The bill states that "the term `smokeless tobacco' has the meaning given such term by section 2341 of title 18". You can find this title/section at http://law.onecle.com/uscode/18/2341.html . I see no mention of "smokeless tobacco".
In his blog ( http://mchugh.house.gov/News/Documen...cumentID=89999 ), Congressman McHugh argues in favor of this bill as an attempt to keep tobacco out of the hands of minors. He writes, "Currently, the USPS is the only major vendor that ships cigarettes from online vendors – DHL, FedEx, and UPS no longer ship cigarettes to consumers anywhere in the country." The tobacco policies of UPS can be found at http://www.ups.com/tobacco . It seems UPS restricts only cigarettes, and not smokeless tobacco.
This bill really pisses me off, but I am not surprised. It's just another instance of Big Nanny extending her power. This bill is bad news for freedom loving adults, and good news for American tobacco companies.
Actually, it's bad news period. Not good news for Big Tobacco.
While snus from Sweden will probably become contraband, so will those Dean's 'Lil Cigars (made in America) that you can't buy in your local tobacco store but can order online for $8.94 a carton of 10 packs.
This is one more door slamming shut on tobacco users. We have no clout. We're society's pond scum. I wish I knew how to turn back the clock a bit, but I don't see it happening.
You make a good point. But the obvious effect of this on American tobacco consumers is: less choice. If we are forced to purchase only products off the shelf in our local store, then we are more likely to either (a) use the products of the major brands, or (b) try to quit by using mainstream nicotine replacement products (gums, patches, etc.). So I still think that, at least to some degree, this is good news for Big Tobacco, as well as for the pharmaceutical industry.
It's true that in some quarters this is being called the Philip Morris bill. That company will emerge from this with protected in-store sales (ask your friendly tobacco shop what kind of restrictions Big Tobacco imposes on him).
I was wistfully thinking I'll lose the freedom to order custom pipe tobacco blends from Just for Him or snuff from Mars Cigars and Pipes. It's that freedom of choice that I'll miss. There will still be tobacco available, but only what Big Tobacco wants me to purchase.
As for snus ... Camel, Marlboro and cousins haven't done too well and many here prefer Swedish snus. One way to shift gears for the new American products is to ban competition. Shutting down mail order is a start toward that end.
If this becomes law, it will be illegal to send "cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, and roll-your-own-tobacco" through the US mail. When ordering from buysnus.com, they send it by the Swedish Post Office. But after it reaches the US, it makes the trip to my door through the US mail. So it looks like I could no longer use this shipping method.
UPS, on the other hand, looks like it could still be an option. UPS policies prohibit only cigarettes (apparently) and not smokeless tobacco. Has anyone here used the UPS shipping option on buysnus.com?
“FedEx, UPS and DHL have all said ‘no’ to shipping cigarettes. Why is the Postal Service still saying ‘yes?’ My bill would shut down the sole remaining channel for delivery of cigarettes to minors,” said Congressman McHugh. ”Parents, schools, public health organizations, and all levels of government across the country have taken steps to educate our children about the dangers of cigarettes, and limit their ability to obtain tobacco products. However, a dangerous loophole exists on the Internet that is allowing underage children to purchase tobacco. As our children have become more sophisticated online, an increasing amount of cigarettes are making their way into our children’s hands every day through the USPS from Internet vendors with few safeguards to stop these underage purchasers.”
The sole remaining channel? I guess that friends, parents, negligent shop owners, and others who provide tobacco to minors do not count as a channel of delivery for tobacco to minors. Go to youtube to see the never ending series of "dipping" videos. There are countless of these videos featuring minors dipping chaw and talking into the camera. I don't think these kids are getting their Grizzly online.
Considering that most online sellers require a credit/debit card I'd bet there's more minors acquiring their tobacco over the counter than online, by a high margin.
The bill states that "the term `smokeless tobacco' has the meaning given such term by section 2341 of title 18". You can find this title/section at http://law.onecle.com/uscode/18/2341.html . I see no mention of "smokeless tobacco".
If these copies of the language of the bill and the code from section 2341 of title 18 are correct, than whoever wrote the bill for McHughes and friends did a pretty poor job. You are correct, what defines the term 'smokeless tobacco' is not defined in title 18. Of course I am certain these bastards will notice the error and define smokeless tobacco.
Looks like I need to go out of my way and buy a couple of cans of General from the tobacco store that is about 40 miles away just to ensure Swedish Match keeps the US test markets. Wish they carried Ettan
Would you mind elaborating on why/how it will become illegal to ship snus to the US?
The why is quite simple. Though the USA employs the rhetoric of freedom and democracy in its public dialogue, our society is nothing of the sort. What we live in can be more accurately characterized as a corporate oligarchy, which in essence means fascist police state on a pragmatic, grass-roots level.
As for the how, (and the when for that matter) I have no idea, but state-sponsored oppression against tobacco and tobacco users appears to be on a fast-track. But oppression is nothing new in America. It's just our turn, that's all.
Goddamn this pisses me off! Revolutions have been fought for less...
Comment