Monday’s Chicago Tribune contained an editorial from “recovering nicotine addict” Clarence Page, who believes that governments are going too far in banning e-cigarette usage.
Page cites bodies such as Chicago’s city council which, like Los Angeles and New York, voted to prohibit the use of electronic cigarettes in most indoor areas. These governments, says Page, most often cite the protection of children as their reason for passing laws against e-cigarettes. Exposing minors to e-cigarettes, they say, will get them hooked on nicotine, and could make them smokers.
“What next? Will government come after my nicotine gum and nonelectronic inhaler? If not, will there be a class-action suit by e-cigarette “vapers” claiming unlawful discrimination under the Constitution’s equal-protection clause?”
The problem with this logic, says Page, is that indoor bans in places like bars, where minors are not allowed, does nothing to further this cause, no matter how erroneous it might be. It’s a slippery slope, says Page, who worries that giving the government the ability to ban the use of a harmless device, even in places the children they say they’re trying to protect can’t enter, hand over far too much power over our lives. If nicotine vapor can be banned, how about nicotine gum and non-electronic nicotine inhalers?
Page, it should be noted, is not a vaper. Though he uses nicotine gum and a pharmaceutical inhaler as a former smoker, he has no loyalty to electronic cigarettes — he simply worries that we’re giving governments far too much control over our lives in allowing them to ban an activity that hasn’t been shown to harm anyone — not bystanders, and not even the vapers themselves.
Government going overboard in ban of e-cigarettes – Chicago Tribune.
Have Bans Gone Too Far?
No comments:
Post a Comment