HOME > Chowhound > Not About Food >
What have you made lately? Get great advice

Smoking is back in French Restaurants: I witnessed it today.

John Talbott Jan 23, 2014 11:33 AM

More and more, French smokers are converting to ecigs (there are two such shops on my street in the 18th) and looking you straight in the eye as they puff and blow vapor at you - inside - including today's lunch site.
They insist that it's all harmless fun - not so says the FDA http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/...

  1. m
    Maximilien Jan 23, 2014 12:48 PM

    I don't think I've been in the presence of the e-cigs.

    Does it smell or make noise ?

    If it does not disturb people around them, then good enough for me...

    3 Replies
    1. re: Maximilien
      Ptipois Jan 23, 2014 01:12 PM

      Smoke or no smoke I'm not sure I like it when people blow their breath in my face.

      1. re: Maximilien
        mangeur Jan 23, 2014 01:16 PM

        E-cigs were all over last summer, so I am not surprised to hear that they are even more popular and/or tolerated 6 months later. While I can't remember seeing them in a restaurant per se, they were everywhere outside in close areas, i.e., crowded aisles at outdoor markets, flea markets and certainly at terrasse tables. It will probably take some time before there is any kind of public awareness of their 2nd hand threat and longer for legislative control.

        1. re: Maximilien
          latindancer Jan 24, 2014 07:43 PM

          <Does it smell or make noise?>

          No & No.

        2. hychka Jan 23, 2014 03:00 PM

          How about asking head waiter to ask the e-smokers to ditch the e-smoke or leave and leave if he doesn't? Can't imagine a headwaiter tolerating spit; why should he/she tolerate e-smoke.

          1. Parnassien Jan 23, 2014 03:07 PM

            Et alors ? I suspect that the FDA reflects to some extent the paranoia gene that seems, at least to us Euro-trash, peculiarly American. I'm with Max... if it's not intrusive, it's ok.

            33 Replies
            1. re: Parnassien
              bcc Jan 23, 2014 03:21 PM

              It it's blowing poison into the air that I'm breathing, then It's intrusive.

              1. re: bcc
                Parnassien Jan 23, 2014 03:58 PM

                That gene again!

                Fumes from frying, roasting, barbecuing, etc taint the air that swirls around in restaurants with "poisons" at much greater and longer-lasting density than the minute droplets from e-cigarettes. When you actually read the admittedly inconclusive and spotty science, it's amazing to find how insignicant the "risk" actually is.

                Without a sense of proportion, life is just one big, very dreary risk. And, sadly, often punctuated by victimitis and a sense of entitlement to ensure that others are indeed the enemy.

                1. re: Parnassien
                  bcc Jan 23, 2014 05:19 PM

                  Please note that the operative word in my objection is "IF". I did not claim that electronic cigarettes are noxious to others.
                  Your argument, however, is one that was used by the proponents of allowing smoking in public places. Are you arguing that smoking should be allowed in restaurants?

                  1. re: bcc
                    Parnassien Jan 23, 2014 06:00 PM

                    "Are you arguing that smoking should be allowed in restaurants?"
                    Of course not. Even though cigarette smoke doesn't bother me personally, I did applaud the banning of smoking at restaurants. The combination of enclosed space, the long lingering smoke, well-demonstrated science, and the real discomfort caused to others make it impossible to defend smoking in restaurants. But in the case of e-ciggies, it's mostly the very notion and imagined (or, at best, grossly exaggerated) risks that offends people. I have friends that puff such things and, even in a windows-up car, I barely notice it if at all... the worst is a sudden sense of brief humidity that lasts for, oh, 0.10 seconds.

                    1. re: Parnassien
                      sunshine842 Jan 23, 2014 06:14 PM

                      I was at a Christmas party when several of us commented that someone was smoking clove cigarettes.

                      Pretty shortly, I had to step outside, because I was choking and gagging on the overpowering odor. Needed the rescue inhaler, the whole bit.

                      About 10 minutes later, a guy came walking through, waving his e-cig and bragging about how great the clove vapor was.

                      It still has a smell, and it still puts crap in the air that others may not want to breathe (or like in my case, have no choice and cannot breathe)

                      They belong outdoors with the people who at least have the courage to smoke real cigarettes instead of make-believe.

                      1. re: sunshine842
                        Parnassien Jan 23, 2014 06:30 PM

                        I agree... the flavoured ones are obnoxious. But so far, considered bad taste and very uncommon in France. I would complain if the smell was intrusive. But the very fact that an e-ciggie can be used by a few inconsiderate folks to produce the stink of cloves or something else obnoxious is not sufficient to consign the entire device to offensive/ dangerous/ ban-it status.

                        1. re: Parnassien
                          sunshine842 Jan 23, 2014 07:05 PM

                          I didn't say ban it -- I said send it outside where it belongs.

                          I sure as hell wouldn't want to be dropping a few hundred euros on a meal only to have it tainted by somebody's obnoxious fume producer.

                          1. re: sunshine842
                            Parnassien Jan 23, 2014 07:36 PM

                            And I'm saying clove or other foul smelling e-ciggie options should be banned ... but, since there is no harm or disturbance (other than imagined) from normal e-ciggies, there is no need to exile the user to the outside if he's using the standard non-smelly e-ciggie.

                            1. re: Parnassien
                              sunshine842 Jan 24, 2014 03:41 AM

                              but you know that's a slippery slope. There's not going to be a way to exile only the smelly ones -- I can see table of bohos now -- half have smelly ones, and half have neutral-smelling ones.

                              Can't you just imagine the chorus of angst and "Oh, mon dieu" when they get asked to move outside? The accompanying hand gestures and shrugs and "pfft"would be worth admission, though.

                              1. re: sunshine842
                                Parnassien Jan 24, 2014 03:54 AM

                                Hmmm, good point, Sunshine... but maybe not as difficult as you might imagine... the French mind is burdened with all sorts of subtleties, nuances and distinctions that make it difficult to see in black and white (with the exception of supporters of the Front National, of course) ... banning just the smelly e-cig varieties might be easily understood and accepted by most.

                                1. re: Parnassien
                                  sunshine842 Jan 24, 2014 07:36 PM

                                  but arriving at a consensus of what constitutes "smelly" would result in gestures and shrugs, ending in a slowdown and eventually a grève for something.

                          2. re: Parnassien
                            mangeur Jan 23, 2014 07:05 PM

                            Speaking of intrusive odors in restaurants and theaters, there is in-your-face perfume or cologne, men's or women's.

                            1. re: mangeur
                              sunshine842 Jan 23, 2014 07:06 PM

                              I absolutely agree -- I've had to leave establishments because of the cloud of funk drifting from the next table.

                              1. re: mangeur
                                Parnassien Jan 23, 2014 07:41 PM

                                Shaking myself from a jet-lagged can't-sleep stupour by the thought/ horror of delicious stinky cheeses being included as one of the intrusive odours by some... this is a very slippery slope, Mme Mangeur :)

                                1. re: Parnassien
                                  mangeur Jan 23, 2014 08:12 PM

                                  Hmm. I have never noticed an intrusive stench from cheese. Garlic, yes. Cheese, no. This IS a scary slope.

                                  cheese zte ch

                          3. re: Parnassien
                            Ptipois Jan 23, 2014 08:53 PM

                            That sense of brief humidity makes me cringe at least as much as cigarette smoke. It's disgusting.

                      2. re: bcc
                        FriedClamFanatic Jan 23, 2014 07:42 PM

                        No scientific proof......just opinion..........I'm with Parnassian...the rest just are paranoid and LOVE to punish smokers and other "deviates" in their minds....Gawd help them if anyone ever proves garlic causes cancer

                        1. re: bcc
                          LeoLioness Jan 24, 2014 03:05 PM

                          Do you own a car?

                          1. re: LeoLioness
                            bcc Jan 24, 2014 04:15 PM

                            What are you trying to say?

                            1. re: bcc
                              jgg13 Jan 25, 2014 08:15 AM

                              Well, for instance I don't appreciate when car owners drive past me and force me to breathe in their poisonous fumes

                              (ok, I don't really care, but it's the same sort of thing)

                          2. re: bcc
                            jgg13 Jan 25, 2014 08:13 AM

                            I'm pretty sure walking down a city block will cause you to inhale far more toxins than a breath of the vapor from one of these.

                            1. re: jgg13
                              bcc Jan 25, 2014 10:44 AM

                              Your analogy fails on so many levels that further comment becomes superfluous.

                              1. re: bcc
                                jgg13 Jan 25, 2014 11:46 AM

                                Actually it doesn't, but keep thinking that.

                          3. re: Parnassien
                            hychka Jan 23, 2014 05:25 PM

                            I must admit to knee-jerking to the notion of e-smoke in a restaurant. Just did a search and find that little is truly known about the hazards. None-the-less I would very much appreciate it if advocates e-smoked in their very own space, not next to my dining table or anywhere else I chose to be.

                            1. re: hychka
                              Puffin3 Jan 24, 2014 08:31 AM

                              If it's any form of gas or vapor that was in your body and has now exited your body please don't expect me to inhale it while I am eating. Thank you for your consideration.

                              1. re: Puffin3
                                bcc Jan 24, 2014 08:47 AM

                                What about breathing?

                                1. re: bcc
                                  sunshine842 Jan 24, 2014 07:37 PM

                                  If your breath is foul enough that it's noticeable, then you need to stop breathing.

                            2. re: Parnassien
                              bagelman01 Jan 25, 2014 11:35 AM

                              Writing from family experience, it's NOT paranoia............

                              My 16 year old daughter became addicted to eCigs. Never mind the fact that iot is illegal here in Connecticut to sell them to minors.

                              One of the chemicals used id the same chemical used to deoce airplanes in the winter. Turns out it can cause allergic reactions. She got hoives and rashes all over her trso. She also began to have very bad headacjes everyday. Her internist could not identify teh cause. She ended up at the neurologost who after complete testing and examining the lifestyle diary she was made to keep for a month found it was the eCigs. Seems there have been many eCig related maladies showing up. AND FWIW dauther thouight she was being safe by only using the nicotine free eCigs.

                              1. re: bagelman01
                                PotatoHouse Jan 25, 2014 03:00 PM

                                1. Why did YOU allow your daughter to use e-cigs in the first place, especially if they are illegal for her to use.

                                2,. If she had an allergic reaction, how did she use them long enough to become addicted?

                                3. Am I misunderstanding your post or are you REALLY blaming the e-cigs rather than your daughter who broke the law by using them in the first place??

                                1. re: PotatoHouse
                                  sunshine842 Jan 25, 2014 04:14 PM

                                  apparently you have never had a teenaged daughter.

                                  I don't have one, but I used to be one.

                                  Dads are usually the last to find out about questionable behaviour.

                                  Allergies and addiction are not synonymous -- and allergies can appear at any time. One day you're not allergic, the next day you are. It's how allergies work. (and most folks of any age -- including her doctors -- wouldn't immediately connect the dots of e-cigs and a rash on the *torso* -- not a part of the body that would typically come into contact with either the e-cigs or their vapour)

                                  The law didn't cause her medical problems -- which would have happened regardless of her age.

                                  1. re: PotatoHouse
                                    bagelman01 Jan 25, 2014 05:08 PM

                                    It's not a matter of allowing......we never saw her use them, but the eCigs were even permitted in her school (where smoking is illegal)
                                    Her use was/is not illegal, the sale to a minor is illegal...this may seem odd, but laws are strange (and I'm an attorney). Here in Connecticut it is illegal for those under 16 to buy government lottery tickets, but the state advertisements all have the disclaimer: "Children under 16 may not buy lottery tickets, but may receive them as gifts."
                                    It look almost 90 days for the skin allergic reactions to manifest themselves (time for chemical buildup), plus she tried many different brands of the liquids and we don't know which is the culprit and when she first ingested it.

                                    READ the earlier parft of my response, her use was not illegal, the sale to her was illegal. And YES I am blaming gthe eCigs for the medical problems, as if she was 18 years old and not 16 years and 11 months the reaction would be the same.

                                  2. re: bagelman01
                                    latindancer Jan 26, 2014 07:48 AM

                                    <ended up at the neurologist who after complete testing and examine the lifestyle diary…>

                                    I'm curious…
                                    Did your daughter concede to the use of the eCigs before she went in for all the testing? I would have thought, being a mother myself, they could have ruled out rather quickly what the culprit was had they known what her 'lifestyle' was.

                                    1. re: latindancer
                                      bagelman01 Jan 26, 2014 03:18 PM

                                      Daughter had a snowboarding accident in December and hit her head. They were trying to bdecide if the headaches were from a concussion or something else. Daughter had admitted to eCig use in Niovcember when she had the allergic reactions and stopped using the eCigs then,. She handed over her supply and we trashed them.
                                      No ecigs from Nov 15 to the neurologost appointment on Jan 22, but still having afteraffects

                                2. f
                                  ferret Jan 24, 2014 08:33 AM

                                  Eastern Europe has long maintained two sections in their restaurants, smoking and chain-smoking.

                                  2 Replies
                                  1. re: ferret
                                    willyum Jan 24, 2014 03:09 PM

                                    LOL :)

                                    1. re: ferret
                                      LeoLioness Jan 24, 2014 04:05 PM


                                    2. h
                                      Harters Jan 24, 2014 09:07 AM

                                      Saw them in a UK restaurant a few months back. Only seen them the once though. Good progress for our society, IMO - but then I was one who never supported the smoking ban (and I say that as a non-smoker).

                                      1. l
                                        latindancer Jan 24, 2014 07:42 PM

                                        I think it's ridiculous to ban them in restaurants…

                                        I've dined with several people at a round table, who're smoking them, and I've yet to notice any odor, at all.

                                        They're completely innocuous.

                                        38 Replies
                                        1. re: latindancer
                                          sunshine842 Jan 25, 2014 08:56 AM


                                          Nobody has run any tests whatsoever yet as to what the contents of that "vapour" actually contains, and I resent being told that I have to inhale something because someone else can't deal with their own addiction (because smokeless have nicotine, regardless of the scent or lack thereof).

                                          It's bad enough that we all have to breathe the ordinary crap that the human race puts into the atmosphere (and don't get me wrong -- I realize that there's a price to progress, and I'm not volunteering to live in a cave) .

                                          But the scented ones have the potential to trigger allergies and asthma, and it's unconscionable to allow that in an enclosed space.

                                          1. re: sunshine842
                                            Roland Parker Jan 25, 2014 09:37 AM

                                            So do perfumes and cologne. As do smells of certain types of food. Restaurants can hardly ban them.

                                            I was all for the ban on smoking as I've always hated the smell and it's certainly made the dining scene in Europe more enjoyable.

                                            I've seen people with the e-cigs and I don't even like the sight of them "smoking." But I won't support a witch hunt. Given that I'm inhaling worse pollutants while walking down a public street in Paris, fussing over the possibility of vapors seems to be a bit silly and more aligned to the strongly negative stigma people now attach to cigarette smoking than anything in reality. Until it's scientifically proven that vapors are harmful to others I'm not going to demand a ban on them, leaving it up to the restaurants to decide how they want to handle them.

                                            1. re: Roland Parker
                                              latindancer Jan 25, 2014 11:28 AM

                                              I agree…

                                              There are number of places I refuse to travel to during the winter…
                                              Bejing for one, where the coal burning is outa control, Paris in the winter and where I live in LA (have no choice here) where it hasn't rained in, what seems, like years…
                                              The skies are grey with pollutants and I'm going to sweat over vapors from one of these 'cigs'?
                                              I don't even smoke and I all I experience with these 'cigs' is a little vapor blown away from me.

                                              1. re: Roland Parker
                                                LorenzoGA Jan 25, 2014 12:35 PM

                                                I think the problem with the walking down the street analogy is that there are certain pollutants and odors you expect to encounter when you walk down the street, and you accept that risk. I don't expect e-cigarette emissions, regardless of what they are like, in a restaurant. I have experienced them, and while I can understand the people who say they are not bothered by it, I do find it unsettling. The sensation caused by the vapor--however one might describe it--just creeps me out and makes my skin crawl. I would find it equally creepy if I caught a whiff of anything that I knew had been exhaled by the person at the table next to me. We breathe air that, no doubt, someone at a nearby table may have exhaled a small portion of. But with e-cigarette emissions, if you can sense them in any way, they are GUARANTEED to have been exhaled by someone nearby. I don't think it's unreasonable to object to inhaling what you KNOW is someone else's exhalation. If it becomes commonplace, then I am just going to have to avoid restaurants that permit this.

                                                1. re: LorenzoGA
                                                  jgg13 Jan 25, 2014 12:41 PM

                                                  I know you say that you realize this happens anyways, but yes - in an enclosed space you're breathing in all sorts of water vapor exhaled by your neighbors.

                                                2. re: Roland Parker
                                                  sunshine842 Jan 25, 2014 02:54 PM

                                                  totally agree with you on fragrance -- and this isn't a witch hunt -- this is about not allowing forced inhalation of chemical substances about which we know shockingly little, despite how popular they've become.

                                                3. re: sunshine842
                                                  latindancer Jan 25, 2014 11:23 AM

                                                  I agree with you on the scented ones…I've never known anyone to inflect that crap on anyone I know of, including me.

                                                  The unscented ones? No problem here.

                                                4. re: latindancer
                                                  postemotional1 Jan 28, 2014 04:28 PM

                                                  I wonder what Colorado will do with pot?

                                                  1. re: postemotional1
                                                    sunshine842 Jan 28, 2014 04:58 PM

                                                    allow it to be smoked only outdoors in approved spaces, just like cigarettes.

                                                    1. re: sunshine842
                                                      sedimental Jan 28, 2014 09:06 PM

                                                      I live in WA and we are not allowed to smoke pot outside "in public".
                                                      We can smoke it in our own homes, cars, yards, private buildings, just not in public spaces. Often, you can smell that not everyone is following all the rules ( mostly the 20 something kids) But, most folks don't care much anyway. A bit of skunky smell outside sometimes is just not a big deal. No one complains that their asthma is effected or anything.

                                                      Washingtonians are fairly laid back folks :)

                                                      1. re: sedimental
                                                        linguafood Jan 28, 2014 09:32 PM

                                                        Can't wait to get back to your wonderful state...

                                                        1. re: linguafood
                                                          sedimental Jan 28, 2014 09:37 PM

                                                          Be a 12th man in the " smoke a bowl". .... Errrrr...Super Bowl :)

                                                        2. re: sedimental
                                                          sunshine842 Jan 29, 2014 03:48 AM

                                                          Obviously it varies depending on local regulations and ordinances.

                                                          But the point was that nobody's going to light up indoors with the approval of the law....

                                                          1. re: sunshine842
                                                            latindancer Jan 29, 2014 07:29 AM

                                                            Actually, I'm very well aware of many who're 'lighting up' indoors in public places in both CO and WA.
                                                            The law just isn't enforced as many would have thought.
                                                            However, light up a cigarette?
                                                            Nobody had better think about it.
                                                            WA state banned the public smoking of cigs long after CA did…which seems so odd.
                                                            WA has a pollution problem equal to CA, if not worse in some areas, and was one of the last to jump on the band wagon.

                                                            1. re: sunshine842
                                                              lagatta Jan 29, 2014 07:53 AM

                                                              Yes, there's a lot of difference between smoking indoors in public places and simply smoking "in public" which could mean outdoors - where there are more fumes from cars and trucks than from any kind of smoker.

                                                              1. re: lagatta
                                                                sedimental Jan 29, 2014 07:59 AM

                                                                I was just clarifying where the law is, in regard to pot in WA. There is a big difference in the law between cigarette and pot smoking.
                                                                Cigarette smoking is still allowed in public places outside.
                                                                Pot is not allowed anywhere outside in public.
                                                                Neither is allowed indoors.

                                                                1. re: sedimental
                                                                  latindancer Jan 29, 2014 08:05 AM


                                                                  Now, if they'd just enforce those 'laws'.

                                                                  1. re: latindancer
                                                                    sedimental Jan 29, 2014 08:22 AM

                                                                    One more kinds of OT post, then I am done :)

                                                                    Most people in WA really don't care much. It is not a "hot topic" or considered any problem from any major groups.
                                                                    The day it became legal, political advocates were smoking in public, in groups, with the blessings of the police department managing crowd control. wA residents as a majority, just don't care.

                                                                    it might be considered a problem from tourists. They are not used to smelling pot at all, anywhere. It is a novelty, and a bit of a shocking one to many. Most people living here, breaking the rules, are kids smoking outside at festivals and concerts. Sometimes outside at bars (where the smokers are). It just isn't a big deal.

                                                                    A whiff of pot smoke is not as offensive to me, than the lingering stench of cigarette smoke, that actually clings to your hair and clothes when having to walk through it -on your way into a restaurant or bar.

                                                                    E cigs don't bother me. There is a lot of e cig smokers in WA too. Most people don't smoke them inside. I don't think I have seen anyone smoke them (in an obvious way) in a restaurant. But will smoke them at outside tables (where you wouldn't a smoke cigarette).

                                                                    1. re: sedimental
                                                                      latindancer Jan 29, 2014 08:46 AM

                                                                      I'm well aware of all the things you talk about.

                                                                      I have a home there.
                                                                      Let's just say…
                                                                      Laws like this are, what most people consider, BS laws..
                                                                      Like texting while driving or hauling trash without strapping down the cargo.
                                                                      Gardeners here break the laws 24/7 while not strapping down their mowers, tools etc…driving on the freeways behind them can be treacherous. Texting while driving accounts for most of the accidents…
                                                                      They're laws that just can't be enforced.
                                                                      Once they're in place, like weed use, there's no turning back.

                                                                      1. re: latindancer
                                                                        sedimental Jan 29, 2014 09:25 AM

                                                                        Yes, that was my point. You can't enforce it in a way that makes sense and most people don't care enough to attempt to enforce it.
                                                                        Cigarette smoking outside of restaurants is a much bigger problem than pot or e cigs. The 20 foot from the front door rule is not effective in a state where it rains all the time and awnings outside the buildings are typically no longer that 12 feet long!

                                                                        1. re: sedimental
                                                                          latindancer Jan 29, 2014 10:37 AM

                                                                          <Yes, that was my point>

                                                                          The backers of the 'pot use for medicinal use' knew, in advance, that the use of pot would be used by the casual user. It wouldn't be used ONLY by the people who it was initially meant for.
                                                                          They knew that once the law was in place, just like in CO, there would be widespread use of it and nobody would care and nobody would ever be able to enforce the law.
                                                                          e-cigs aren't only used by addicts looking for a way to kick their habit. They're used by everyone, including underage children, who're looking for an oral fix for one reason or another, look cool or be part of a fad.

                                                                      2. re: sedimental
                                                                        lagatta Jan 29, 2014 09:03 AM

                                                                        I travel to Amsterdam at least once a year (no, NOT for that reason - I don't smoke anything - the only drugs I do are coffee and wine). There are certain areas where the smell of marijuana outdoors is fairly strong - this is not legal; actually the only place where pot is legally "tolerated" is in coffeeshops - but absolutely nobody makes a fuss about it.

                                                                        There has been a reduction in the number of coffeeshops though, not due to this but because there was too much selling of hard drugs, causing social problems. In a similar vein, the official "Red Light" is being reined in and windows closed, once again due to collateral problems caused by gangs.

                                                                        It is also due to social change: young people seem to be more interested in computers, smartphones and similar devices than in smoking dope nowadays, and some of the Red Light has been given over to upscaled restaurants, cafés and art galleries.

                                                                        In principle, smoking anything is prohibited in restaurants, bars and cafés, except for the tolerance of marijuana in coffeeshops. However, the ban on tobacco smoking is often flouted, to my dismay. Tobacco makes me physically ill.

                                                              2. re: sedimental
                                                                PotatoHouse Jan 30, 2014 01:53 PM

                                                                "We can smoke it in our own homes, CARS, yards, private buildings, just not in public spaces."

                                                                Nice to know the police allow stoners to drive impaired....

                                                                1. re: PotatoHouse
                                                                  linguafood Jan 30, 2014 01:56 PM

                                                                  Nobody said anything about *driving*. Just *smoking* in the car.

                                                                  1. re: linguafood
                                                                    PotatoHouse Jan 30, 2014 02:03 PM

                                                                    Try sitting in a car drinking a 6-pack or a fifth of Jack Daniels and see if you don't get arrested for drunk driving. Should be no difference.

                                                                    1. re: PotatoHouse
                                                                      linguafood Jan 30, 2014 02:05 PM

                                                                      When you're not actually driving? What an idiotic law.

                                                                  2. re: PotatoHouse
                                                                    FriedClamFanatic Jan 30, 2014 02:20 PM

                                                                    Um..not if you live in San Rafael, CA........seems they think that all that nasty smoke and carcinogens go thru cement, so if your bldg. abuts another.....you can't smoke in it.......they'll get around to car distances apart soon

                                                                    1. re: FriedClamFanatic
                                                                      latindancer Jan 30, 2014 02:48 PM

                                                                      <you can't smoke in it>

                                                                      But who's actually enforcing the law? Unless someone calls, and makes a complaint, there's not the legal manpower to come, investigate and potentially arrest someone.
                                                                      That's the part of BS law that the legislators could care less about. They just want the law passed.

                                                                      1. re: latindancer
                                                                        FriedClamFanatic Jan 30, 2014 08:17 PM

                                                                        yeah........and if you are not wearing your seat belt, you are a detriment to society since you could fly through the windshield in a crash and hit poor "whoopsie" the maltese riding in the front of the other car

                                                                        but wait.......some "do-gooder" will be there to tattle

                                                                    2. re: PotatoHouse
                                                                      sedimental Jan 31, 2014 04:02 AM

                                                                      Lol. I didn't mean while driving or impaired. But it is okay as far as I know, to smoke in your own car, truck, camper/RV etc parked for example at a concert, park, event,....however, driving impaired is still a DUI.

                                                                      Of course, if you break the law, and smoke where it is not allowed, you wouldn't get arrested. You would get a ticket, same for smoking anything where you are not supposed to, or jaywalking, or the myriad of other laws governing good communal behavior that no one cares enough about to call police over.

                                                                2. re: postemotional1
                                                                  latindancer Jan 29, 2014 07:44 AM

                                                                  What do you mean?

                                                                  I travel to CO quite often…
                                                                  It's smoked publicly and nobody seems to mind.
                                                                  I find it strange because I no more want to inhale the effects of pot any more than I do cigs.
                                                                  Inhaling anything into my lungs without my approval isn't okay with me.

                                                                  1. re: latindancer
                                                                    sunshine842 Jan 29, 2014 06:23 PM

                                                                    actually, way back up there, I was actually referring to a piece on NPR a few weeks back -- they were talking about how it's a bit of a paradox -- it's now legal to smoke it, but there are very few places where it's legal to smoke.

                                                                    They said that several of the shops that they interviewed were constructing smoking decks as a part of the shops.

                                                                    1. re: sunshine842
                                                                      latindancer Jan 29, 2014 09:33 PM

                                                                      Both interesting and compelling.

                                                                      With all the debate about the pros and cons of legalizing it I never heard anyone talk about the ill effects (the inhalation) of people around them.
                                                                      I think with all the discussion here on this thread I've changed my mind about e-cigs too.
                                                                      I have the right NOT to have anything I don't want entering my lungs.
                                                                      Whether it be vapor, cig smoke or pot…it's really all the same idea.

                                                                      1. re: latindancer
                                                                        lagatta Jan 30, 2014 04:20 AM

                                                                        Even exhaust fumes?

                                                                        1. re: lagatta
                                                                          sunshine842 Jan 30, 2014 04:57 PM

                                                                          Even exhaust fumes.

                                                                          We all realize that progress comes with a price, and nobody's volunteering to go off the grid and live in a cave.

                                                                          But damn -- it's bad enough that I get stuck breathing the vile fumes from the broke-down junker in front of me in traffic. I have no control over that -- so at some point we as a society have to be able to stand up and say ENOUGH. Control it where we can, and deal with what has to be in the name of economic progress.

                                                                          1. re: sunshine842
                                                                            latindancer Jan 31, 2014 07:00 AM

                                                                            <we as a society have to be able to stand up and say ENOUGH>

                                                                            In theory that sounds wonderful.
                                                                            Where I live things are moving pretty fast 24/7. People are trying to get from point A-Z quickly.
                                                                            It's really not very often you'll see someone actually be thoughtful enough to even pull over to help a stray dog (swerving to avoid hitting and not stopping is quite the norm here) let alone stand up and say ENOUGH about anything.
                                                                            People have to have really had ENOUGH in their own lives…
                                                                            There was a movie made about this many years ago.

                                                                          2. re: lagatta
                                                                            latindancer Jan 31, 2014 06:55 AM

                                                                            Why would exhaust fumes be any different?

                                                                            If I'm behind some jerk/moron/idiot who's driving a car with visible exhaust fumes flowing freely I simply call whoever has jurisdiction where he/she is driving, give them a license # and description and they take care of it.
                                                                            I do the same with a gardener who *illegally* is using a gas powered blower (knowing full well they're breaking the law).
                                                                            Fumes from anywhere, no matter where it's coming from, aren't something I'm willing to overlook.

                                                                            1. re: latindancer
                                                                              sunshine842 Jan 31, 2014 08:32 PM

                                                                              but right there you are, saying ENOUGH.

                                                                3. p
                                                                  pedalfaster Jan 25, 2014 04:25 PM

                                                                  I'm a non-smoker.
                                                                  I figure I inhale more nasty-toxic stuff on city streets where cars are allowed to drive.

                                                                  1 Reply
                                                                  1. re: pedalfaster
                                                                    sunshine842 Jan 25, 2014 05:51 PM

                                                                    all the more reason to not up the intake once indoors.

                                                                  2. j
                                                                    jarona Jan 26, 2014 08:12 AM

                                                                    when we were in Cannes last summer there was a line that stretched from the counter at a makeshift e-cig store to the outside. Interesting.

                                                                    1. l
                                                                      lagatta Jan 28, 2014 07:23 PM

                                                                      I'm not at all surprised. You are the doctor...

                                                                      I'd been so thrilled at being able to go to restaurants and cafés - and breathe. My dad killed himself smoking, and did quite a bit of harm to my respiratory system (not that I'd hold that against him: this was not known 45 years ago).

                                                                      3 Replies
                                                                      1. re: lagatta
                                                                        sunshine842 Jan 28, 2014 08:07 PM

                                                                        my dad actually apologized to me when he read that exposure to smoke sometimes triggers lifelong allergies in kids. He was pretty upset, saying that if they'd had any idea, they'd have quit.

                                                                        I said the same thing...when we were born, it wasn't public knowledge. (he quit in the early 70s and hasn't touched one since, btw)

                                                                        1. re: lagatta
                                                                          PotatoHouse Jan 30, 2014 02:00 PM

                                                                          The first cigarette pack health warning came out in 1966.

                                                                          1. re: PotatoHouse
                                                                            lagatta Jan 30, 2014 04:07 PM

                                                                            Yes, but I'm pretty sure that it didn't refer to the dangers of second-hand smoke, and that such messages came much later.

                                                                        Show Hidden Posts