The TPD means nothing

[buggritt]

Don't be ridiculous gents.

[csmith10]

Fingers crossed the totally wicked legal challenge gains some traction

[blaze]

Apr 7, 2015 22:20:55 GMT Montana said:

Hopefully someone can clarify or direct me to the answer for a question I have.

Regarding Mods and atty's , that we already own.Are we still going to be able to use mods come the TPD implementation as they DON'T give a consistent dose and atty's because they are not leak free ?

Yes - there will be nothing illegal about using anything.  All the TPD will do is ban their sale.

[charliehorse]

The following quote is taken from here - ec.europa.eu/health/tobacco/docs/dir_201440_en.pdf

(16) ‘electronic cigarette’ means a product that can be used for consumption of nicotine-containing vapour via a mouth piece, or any component of that product, including a cartridge, a tank and the device without cartridge or tank. Electronic cigarettes can be disposable or refillable by means of a refill container and a tank, or rechargeable with single use cartridges;

Now, the bit that catches my attention is "consumption of nicotine-containing vapour"
What about vapour that does not contain nicotine ie, zero nic juice ?

Does that mean that all the atomizers/clearomisers/ whatever you want to call them, that are on sale right now, could still be sold after the event but with something like "Not for use with liquid that contains nicotine" marked on the packaging ?

And would zero nicotine juice still be available in any quantity and flavour ?

[markm]

Sadly it's not going to be that easy to sidestep.
First up, we still don't know if governments intend to apply rules to zero nic juices,
Secondly, "that can be used for" is the important part of the phrase you highlighted.

[letsavit]

Apr 8, 2015 12:04:34 GMT charliehorse said:

The following quote is taken from here - ec.europa.eu/health/tobacco/docs/dir_201440_en.pdf

(16) ‘electronic cigarette’ means a product that can be used for consumption of nicotine-containing vapour via a mouth piece, or any component of that product, including a cartridge, a tank and the device without cartridge or tank. Electronic cigarettes can be disposable or refillable by means of a refill container and a tank, or rechargeable with single use cartridges;

Now, the bit that catches my attention is "consumption of nicotine-containing vapour"
What about vapour that does not contain nicotine ie, zero nic juice ?

Does that mean that all the atomizers/clearomisers/ whatever you want to call them, that are on sale right now, could still be sold after the event but with something like "Not for use with liquid that contains nicotine" marked on the packaging ?

And would zero nicotine juice still be available in any quantity and flavour ?

Like me I vape the stuff I buy in boots only, it relaxes me...! ....there will be loop holes, there always is.....I can cargo from a few parts of the world....not directly from China though.....I may well be opening a shop next year.... A shop front with a near by stock room.....

[letsavit]

Apr 8, 2015 12:10:05 GMT markm said:

Sadly it's not going to be that easy to sidestep.
First up, we still don't know if governments intend to apply rules to zero nic juices,
Secondly, "that can be used for" is the important part of the phrase you highlighted.

Bloody hell you're a doom monger, write your letters and just sit back and take it ....

[charliehorse]

Apr 8, 2015 12:10:05 GMT markm said:

Sadly it's not going to be that easy to sidestep.
First up, we still don't know if governments intend to apply rules to zero nic juices,
Secondly, "that can be used for" is the important part of the phrase you highlighted.

I see what you are getting at, but surely if it comes down to it, then, "via a mouth piece" would be just as valid.
Do away with the mouth piece and problem solved, just call it a nose piece and we can all sniff the vapour 



Edit to add I am not trying to poke fun or make light of a potentially serious situation, but if it comes down to politicians and definitions then the lawyers will see a bigger profit than Big T and Pharma, and drag it through the courts and appeals for ever 

[ceedee]

Apr 8, 2015 12:38:41 GMT charliehorse said:

Apr 8, 2015 12:10:05 GMT markm said:

Sadly it's not going to be that easy to sidestep.
First up, we still don't know if governments intend to apply rules to zero nic juices,
Secondly, "that can be used for" is the important part of the phrase you highlighted.

I see what you are getting at, but surely if it comes down to it, then, "via a mouth piece" would be just as valid.
Do away with the mouth piece and problem solved, just call it a nose piece and we can all sniff the vapour 



Edit to add I am not trying to poke fun or make light of a potentially serious situation, but if it comes down to politicians and definitions then the lawyers will see a bigger profit than Big T and Pharma, and drag it through the courts and appeals for ever 

If the UK government adopts the phraseology of the TPD then anyone selling kettles, humidifiers or garden hoses COULD be prosecuted if a busy-body trading standards bod decides on a very narrow interpretation. I suspect this is a direct result of the fiasco regarding head-shops selling drug-taking paraphernalia.
 
And as you correctly point out, all laws are passed by politicians and, yes, one way or another lawyers usually benefit from the application of them.