The Premium Debate: Banning disposable vapes ‘a good start’

Vaping is growing in popularity among young people. Photo / 123RF

Opinion

The owner of a ram-raided vape shop believes more attacks will happen to fuel a future black market as the Government cracks down on cheap disposable vapes.

However, health officials say the risk of a black market for disposable vapes is “considered low” because there will be alternative nicotine products on the market — albeit fewer disposable options.

The column had a big response from Premium subscribers. Here are more of their comments.

Read the full story here: Ram-raids: Vape shop owner fears changes to Government vaping rules will lead to a black market, more attacks.

Have your say by going to bayofplentytimes.co.nz or dailypost.co.nz and becoming a Premium subscriber.

As someone who has been using e-cigarettes for over 10 years, I think banning disposable vapes is a good start, but [the Government] could go further and ban salt nicotine liquid, as this e-liquid has no harsh nicotine taste and therefore is often extra-strong, usually around 20 to 40 milligrams of nicotine, where freebase nicotine liquid usually tastes harsh over 6mg - I believe this is the main cause for children getting hooked on these.

And disposable vapes are generally more expensive to use than reusable vapes. I don’t see why there would be a black market for vape products when you can still buy them off the shelf.

John M

Plain and simple… follow the Australian guidelines and ban recreational vaping altogether.

Oh, hold up… Labour might lose too many votes. Feeble.

Valle L

Do we need businesses that depend on selling products I believe are harmful to health and families - like vapes, alcohol, cigarettes, sugary drinks and fatty, salty snacks - in socially deprived communities, when it will cost the country many millions in health costs alone?

Banks, bars and jewellers who deal in high-value items have to bear the costs of their security.

Why should premises that sell vapes, alcohol and cigarettes feel that the taxpayer is obliged to provide their security?

Totally agree with Valle L [with regard to] the feeble Government response to the vaping epidemic.

Deafening silence from the other parties, or is it under-reporting?

Don L

Decisions on the use or otherwise of vapes, like alcohol and cigarettes, should be based on medical science/advice and real data on their long-term harmful effects etc, instead of being politicised.

With regard to ram-raids and other criminal-related matters, Labour’s favourite buzzwords have been “we are watching/monitoring the situation etc” - instead of taking real actions such as harsher punishments to disincentivise people from committing crimes in the first place.

As for youth offenders, other countries with very low youth crimes make the carers or parents of these offenders pay for damages they cause - that would be a good start to ensure these carers or parents pull their weight instead of blaming society for their actions without any consequences/cost to themselves.

Albert C

What world are we living in here? It is illegal to sell alcohol, cigarettes and vaping products to those under 18.

You can’t drive without a licence, it is illegal to steal from stores, you have to wear a seatbelt when driving.

We have thousands of laws in place to protect people. Instead of banning certain types of vapes, why not enforce the laws already in place?

Are we going to ban cigarettes, alcohol and cars next?

In what fairyland would banning disposable vapes prevent kids from using vaping products?

They can get different vapes or cigs. Let’s ban everything - that way there will be no need for personal responsibility and we can all live like robots.

Brent A

It’s important to remember the original purpose of introducing vape products was to help people gradually quit smoking, not to create a new generation of nicotine addicts.

Unfortunately, these products have attracted a younger audience.

Efforts must be focused on promoting their initial positive intention, while simultaneously protecting vulnerable age groups.

Martin Carl F

Republished comments may be edited at the editor’s discretion.

The Rotorua Daily Post and the Bay of Plenty Times welcome letters from readers. Please note the following:

• Letters should not exceed 200 words.
• They should be opinions based on facts or current events.
• If possible, please email.
• No noms-de-plume.
• Letters will be published with names and suburb/city.
• Please include full name, address and contact details for our records only.
• Local letter writers given preference.
• Rejected letters are not normally acknowledged.
• Letters may be edited, abridged, or rejected at the Editor’s discretion.
• The Editor’s decision on publication is final. No correspondence will be entered into.

Email editor@dailypost.co.nz or editor@bayofplentytimes.co.nz.