Phased Tobacco Ban Bill Proposed in California

[sablebrush52]

Well I hope you're right, but you can't tell me California doesn't have a history of passing stupid laws.

And you can't tell me that YOUR state and EVERY OTHER STATE has a history of doing the same!

 

[sjohnston0311]

Well played , sir. You agreed with Sablebrush then went ahead and bashed California.

Well my intention was not to just bash California. As I said, I'm from Massachusetts, we aren't any better.

 

[sjohnston0311]

And you can't tell me that YOUR state and EVERY OTHER STATE has a history of doing the same!

I mean, you're right. I wasn't trying to single out California necessarily. If the law were being proposed in MA I would say the same thing.

 

[rmbittner]

AB 935 was introduced in California's assembly yesterday. The bill would prohibit the sale of tobacco to anyone born after January 1, 2007. Any retailers caught breaking this law would be fined $400-$600 for a first offense and the amounts would increase up to $5,000 to $6,000 for a 5th offense over a five-year period. In addition, once the retailer had committed a 3rd, 4th, or 5th offense they'd be reported to the Board of Equalization which would issue another $250 fine and suspend or revoke the retailer's license.

Since it was just proposed yesterday there is obviously plenty of time for this bill to be amended and I don't have any indication yet whether there is widespread support for the bill. I just thought I'd share so people were aware.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB935

Can’t help pointing out that even if this passes it literally won’t affect anyone in this forum.

 

[sjohnston0311]

Can’t help pointing out that even if this passes it literally won’t affect anyone in this forum. Even if you have children you’d like to encourage to be pipe or cigar smokers, it’s about purchasing tobacco from sellers within the state. Build up a cellar, purchase from out of state, etc.

It will though. As the number of people old enough to buy tobacco starts to drop off, businesses will find its not worth it selling tobacco in the state, so CA tobacco users would have to travel out of state regardless of when they were born.

 

[Swiss Army Knife]

Nature abhors a vacuum. The drug cartels will gear up. Tobacco will never go away. The ban will just create a new area of endeavor for the law enforcement and prison industrial complex.

I'm already picturing PipeStud lording over a great American tobacco cartel, cabana hat and all.

 

[rmbittner]

It will though. As the number of people old enough to buy tobacco starts to drop off, businesses will find its not worth it selling tobacco in the state, so CA tobacco users would have to travel out of state regardless of when they were born.

It is already illegal -- in every state — to sell tobacco to anyone born since 2007. And, going forward, I don’t see hordes of under-30s running to tobacconists. IMO, it would be 2040+ before this would impact in any meaningful way.

 

[sjohnston0311]

It is already illegal -- in every state — to sell tobacco to anyone born since 2007. And, going forward, I don’t see hordes of under-30s running to tobacconists. IMO, it would be 2040+ before this would impact in any meaningful way.

And 2040 is less than 20 years away. I'm sure there will still be some people on this forum who are still alive then, in which case it will effect them.

 

[brian64]

I'm sure there will still be some people on this forum who are still alive then

Maybe a handful...but by then they'll all have their Neuralink brain implants which will cure them of their evil nicotine addiction, as well as make them not want to visit any unauthorized websites. It will be a true utopia...California worldwide!

 

[Puffaluffaguss]

Maybe a handful...but by then they'll all have their Neuralink brain implants which will cure them of their evil nicotine addiction, as well as make them not want to visit any unauthorized websites. It will be a true utopia...California worldwide!

Well given most of you o'l timers on hear are over 50 there are still young people on here. They gave me hell for saying 31 is old and all I can say is if I were to implant my brain it would be to better taste the nuances of a 70 year old tin of balkan sobranie lol.

 

[Andriko]

If California does it, the rest of the world is at most 10 years behind. That said, no one seems to be after cigars, just cigarettes, so we will always have something probably.

 

[rmbittner]

And 2040 is less than 20 years away. I'm sure there will still be some people on this forum who are still alive then, in which case it will effect them.

But how? Unless there are elements in the bill you didn’t mention, they’ll all still be able to purchase tobacco.

 

[rmbittner]

Well given most of you o'l timers on hear are over 50 there are still young people on here. They gave me hell for saying 31 is old and all I can say is if I were to implant my brain it would be to better taste the nuances of a 70 year old tin of balkan sobranie lol.

But you’ve all been born well before the cutoff date mentioned in the OP. What am I not getting?

 

[litup]

Oh sweet Jesus, more "it's California" crap. I thought that lobotomies had been outlawed.

I'm a Californian, and I'll tell you that it has no chance of passing. Stupid stuff like this is always getting proposed, people get their panties in a bunch, and it always goes nowhere

Prop 31 for example. Oh wait, that one actually passed.

 

[Andriko]

But you’ve all been born well before the cutoff date mentioned in the OP. What am I not getting?

As the amount of people who smoke naturally decreases with the age cap, the tobacco smoking market will get smaller and smaller, meaning that there is no point for companies to even bother - the rapid loss of pipe tobacco brands is a good demonstration of this. This means that, in effect, with in 20 years there won't be anything left to smoke even if it's 'legal' for a dwindling group of middle age people.

 

[litup]

But you’ve all been born well before the cutoff date mentioned in the OP. What am I not getting?

Some of us care about more than just our own ability to smoke. We might also be concerned for our friends in the industry who rely on tobacco sales to put food on their tables. We might also care, for whatever reason, about being able to smoke tobacco with younger people at some point like our sons.

 

[rmbittner]

Some of us care about more than just our own ability to smoke. We might also be concerned for our friends in the industry who rely on tobacco sales to put food on their tables. We might also care, for whatever reason, about being able to smoke tobacco with younger people at some point like our sons.

I get that. (And, honestly, I’m not sure why I’m even active on this thread since I don’t live in CA and I have enough tobacco to last.) But it seems to me that a) the doom-and-gloom outcome is highly unlikely—particularly as this is a bill in one state out of 50, and b) the solution for enjoying and sharing tobacco for decades to come is easily achieve: Build your cellar. Share your cellar with loved ones.

I just don’t think the industry is reliant on young consumers at this point, which is why I’m thinking this is a far-future concern and nothing to be anxious about in 2023. But, again, I don’t really have a dog in this fight, as they say.

 

[litup]

It might end up being a nothing-burger. Like I said at the start of the thread, this bill was only introduced yesterday so there is plenty of work to be done and it's unlikely that the final bill wouldn't be a much-amended version of this bill. We also have no idea if it will even pass.

However, I think it's still important to follow for reasons that others have mentioned already. Specifically, you give them an inch and they'll take a mile. California just gave that inch when we allowed Prop 31 to go through (a ban on flavored tobacco).

For those outside California, I think this matters because many other states pay attention to what California does and follows suit. California also comprises 12% of the entire population of the U.S. So changes in an industry that start with California are significant.

 

[rmbittner]

It might end up being a nothing-burger. Like I said at the start of the thread, this bill was only introduced yesterday so there is plenty of work to be done and it's unlikely that the final bill wouldn't be a much-amended version of this bill. We also have no idea if it will even pass.

However, I think it's still important to follow for reasons that others have mentioned already. Specifically, you give them an inch and they'll take a mile. California just gave that inch when we allowed Prop 31 to go through (a ban on flavored tobacco).

For those outside California, I think this matters because many other states pay attention to what California does and follows suit. California also comprises 12% of the entire population of the U.S. So changes in an industry that start with California are significant.

I know that Schwarzenegger was not universally loved as governor, but at least he knew how to enjoy good cigars. I’d like to think he’d terminate this bill, if it came to that.

 

[litup]

I know that Schwarzenegger was not universally loved as governor, but at least he knew how to enjoy good cigars. I’d like to think he’d terminate this bill, if it came to that.

Strangely enough, Arnie was in favor of banning tobacco (for us regular people at least) in spite of his love for cigars.

Arnie Support Beverly Hills Ban Except for His Cigar Lounge