*** R2B Smoke Free and Nicopure respond to FDA - Court Document ***

[5150sick]

https://www.docdroid.net/cV93hxZ/joint-petitioners-opposition-and-reply-brief-as-filed.pdf.html


That's some good shit right there.

Should keep me busy for the next couple of days. - 5150

 

[Jimi D]

Thanks for posting

 

[KDodds]

To the logical, rational, legal/philosophical mind, the argument seems to be a clear no-brainer. Unfortunately, impartiality comes into play, and we all know our governments, whether federal, state, or local, are extraordinarily prone to prejudice on many levels. And, of course, it actually has to be read. It's not like those in power have never made a judgment without reading through all that is encompassed in the case (Patriot Act, only 2 congressmen actually read it).

 

[JuicyLucy]

Okay, I read the whole document and I do have one question:

When addressing the first amendment violations in the deeming regs, how come the ban on vape shop employees helping customers is not addressed?

Or are many of the claims of not being able to advise consumers misunderstood or exaggerated?

Probably a rhetorical question, but a valid one I think

 

[KDodds]

Okay, I read the whole document and I do have one question:

When addressing the first amendment violations in the deeming regs, how come the ban on vape shop employees helping customers is not addressed?

Or are many of the claims of not being able to advise consumers misunderstood or exaggerated?

Probably a rhetorical question, but a valid one I think

From what I have read and gather, there's nothing specifically forbidding vape shops from talking about devices, what they do, how they work, what kind of juice to use in which tank, how to make a coil, etc. BUT, like everything else in the regs, these portions are unclear as to actual practical intent. While the intent is veiled in preventing vape shop employees from discussing health benefits and encouraging use, it is left nebulous on purpose so that the FDA can make up and enforce "laws" on the fly, like most of the rest of the regs.

 

[JuicyLucy]

I can see banning vape shop employees from making health-benefit claims - because it has not been definitively proven, etc.

But I've seen many posts by vendors claiming they can't help customers use their devices or give them advice on devices and that bothers me a lot.

 

[KDodds]

Yep, me too. I think they're being overly cautious. It is their livelihood after all, and no one wants to be the FDA's test case and have their livelihood yanked out from under their feet. I can understand that. BUT, I do believe it's perilous to act as your own attorney and shops that will help are probably going to put shops that won't help out of business slowly, as customer service perception of shop 1 selling at MSRP is weighted against the customer service of shop 2, also selling at MSRP.

 

[Rossum]

That's some good shit right there.

It is indeed. The plaintiff's attorneys didn't have very long to prepare that either.

Should keep me busy for the next couple of days. - 5150

We knew you were slow, but it's only 55 pages, and it's actually pretty easy to read.