. I do it because I just don't want to blow vapor or smoke into anyone's face. I'm pretty short, so blowing it up over everyone's face is difficult to do. In those cases, I plan to stealth vape and blow it down.
As I thought, the "vaping is the same as smoking" posters on ECF have decided to hide from this thread. As many of us stated many times, once you start supporting the "don't vape where smoking is prohibited" proposition, this is where it leads. Prohibiting harmless behavior based on appearance is as ignorant as those who support it.
When I smoked, I did smoke almost anywhere outdoors, including in areas where smoking was banned, except in crowded areas. I saw no reason to obey: let us not forget that the reasons invoked for banning smoke in public places was the harmful effects of second hand smoke, so that if you are smoking where second hand smoke cannot affect anyone, you are violating the letter of the law but not its spirit.
Moreover, I would smoke outdoors where it is banned if motor vehicles circulate there. Once, someone reminded me that smoking was forbidden and told me that my second hand smoke was poisoning them. I pointed to the taxi parked two meters away with its engine idling. I told that ANTZ: "if you rerout the exhaust gases of that cab inside the cabin, all occupants will be dead within ten minutes, now that is poison. Now how many cigarettes do you think one would need to smoke in that cab before anyone died? You do not worry about the very toxic fumes from that cab a few feet away yet you are telling me I am poisoning you? She looked outraged but she left without saying a word.
Now, vaping being much less harmful than cigarette smoke, I have no problems vaping anywhere outdoors. Indoors, I ask permission even where vaping is not banned, for the simple reason that I understand that from a distance a cloud of vapor looks like smoke and I do not need the hassle of arguing that I am not smoking but vaping.
When you point to people that smoking outside does not harm bystanders, the only reasons they can see to justify the ban are: smoking in public outdoors gives a bad example to the children, restricting where people can smoke even if it does not affect anyone else reduces their tobacco consumption so it is good for them. This is getting silly.
What is that? Fourth-hand smoke (the ill effects of seeing someone smoke, of thinking about smoking?) I call that fourth-hand smoke because a few years ago there was a study claiming that the dangers of the smoke lingered long after the smoke had dissipated, in furniture and walls where people had smoked: they called it third-hand smoke. Doing some research, I learned that the so-called study was in fact a survey where they asked people if they thought that the lingering odor of smoke in a room could harm them and a majority had responded yes.
Moreover, I would smoke outdoors where it is banned if motor vehicles circulate there. Once, someone reminded me that smoking was forbidden and told me that my second hand smoke was poisoning them. I pointed to the taxi parked two meters away with its engine idling. I told that ANTZ: "if you rerout the exhaust gases of that cab inside the cabin, all occupants will be dead within ten minutes, now that is poison. Now how many cigarettes do you think one would need to smoke in that cab before anyone died? You do not worry about the very toxic fumes from that cab a few feet away yet you are telling me I am poisoning you? She looked outraged but she left without saying a word.
Now, vaping being much less harmful than cigarette smoke, I have no problems vaping anywhere outdoors. Indoors, I ask permission even where vaping is not banned, for the simple reason that I understand that from a distance a cloud of vapor looks like smoke and I do not need the hassle of arguing that I am not smoking but vaping.
When you point to people that smoking outside does not harm bystanders, the only reasons they can see to justify the ban are: smoking in public outdoors gives a bad example to the children, restricting where people can smoke even if it does not affect anyone else reduces their tobacco consumption so it is good for them. This is getting silly.
What is that? Fourth-hand smoke (the ill effects of seeing someone smoke, of thinking about smoking?) I call that fourth-hand smoke because a few years ago there was a study claiming that the dangers of the smoke lingered long after the smoke had dissipated, in furniture and walls where people had smoked: they called it third-hand smoke. Doing some research, I learned that the so-called study was in fact a survey where they asked people if they thought that the lingering odor of smoke in a room could harm them and a majority had responded yes.
Last edited:
I've vaped at beaches along the Gulf of Mexico, Santa Cruz, Ca, Cozumel & Progreso, Mexico. No one bothered me... no one appeared to pay much, if any, attention to it.
It was a pleasurable experience I plan to continue going forward...
It was a pleasurable experience I plan to continue going forward...
The FDA is partly basing their regulatory decisions on bogus things, like suppose a smoker sees somebody vaping, does that "make" the smoker then want to light up a cigarette?
If so, then vaping is detrimental to the net public health...
Gato del Jugo,
Funny that they do not apply that same bogus reasoning to people who eat ice cream in front of obese people. That would soon mean the banning of candy eating and all junk food in public.
Funny that they do not apply that same bogus reasoning to people who eat ice cream in front of obese people. That would soon mean the banning of candy eating and all junk food in public.
- Status
Similar threads
