Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 247 posts

Re: Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul

#151

Post by PeterisP »

morpheuskafka wrote: post #127
t-writescode wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if there’s no nicotine, then who cares? Magic the Gathering cards and pogs were addicting back in the day, but kids could still buy them.

I do not think you can develop a physiological dependence to Magic the Gathering cards. Additionally, the cards do have some market value, so it was more of a poor use of money than throwing money away.

Are you claiming that people develop physiological dependence to non-nicotine pods? Nicotine is very addictive, but that's why the parent poster said "if there’s no nicotine, then who cares?" People may get all kinds of strong weird habits with oral fixation e.g. biting nails and such, but that's generally not considered as physiological dependence.

Re: Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul

#152

Post by foxhop »

Why so many comments about a ban? There isn't any mention of a ban... even if prosecuted for marketing to minors and found guilty, does not mean the product will be banned...

Should Juul be found guilty they will be punished via fines, just like a tobacoo company.

Of course Juul knew this and decided it was worth it because if their device went viral, which it did, they would be locked in as a market leader, which they are.

All they have to do now is lawyer up and try to survive the next year or so and they are locked in.

If they are fined so hard as to go out of business, the product is still not banned and you would have the next in line take the market leader position.

The product is here to stay, banning the devices will be more difficult than banning marijuana (which is a loosing battle).

Will Juul be a brand in the United States in 5 years? Maybe?

Will we still have e-cigarettes in the United States in 5 years, definitely.

If prohibition really occurs of course we will have 3d printed vapes and an even strong black market vape.

I think regulation will likely occur, likely making it require a prescription, but that is still not an outright ban.

Re: Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul

#153

Post by gpm »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #138
ganitarashid wrote: post #116

Vaping under 18, I get it, you’re young and dumb and succumbed to peer pressure. It happened to the best of us. But vaping after 30? It’s like they’re saying: Hey I want you to take me seriously while I am willfully destroying my body in front of you. If you don’t care about yourself, you can’t be trusted to care about anything.

Isn't the whole argument for Juul is that it's a smoking cessation device? Practically nobody starts smoking after college age, but there are a lot of 30+ people who became smoking addicts when they were young, and for them Juul is at the very least an option to get their nicotine fix without all the tar and worse negatives in cigarettes.

Sure, that's the argument. But given the number of people using it it's impossible that that's how most people are actually using it.

Re: Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul

#154

Post by anonymousjunior »

todipa wrote: post #122

Why can't we ban nicotine?

Why can't we ban ibuprofen?

Nicotine is an extremely complex molecule which has been proven to have positive effects in the treatment of autism, as well as mild cognitive impairment, such as Alzheimer disease. Blanket statements like this are harmful to the general nature of science and show a disregard for empirical evidence.

Nicotine can be utilized for positive measures at therapeutic levels and was in Phase III clinical trials with the FDA for such uses before the backing pharmaceutical firm ran out of money. I recommend you do some research on Nicotine as a compound and interactions with nicotinic receptors in the body, the pharmacology is actually fascinating.

Re: Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul

#155

Post by 1123581321 »

Kudos wrote: post #130
morpheuskafka wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having a 19-year old investor/employee at a tobacco company isn't illegal. Not really sure what the prosecutors could glean from this in terms of hard evidence of a crime.

> Not really sure what the prosecutors could glean from this in terms of hard evidence of a crime. That's why it's called an investigation, you follow leads not knowing whether they will pay off.

Investigations can result in a great deal of inconvenience, and occasional retribution from the target. It’s okay to prudently decline to volunteer almost certainly useless information if it doesn’t seem worthwhile.

Edit: it seems to be unclear that this is a pragmatic decision made millions of times a day around the world, and not particular to Juul.

Re: Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul

#156

Post by ThrustVectoring »

colechristensen wrote: post #93
sbilstein wrote: post #44

One thing that gets lost in Juul and vaping supporters is just how bad nicotine addiction is for your personal life. I recently quit nicotine a few months ago and it made a big difference for me. Nicotine withdrawal kicks in very quick which is why smokers take constant breaks. The anxiety, the grumpiness, irritability and anger you feel as a smoker when you are without nicotine will piss off your partner, make you s…

It comes down to personality and biochemistry, not everyone is that hooked on the stuff. If you ban everything that is addictive you end up doing a disservice to people who can handle the substance or item in question. Banning addictive substances because some people can't handle them goes against my philosophy of the purpose of government. Do we need some kind of super-citizen test where you have to prove your knowl…

This isn't legal advice, but a lot of the restrictions around buying and using explosives on your own land for personal purposes is waived for binary explosives. You can go and buy tannerite, mix it on-site, and use it as an explosive firearms target and blow stuff up. Zero licensing required to do this.

NB: Do not do this if you have a felony conviction since this that makes it a crime.

Re: Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul

#158

Post by TheMinorityGuy »

Kudos wrote: post #130
morpheuskafka wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having a 19-year old investor/employee at a tobacco company isn't illegal. Not really sure what the prosecutors could glean from this in terms of hard evidence of a crime.

> Not really sure what the prosecutors could glean from this in terms of hard evidence of a crime. That's why it's called an investigation, you follow leads not knowing whether they will pay off.

It is called snitching. Do not report people when you are not clear what the crime is and who the victim is. It wastes taxpayer money on needless investigations.

Re: Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul

#159

Post by outsidetheparty »

foxhop wrote: post #152

Why so many comments about a ban? There isn't any mention of a ban... even if prosecuted for marketing to minors and found guilty, does not mean the product will be banned... Should Juul be found guilty they will be punished via fines, just like a tobacoo company. Of course Juul knew this and decided it was worth it because if their device went viral, which it did, they would be locked in as a market leader, which th…

> Why so many comments about a ban?

New York State banned flavored e-cigarettes recently, on the grounds that they encourage kids to take up vaping; that ban wasn't specifically targeted at Juul (who saw the writing on the wall and stopped selling flavors last year) but that's the brand name everyone knows, so that's why they're catching the investigative heat now.

Re: Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul

#160

Post by colechristensen »

fcarraldo wrote: post #148
colechristensen wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government banning tobacco from sale is the same sort of free-will exercise by humans for humans as is me banning tobacco from my own body, just on different levels. The government can just as well have "addiction" problems with things that are bad for the population which are supported by the population. The difference isn't free-will or not, it is only the level on which it is applied. I prefer personal free wi…

I can’t get behind this argument when we live in an economy driven by a massive industry of personalized marketing and advertising. You espouse free will as if it’s some absolute, but studies show that human behavior is primarily the product of environment and is, to an extent, easy to predict the likelihood of someone becoming a smoker based on their age, race, income and zip code. How can we justify giving mega cor…

You're talking about marketing, I'm talking about availability of products.

I don't think anybody is going around discussing the philosophy of government because they're concerned that they aren't free enough to be advertised to.

There is a marked difference between governments interfering with an individual's freedom to act on themselves and interfering with an individual's freedom to manipulate the actions of others.

>giving mega corporations carte blanche to market poisonous and addictive substance

They absolutely do not have this. Tobacco ads are banned from TV and Radio in the US, for example. Wouldn't exactly call that a blank check.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Health_Cigarette_Smokin...

Post reply on HN