If the data graphed below (from this interesting treatise) is accurate, retail sales associating with vaping products has/is posing a significant and prominent threat to Pig Tobacco monetary profits (nationwide):
Thus, we are (predictably) seeing the ranks of revenue-conscious bought and paid-for politicians arising to terminate “vaping” related industries “with extreme prejudice”. “Saving the children” (from healthier habits).
Does anyone here understand legislation gibberish? First the article then the link to mass.gov I live here in this post Nazi regime.
Fresh is going to talk about it in just under an hour
H4183 (as amended in the House) was voted to be “engrossed” (combined together by an inter-body “conference committee”) with an amended version suggested to the House by the Senate (H4196), the link to that (suggested by Senate to be amended) text of which can be found here). Bill Text download here.
What does “engrossed” mean? I don’t understand how to make sense of how legislation is written. Just tell me the bad or possibly good news.
“Engrossed” (combined together by an inter-body “conference committee”). Bill Text PDF download here.
From Page 12 of 20 (of the new, suggested as an amended version titled H4196):
(4) When the commissioner or a police officer discovers an untaxed electronic nicotine delivery system in the possession of a person who is not a licensed or commissioner-authorized electronic nicotine delivery system distributor, the commissioner or police officer may seize and take possession of the electronic nicotine delivery systems and any vending machine or other receptacle including, but not limited to, a motor vehicle, boat or airplane in which the electronic nicotine delivery systems are contained or transported.
Any electronic nicotine delivery system, vending machine or other receptacle seized by a police officer shall be turned over to the commissioner and shall be forfeited to the commonwealth. The commissioner shall destroy the electronic nicotine delivery system and shall destroy or otherwise dispose of the vending machine or other receptacle. The commissioner may, within a reasonable time after the seizure and by a public notice of not less than 5 days before the day of sale, sell the vending machine or other receptacle at public sale and deposit the proceeds in the General Fund.
Looks like they forgot to include “Flash Gordon Rocket Ships” in the above vulnerable physical entities.
Just signed in…
Looks like he’s shooting for a 7:30p CST starting time (for those interested)
Thank you for the heads up @woftam!
Edit/
Didn’t see the mistake I made before.
Starting in 2 minutes!
Thank you so much. So, if they see me vaping in my car they’ll most likely not bother me? Or will it be a search for illegal ecig transportation? OMG! It couldn’t be.
I would suggest just confidently stating, “Worry not, Occifer, I am merely smoking some good weed”. 
PS - Looks like you (might) be OK in an (as evident to said Occifer), parked (but not in a moving), vehicle:
Rules on transporting:
You can possess up to 1 ounce outside of your home. That includes a motor vehicle, but the marijuana or marijuana product must be in a sealed container or secured in the trunk or locked glove compartment.
Driving while stoned is illegal.
.
Please define “stoned”, Occifer and Neuropsychopharmacologist Friendly ? Name, Stank, Serial Number.
Basically, if what they want to do passes…
If you are caught with an UNTAXED bottle of liquid, they will confiscate your vehicle (think: same type of “asset forfeiture” as the drug wars)
So I need to have receipts for every vape product on me dating back to the year ‘01’. Great, will they wait till I search the emails on my phone for all my orders. I guess I’ll have to leave anything home that I deleted the emails for. Oh ffs, kill me now.
I think the bigger concern is for those who DIY…
Good luck getting your own mix tax stamped! 
Althooooough… It’s already been (very helpfully) suggested to buy one bottle of their “extortion juice”, and refill it as needed. 
Use it only for your “going out” liquid.
I’d add to that that one might consider coating the bottle with a layer of clear nail polish or some such, so as to maximize the life of the bottle (before having to buy another).
Well, all I know is that yesterday I was a happy vaper, now I’m a paranoid, depressed mess. Thx alot, Masshole. Thank you for your insights. Think I’ll check out Fresh now. Have a good night, all.
Dr Micheal Siegel,
Professor in the Department of Community Health Sciences,
Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
(who is not an attorney at law, but who is clearly quite intelligent) published on November 15, 2019:
The relevant provision in HB4183 reads as follows:
“When the commissioner or a police officer discovers an untaxed electronic nicotine delivery system in the possession of a person who is not a licensed or commissioner-authorized electronic nicotine delivery system distributor, the commissioner or police officer may seize and take possession of the electronic nicotine delivery systems and any vending machine or other receptacle including, but not limited to, a motor vehicle, boat or airplane in which the electronic nicotine delivery systems are contained or transported.”
Because a DIY e-liquid or a black market e-liquid would meet the definition of an “untaxed electronic nicotine delivery system,” possessing either in your car would make your vehicle subject to seizure.
Moreover, if you merely possess a DIY or black market e-liquid (in any location), you are subject to a potential $5,000 fine for the first offense and up to $25,000 for subsequent offenses.
Youth are also subject to the penalties in H4183. So if a youth were caught possessing a black market CBD, THC, or nicotine cartridge, they would be subject to a $5,000 fine; $25,000 if they are caught twice.
Even worse, the bill essentially requires you to have a receipt for your e-cigarette or e-liquid purchase to prove that you paid the excise tax. The bill contains a provision that presumes your e-cigarette was not taxed unless you can prove it. So even if you possess a legal e-cigarette (meaning one you purchased from a licensed smoking bar), if you don’t have the receipt that e-cigarette could cost you an extra $5,000 above its purchase price. If you’re caught twice possessing a JUUL pod without a receipt, that pod four-pack will cost you $25,019.99. …
… if this law is enacted, it will be illegal for any person in Massachusetts to possess any electronic cigarette, vaping device, e-liquid, e-cigarette battery, cartridges, or even e-liquid vials that you obtained prior to the effective date of the law. In other words, you have to discard every single e-cigarette device, component, or e-liquid that you possess on the day the law goes into effect. Otherwise, you are subject to a fine of up to $5,000 for the first offense and up to $25,000 for subsequent offenses.
The relevant provision in HB4183 reads as follows:
“A person who knowingly purchases or possesses an electronic nicotine delivery system not manufactured, purchased or imported by a licensed electronic nicotine delivery system distributor or licensed electronic nicotine delivery system retailer shall, in addition to any other penalties provided by this chapter or chapter 62C, be subject to a civil penalty of not more than $5,000 for the first offense and not more than $25,000 for a second or subsequent offense.”
So for example, suppose you bought a JUUL device at Walgreen’s in 2018. Walgreen’s was not a licensed electronic nicotine delivery system retailer at the time you made the purchase. You could therefore be considered to be in a possession of an e-cigarette that was not obtained from a licensed dealer. What you thought was a cheap $14.99 expenditure may actually be an expenditure of $5,014.99.
.
Found something of a (sort of) “apologist” for the Salem Witch Trials in Massachusetts in the late 1600s:
… so who knows. Perhaps such egregious persecutions in the Commonwealth of Mass are “not so bad” ?
You sure know how to cheer a girl up 
Sorry. This old man gets a bit goofy with the “gallows humor” (at times). This is indeed a serious issue ! 
I’m always one to use humor in a bad situation but this one really got to me. I’m just verklempt. Thanks for all your 'splaining.
Yes. My apologies again. (Sounds) like DIYers might want to pickup a few “licensed” retail containers, then refill them (as previously mentioned), and perhaps avoid letting them be visible to anyone (such as uptight “authorities”) when sitting or traveling a vehicle. Home, at least seems (let us dearly hope) to still be one’s “castle” ! As “Linda Richmond” (Mike Myers) used to say in that classic SNL skit, “talk amongst yourselves”.
As this tyrrany appears to also (potentially) apply to Vaping devices, as well, I don’t know what to say. Keep them concealed is the best I can recommend. They would have to take mine “from my cold, dead hands”.
The fear, loathing, and distrust that such punitive prohibitions engender is a terrible thing for society. The demonstrably failed as well as massively expensive industry of criminalization, fines, incarcerations, and destroyed lives has (IMO) itself been responsible for the overwhelming majority of societal and public health risks and harms where it comes to peoples’ desires to use (similarly) “controlled substances” for over a century. America has and does “forge its own fetters” in chains of ignorance, intolerance, and cruelty. 
Coiffured Charlatan Lunatic Nanny State Morons of the Apocalypse are Running the Asylum
As with every “vaping/flavor ban” the language of which I have read so far (including New York, California, Washington, and Michigan), the crafted language makes the grave mistake of ignoring the objective fact that virtually all Tobacco leaf derived products (including Cigarettes, Pipe Tobacco, almost all Cigars) have “flavorings” added by the manufacturers in order to make the experience more aesthetically tolerable. These products simply could not exist without such additives. “Pig Tobacco” would simply not allow such.
The definitions set forth (surrounding characterizing “tastes” and “aromas”) are so hopelessly subjective in nature that they fall far short of objective facts upon which actions prosecuted in, and decisions rendered by the Courts can (or ever should) be based. This (after protracted litigation, and after vast damages have been done to the “vaping” industries) may turn out to be their “Achilles’ Heels” - eventually, in the bitter end.
A (not passed) bill in the California House of Representatives last Summer would have established a “flavor registry” to be administrated by the State. Thus, some sanctimonious stuffed-shirt administrative ass-clowns would proclaim this or that Tobacco related products do or do not “taste/smell” like Tobacco (to them). The whole regulatory premise is idiotically absurd - and if the protagonists don’t themselves know that, then they really should be more appropriately employed to “dig ditches” (as opposed to perniciously digging our own “graves”). From Massachusetts bill definitions language (including amendment proposed by state Senator):
“Characterizing flavor”, a distinguishable taste or aroma, other than the taste or aroma of tobacco, imparted or detectable either prior to or during consumption of a tobacco product, including but not limited to, a taste or aroma relating to any fruit, chocolate, vanilla, honey, candy, cocoa, dessert, alcoholic beverage, menthol, mint, wintergreen, herb or spice; provided, however, that no tobacco product shall be determined to have a characterizing flavor solely because of the provision of ingredient information or the use of additives or flavorings that do not contribute to the distinguishable taste or aroma of the product.
“Constituent”, any ingredient, substance, chemical or compound, other than tobacco, water or reconstituted tobacco sheet, that is added by the manufacturer to a tobacco product during the processing, manufacturing or packaging of the tobacco product; provided that “constituent” shall include a smoke constituent.
“Distinguishable”, perceivable by either the sense of smell or taste.
“Flavored tobacco product”, any tobacco product that contains a constituent that has or produces a characterizing flavor.
This proposed law (like California’s, which did not pass) does not appear (that I can see) to discriminate between flavorings in Tobacco itself as well as Vaping juices. In California, it may well have been that “Pig Tobacco” in response “flexed their monetary muscles” to “kill the bill”. (Perhaps), such utterly self-serving players - who are themselves vaping “opponents” - (might, possibly) come to bear in the Massachusetts legislative process. That might be the “best hope” - as they seem clearly the “cash cows” being pampered.
.
In an exclusive scoop, I have located video of the Legislature deeply contemplating “tobacco flavor”.
