Never cared for vaping or e cigarettes, but I recently stopped smoking cigarettes again and haven’t had one in about 3.5 weeks even though I have a pack in the car, and usually have one in my pocket when walking around. I have been using fruit flavored vapes this time. If they just tasted like real cigarettes I would not use it, id definitely go back to smoking. What’s the point then. Id be more likely to try out nicotine oils at that point you just put on your skin, but I doubt they would do me much good because a lot of it for me is about having something in my hand to toy around with. There was a period I quit drinking for 6 months, still went to bars to socialize and such, just drank gingerale or something I could pass off as a drink so it didn’t get questions and I could toy with it. Fidget spinners and shit never clicked for me.

That said, I’m sure they get more people to use them than normal cigarettes do, they taste good, and don’t smell bad.

My question more so is… What is the court deciding? It’s either does the law prohibit them or not, and is the law legal without an amendment or not. It should have nothing to do with if more people get addicted or if companies say it helps people get off cigarettes. Those are distractions from legislation.

Judges say: it says 12 It doesn’t matter if 12 is better or worse for our society, what matters is a judge says it is written as 12.

If the population believes 12 is not the best answer, then our representatives write an amendment or law that says 17.

Asking the courts to approve things on moral/ ethical standings is directly conflating the courts to use bias and undermining the government process/branches created to ensure it doesn’t all fall apart like it is.