No Drinking, Smoking, or Vaping Under 21 in California if New Law Signed - Motherboard

If California’s governor signs a new slate of bills into law, teens in the state could soon legally smoke medicinal weed, but not vape. The bills, which are designed to curb teen smoking and include raising the legal smoking age to 21, have lumped in the use of vaping devices, to the chagrin of the industry.

“It’s a bridge too far,” said Gregory Conley, the president of the American Vaping Association, a nonprofit advocacy group. “This is California. The idea that you can go and shoot 300 porn films before you’re 21 but you can’t have a vape afterwards, I don’t think that’s right.”

The slate of bills would fold e-cigarettes under the Stop Tobacco Access to Kids Enforcement Act (which prohibits the sale of tobacco products to minors), raise the legal smoking age to 21 (and include e-cigarettes), prohibit vaping anywhere that smoking is prohibited, and allow local municipal governments to tax tobacco products (including e-cigarettes) as long as they put it to a vote. Conley said while these rules may make sense for traditional tobacco products, the AVA believes vaping needs to be treated differently.

That’s because the current scientific literature shows vaping is much less harmful than smoking—as much as 95 percent less harmful, according to England’s public health agency—and vaping can be an effective smoking cessation tool. In fact, a large number of vapers use e-cigarettes to either cut back on smoking or quit flat out, and the number of US adults who currently vape but have never smoked is less than 1 percent, according to the Centers for Disease Control. Studies have also shown that banning e-cigarettes for minors can cause teen smoking rates to increase slightly.

“It’s very, very easy for teens, including 18-20 year olds, to get cigarettes,” Conley told me. “But to get high quality vapor products is more difficult because there are fewer avenues to get them.”

The new laws are also worded very broadly. E-cigarettes would fall under new definitions of tobacco products that include “an electronic device that delivers nicotine or other vaporized liquids,” meaning even vape juices without any nicotine would be treated like cigarettes. And bumping the age to 21 means employees at vape shops and manufacturers under that age would need to find new work. One vape shop owner told told OC Weekly that about a third of his employees are under 21, as are a third of his customers.

The state senate passed the final version of the bills late last week and they are now awaiting the approval of Governor Jerry Brown.

Lawmakers are concerned about teens and young adults taking up vaping not as a way to quit smoking, but as a hobby. Despite being less harmful than cigarettes, even vaping industry insiders admit it’s far from a harmless habit. So if high schoolers who would never consider smoking are happy to pick up a vape pen, that’s a problem, and a report by California’s department of public health show 20 percent of teen vapers in the state had never smoked a cigarette.

Senator Mark Leno, a major proponent of the e-cigarette bans, said that this trend really stoked the push for legislation.

“No tobacco product should be exempt from California’s smoke-free laws simply because it’s sold in a modern or trendy disguise,” Leno said in a press release. “Addiction is what’s really being sold. Like traditional cigarettes, e-cigarettes deliver nicotine in a cloud of other toxic chemicals, and their use should be restricted equally under state law in order to protect public health.”

 

I'm not sure if I understood correctly, but in California those activities are forbidden for people younger than those ages? I mean, if a teenager at 15 years smoke a cigarette on the street, can he be fined for that? Because he is smoking and he is underage? I knew that only selling those products to people underage is illegal.

 

“It’s a bridge too far,” said Gregory Conley, the president of the American Vaping Association, a nonprofit advocacy group. “This is California. The idea that you can go and shoot 300 porn films before you’re 21 but you can’t have a vape afterwards, I don’t think that’s right.”

That's an excellent point! It's ridiculous that someone can make porn at 18 but not vape or smoke.

 

That seems a bit excessive to me. I guess I can say that I am not too surprised that it is coming from California, but I would have to assume that there are a lot of people who are up in arms about this. I am kind of surprised that I have not heard more about this in the news, because it seems to be something that could really stir up some intense emotions and opinions from a lot of different people.

 

I hope it won't get signed. As I've said before, you can't just prohibit things. Drinking has been under restriction for so many years but everyone starts doing that as a minor. For the first time, at least.

 

“This is California. The idea that you can go and shoot 300 porn films before you’re 21 but you can’t have a vape afterwards, I don’t think that’s right.”

I'm laughing my ass off. This guy is absolutely right. Btw, hope they won't raise the age of porn consent

 

Is the smoking age 21 as well in California? It would be crazy to have the cigarette age at 18 and the vaping age at 21. I'm not too sure about the vaping age. I guess it's not the worst thing in the world to limit vaping opportunities for those under 21. Ideally you would want those to vape or smoke cigarettes, but if they are going to smoke something, they should try vaping instead of cigarettes.

 

This is one of those overprotective parent laws that will cause more problems than it solves. What will actually happen is a vast number of smokers will be considered criminals rather than getting the type of help and assistance that they need to overcome their problem. This is so stupid that I think it has a very reasonable chance of passing.

 

21 drinking
21 smoking
18 vaping

I think that would be right.

 

I don't know how they are going to enforce it. All someone has to do is have a older friend that will buy the all those things if you are under age. There is something that bothers me though, so you can choose your government when you are 18 you can even drive a car at this age, but you can't drink, smoke or vape until you are 21.

 

If they are going to do that, then they need to up the legal adult age to 21. Enforce parents to continue supporting their kids until they are 21. Then, you will have change introduced because then parents would probably be upset that they can be held liable for the actions of their children past the age of 18. It is only fair right? It would suck for the 18 year old, to have to remain a legal minor for a few more years but my guess is that dumb laws like this would be stopped into the mud quickly.

 

Funny how the law permit someone to join the military right out of high school and is ordered to shoot an enemy combatant, but then again, a 17 year old can't smoke or vape at all. Never mind about porn, a license to kill at 17 is far more surprising. If they are going to restrict minors from everything, they might as well do it across the board. They shouldn't pick and chose particular activities as it leaves themselves open for ridicule and opposition.

 

Yeah, that's kind of ridiculous. We all know that kids start smoking at the age like 15-16, somebody does that even younger.

 

I don't think all those cigarette manufacturers care much about minors who smoke. They are even glad kids do that. However, they can't publicly express that. Of course, they would say tons of righteous things on that topic. But in reality they are not against that at all.

 

If you're legally an adult, and independent why is there a restriction. I never got the whole you can't drink until you're 21 law. It is pretty commonly known that most people have already started drinking socially at ages under and around 18. I agree with the argument that if you are of age to sign up to go to war for your country than that should be the legal age of drinking. The same I think should apply to vaping. I don't think that law will be passed.