The "Lone Wolf" Graphic Arts Technologist: Bans: Illegally Usurping Your Constitutional Rights

From the Boulder, CO "vaping ban" web page (https://bouldercolorado.gov/vaping-and-tobacco-regulations):

"A tobacco product is a product which contains, is made or derived from tobacco or used to deliver nicotine, synthetic nicotine or other substances intended for human consumption. This includes products whether heated, chewed, absorbed, dissolved, inhaled, snorted, sniffed, or ingested by any other means, including, but not limited to cigarettes, cigars, little cigars, chewing tobacco, pipe tobacco, snuff, bidis, snus, nicotine product, mints or hand gels."

So let's take a look at this.

Firstly, it defines anything that could "deliver ... other substances intend for human consumption" as "tobacco products" (note the use of "or" between the clauses.

I suppose on the surface this is fine, especially if this was all (all in the sense of just defining tobacco products) the ordinance did, but it goes on to say that what the ordinance does:

Raising the age to purchase to 21 for tobacco products
Limiting any one retailer from selling more than two electronic cigarettes or four associated products including refills to any one person in any 24-hour period
Banning the sale of flavored tobacco products to be used in an electronic smoking device (temporary menthol flavored products exception, see bullet below) in Boulder
Restricting the ability to sell menthol flavored electronic cigarette products to only 21 and over age restricted businesses until Dec. 31, 2019. After Jan. 1, 2020 the sale of menthol flavored electronic cigarettes in the city of Boulder is completely prohibited.

Now think about this.

It will be selectively enforced against vape shops only even though it covers virtually anything any human being might inhale (perfume) or consume (a hot dog).

Clearly a hot dog bun is a "tobacco product" under this ordinance as it falls under "deliver ... other substances intend for human consumption" (it delivers a hot dog to your mouth for you to consume) so hot dogs should be subject to the restrictions above as well as any e-liquid or vape supply. I suppose too, your hand might also be considered a "tobacco product" for the same reason.

Of course, Colorado's vaunted "THC products" are also, at least theoretically, restricted as well as all food, all perfumes, air fresheners, cooking products, baking products, medications, etc.

So exactly how is this different than creating a law that, as an example, allows for "public drinking fountains" but only allowing white people to access it?

It's not...

The "vaping ban" would be selective enforcement of a general law and, I think, a serious problem in that it can be used to discriminate otherwise legal activity and to take away peoples access to otherwise legal products. I have written about the right to "treat your own disease," for example, which the government cannot unreasonably take away.

Certainly a police officer can ticket only one of several cars speeding down the highway and a judge would not accept a "selective enforcement" argument that the ticket is invalid because others were also speeding (see https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/24766/selective-enforcement-vs-equal-protection).

But I think that this law is so ridiculously broad and encompasses virtually all aspects of human "consumption" that it would be found invalid.

But rather than have some ~~shlub~~ vape shop owner get a ticket and fight it...

We cry,

We whine on Facebook.

Crying like small children in a haunted house.

This law violates your Constitutional rights very clearly. The Constitution's 4th Amendment says:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

How, exactly, are you secure when a law specifically allows law enforcement to arbitrarily pick and choose what to enforce and who to enforce it against? After all, anything you might "consume" could be construed as a "tobacco product" under this.

Or, think of it this way, this law make kids eating cup cakes flavored with 0mg King Arthur Coconut Flavoring criminals (see the previous post).

You are being led down a false path...

"Vaping leadership" is doing nothing to stop this injustice.

Vapers just sit and cry about what they are losing.

I am not aware of a single case where this legal fraud is being fought in the courts.

(The Colorado "Gay Cake Case" shows that unreasonable Colorado laws can and should be struct down - https://icma.org/blog-posts/colorado-cake-maker-wins-same-sex-marriage-cake-case-narrow-opinion?gclid=EAIaIQobChMInMGPm_aq5QIVD1YMCh1IAw8pEAAYASAAEgL3pvD_BwE).

How is this any different?

Banning or restricting anything for "human consumption" and then selectively picking on vape shops.

Still no CASAA.

Still no legal action.

Nothing...

And you lose more of your rights.