Had to buy a certain product to use a certain substance and there's a really stupid new law.

Comments

• Blueberrydreamer@lemmynsfw.com ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Are you seriously complaining about requiring a signature? Why should weed paraphernalia be treated any differently to tobacco?

  source

  • FlyingSquid@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Since it requires me to be at home when I’ve never had to for this before? Yes.

    And it should be treated differently because the law is about tobacco. if they want to make it about weed, they should specify that.

    source

    • admiralteal@kbin.social ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I think you may be forgetting that weed is illegal, federally. The product you're buying is for tobacco -- officially -- because if it weren't it would be a federal crime to ship it across state borders.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• insomniac_lemon@kbin.social ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I could see it in the specific case of a cheap (steam) vape pen purchased without debit/bank card off of a general store site. They check the mail and pocket it, get vape juice from somebody. Charge+fill and it's ready with time. Similar for concentrates, portable dry vaporizers (or something like dynavap) maybe a bit less.

  A $100+ desktop dry vaporizer purchased from a dedicated website seems like it'd be harder to hide unless parents are really inattentive. Miss the delivery at the door, them carrying it in (+branded boxes), a dedicated spot plugged in, and an almost ritual to properly heat up the glass/material that might give it away (glass clinking, balloon bag filling, fan on/off etc).

  source

  • FlyingSquid@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Yep. It was a dry vaporizer. From Vapor Genie if anyone is curious. It is definitely not intended to be used for tobacco. I think it would just burn the tobacco rather than vaporizing it.

    source

    • insomniac_lemon@kbin.social ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I think it would just burn the tobacco rather than vaporizing it

      I mean if the temperature is set low enough (also convection) it should prevent combustion(/harmful byproducts) for most materials. Like under 200C especially.

      Although I'm not sure vaporizing tobacco intended for smoking would taste all that great and smokers generally don't seem to care anyway. Sounds gross to me, then again so does nicotine in general.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• Shawdow194@kbin.social ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I know tobacco laws in this country (USA) are archaic. It seems like this ties into tax laws more since tobacco regulation and taxing is determined by locality. And by restricting federal handling

  Also notice this line; "...aerosolized solution, delivers nicotine, flavor or any other substance to the user inhaling from the device.”
  They know it might be used for cannabis. It's just like how non-alcoholic beer falls under alcohol regulations even though it should be treated like normal beverages. Good examples of old laws not properly reflecting the current times

  source
• RainfallSonata@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Porch pirates.

  source

  • FlyingSquid@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    I don’t think so. A law specifically stopping porch pirates from stealing vaporizers?

    source

    • RainfallSonata@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I mean, if enough vaporizers have to be re-shipped because they were stolen before they’re received, yes, of course. You’re not going to expect to pay a second time for something you never received. The insurance company (I assume this is medical use?) or the supplier doesn’t want to pay a second time. Of course they’re going to make you sign. It’s not a law to stop porch pirates, it a law to reduce costs.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• Slippery_Snake874@sopuli.xyz ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  It’s for the same reason you need to show ID if you have alcohol delivered

  source

  • FlyingSquid@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    You don’t have to sign for a bong.

    source

    • gregorum@lemm.ee ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Bongs aren’t electronic. That’s, seemingly, the line in the law.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• Shawdow194@kbin.social ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I know tobacco laws in this country (USA) are archaic. It seems like this ties into tax laws more since tobacco regulation and taxing is determined by locality. And by restricting federal handling

  Also notice this line; "...aerosolized solution, delivers nicotine, flavor or any other substance to the user inhaling from the device.”
  They know it might be used for cannabis. It's just like how non-alcoholic beer falls under alcohol regulations even though it should be treated like normal beverages. Good examples of old laws not properly reflecting the current times

  source