Online vape seller has ‘no intention of stopping’ shipments to Australia, despite nationwide ban — ‘We have no intention of stopping just because of one twat in Canberra.’::The New Zealand-based seller issued a notice to its Australian customers that shipments will continue regardless of the government’s vape reform.

  • deranger@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    120
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Leave vaping alone, but ban those single use vapes with rechargable lithium ion batteries in them. It’s absolutely insane to me the amount of waste from throwing out perfectly good rechargeable batteries after one cycle.

    • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      No, do not leave vaping alone. Just because some asshat companiea found a new way to exploit health damage for profit does not mean it should be allowed because freedumb.

      • deranger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Let me consume nicotine in the least harmful method available. You don’t get to dictate what I do with my body. That includes all drugs.

        • gmtom@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          You mean nicotine gum? Or nicotine patches right? Because those are still legal.

        • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Sure, but can we then tax the product for the actual health risk?

          And least damaging? How about gum, or tabs. No popcorn lung involved.

          • Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            1 year ago

            Abortion is bad for the fetus’s health. Perhaps we should tax it 1000%. While we are at it let’s tax Soda and Sugar. Fuck it lets tax cosmetic surgery, I mean it is such a waste and so risky.

            If we are going to go down this road of controlling other people’s bodies let’s go all the way then.

            • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Sugar is already being taxed, and this will grow. High fructose should be extra taxed yes. Abortion seems out of place in your rabid “muh freedumbs” response.

              There is a responsibility for a government to protect the health of citizens. I can see this (and drugs) being properly regulated. And then people can buy and use as they see fit. But just free sales, no.

              • deranger@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I don’t agree with those taxes. People are free to do with their body what they want, provided it’s not harmful to others. This is not the responsibility of the government.

                Providing education so people can make informed decisions about the risks of the behaviors they engage in - now that’s a government (and parental) responsibility.

                • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yeah, same as with vaccination. Your decisions influence a lot of others.

                  Even if the government properly informs people, not everyone is able to make an informed decision.

                  Private companies abusing the system and hurting many people along the way is not something that should be celebrated as freedom. And this is a perfect example of that. Health, the environment everything can be sacrificed in the name of profit.

              • Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Well I’m glad you are there to dictate what someone can and can’t do with their body. We only want people to engage in activities if they are state sanctioned.

                • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  As an alternative, government regulates all sorts of things. Alcohol, gambling, cigarettes, firearms.

                  The government is the counterweight to corporations abusing people that might not be able to resist and the VERY negative societal impacts this has.

                  The fact you think this is unnecessary makes you very fortunate that you never had to deal with the negative externalities of these companies.

  • RegalPotoo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    bold_move.gif

    The thing about shipping internationally is that you generally need a logistics partner to actually physically move the packages for you, and they also have a legal responsibility to ensure that what they are carrying is legal. I don’t know what number of packages you need to have seized by customs before they stop doing business with you, but I’d doubt it’s much more than 1.

    As a bonus, there are only a handful of logistics companies in NZ that do international outbound, and they are the major domestic delivery companies as well, so if you fuck around enough you could end up finding out that no one will deliver your packages locally either

    • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Those rules might apply to the sender… but the customer who places the order doesn’t get off so lightly. They can go to jail for five years for importing a drugs without a license.

      That’s not even really a vape thing. Nicotine is a drug. Importing cigarettes is also illegal with the exception of travellers in person can bring a few packets with them.

      It wouldn’t be hard to catch people - international shipping requires labels declaring the contents. And if the vape seller is lying on those declarations then they’re breaking NZ laws.

      • khannie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I can confirm that the rules do apply to the sender. You have to declare on a package what’s inside. For businesses using the normal postal system this is generally done electronically and also printed on the package so they’ll just be intercepted and binned. We ship product to Australia frequently and this is how it’s done. Same with private carriers but slightly different process. It’s still clear what’s inside.

        Even if they try to avoid the ban by not putting correct customs information it’ll quickly become apparent to Australian customs which packages to seize who will then work directly with the private carrier if necessary (though it is prohibitively expensive to ship to more remote locations in Australia with private carriers so unlikely they will be used).

        In short this is bluster.

    • anivia@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Darknet markets have no issues shipping millions of packages internationally that contain drugs or steroids. Why should this be any different for these vapes?

  • AA5B@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Whether or not you think Australia should have such a ban, a company trying to provoke a war with a nations customs service is a true “fuck around, and find out” moment

  • db2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    1 year ago

    Are cigarettes banned as well or do they get massive taxes from their sale like in the US?

    • No_Eponym@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I heard cigarette taxes are the preferred form of sin tax because typically smokers pay more in taxes than they use in healthcare etc on the way out. Nicotine addicts die fast and are tax efficient, unlike alcohol or gambling addicts.

      • daltotron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        A good example of a policy that can kind of make a form of “objective” economic sense for the government to do, but is actually totally immoral, cruel, and inefficient. A good example of why governments shouldn’t be run like companies, basically.

        • Womble@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Banning vices has rarely (if ever?) gone well. Far better to tax and regulate them to at least reduce the harms by making it less affordable/dangerous and mitigate them with revenues that can be used to repair the damage.

          • daltotron@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You know I would kind of off the cuff think that probably the optimal solution would be something that prevents general accessibility for the population at large, but encourages, and makes it more easily accessible for those who already have problems with it, and then kind of, chase solutions from there. Of course, I think probably that solution would lend itself more towards a country or state that cares whether or not you’re going homeless or sleeping in your car or what have you, because it’s generally easier to keep track of less marginalized populations.

            This isn’t really to advocate for a ban, but there’s definitely a kind of fine middle ground between full bans and completely free easy access. I think the thing that strikes me the most as a kind of, huge dick move, is mostly that it’s kind of a purely short term financial calculation of, oh, smokers are going to pay a lot more in taxes than in healthcare, and they die quick, so that’s economically good. But of course, you wouldn’t want a country made up entirely of smokers, and I don’t think that would be good, or pay out the best in long term societal, or even purely economic, benefits. I’m skeptical of blanket calls for total drug legalization just as I am skeptical for blanket calls for bans. Usually, there’s more nuance to the situation than that, which unfortunately tends to be the thing most leveraged to enforce the status quo or pass bad austerity legislation.

    • Wooki@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      All but, massive taxing, plain packaging laws and more controls like can smoke in public places, banned in bars banned in restaurants and hotels ect. Its being “phased out” slowly turning the heat up until its gone.

  • boatsnhos931@lemmy.worldBanned
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    I was just wondering in my pea sized brain how making things illegal in the past has worked out… hrrmmm

    • DingoBilly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sometimes it works out great (banning guns in Australia for most people), other times it’s terrible (banning alcohol in America).

      But in general, vapes are shit and should be banned. No issues there. This producer will soon be blocked pretty easily.

      • boatsnhos931@lemmy.worldBanned
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Notice my next comment clarifying that I am talking about mind altering substances. You may think vapes are shit but they wouldn’t be around if people didn’t like them plus no major second hand or terrible smell like traditional cigarettes homie.

      • macrocephalic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Also cigarettes in Australia. They’re not banned, obviously, they’re just taxed so high that hardly anyone smokes them anymore. I’m probably a bit sheltered, but I’m genuinely surprised when I see someone smoking an actual cigarette now.

    • gaifux@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Your brain is pea sized indeed, because any nominal amount of wondering should make you realize it has to be taken on a case by case basis. Otherwise we should just make everything legal, no?

      • boatsnhos931@lemmy.worldBanned
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is going to blow your mind but I believe all mind altering substances should be legal and available to purchase if you are 21 years of age. This takes money away from the black market organizations and can help fund rehabilitation facilities/drug education/college scholarships.

        • Persen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          People should be able to kill themselves as well if they choose to.

    • Gabu@lemmy.worldBanned
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Still better than people who smoke (which does include “vaping”)