When legislators pass laws there has to be a good reason for them doing so. Just jumpingon a bandwagon and passing laws because the neighbouring state has already done so isn’ta good enough reason. Legislators also need to look at the whole story not just take noticeof some bad publicity and decide it’s time to take action.It’s often the reaction to the passing of a law that is really important. Sooner or later onepiece of legislation will be passed that will make people realize that the legislators areoverstepping their mark. One such law was passed by the Minnesota City Council last weekand the reaction over the past couple of days has been a huge thumbs down.The Minnesota Daily newspaper reacted badly to the decision of the Minnesota City Councilto ban indoor public use of e-cigarettes. This means vaping can’t take place in stores,restaurants and at work but does allow people to vape at e-cigarette stores where samplingis necessary.The newspaper says that the bill is “premature” and come up with a reason for that beliefthat should shame all the local politicians who voted in favour of the new law. Havingactually done some research into the subject, they realize that e-cigarettes “are helpful topeople in quitting smoking, or at least significantly reducing their consumption of traditionalcigarettes.” Their view is that until “there is a scientific consensus” on the long-term healtheffects of vaping, it should be up to businesses and institutions not politicians to decidewhether vaping can take place on their premises.The papers anger at the legislation is summed up by this sentence: “This bill is yet anotherexample of the city overstepping its bounds and imposing an ill-conceived law that on thesurface is supposed to help solve a public health issue that in reality is not so simple.”Now it’s not uncommon for one paper to come out and heavily criticize a piece of legislation.However, the bungling politicians in Minnesota really seem to have totally misjudged theopinions of people in the state as the Star Tribune has also covered the story and it doesn’tmake happy reading for the bandwagon politicians of Minnesota.John McClay lives in Bloomington where the local council have also taken action against e-cigarettes. They even banned vaping in vaping stores which is totally insanity. His views areones that politicians should really take notice of. He’s carried out plenty of research into e-cigarettes and with that knowledge would never have passed the law that’s just been thrustonto the citizens of Minnesota.He knows that in recent years the number of people smoking tobacco cigarettes in theStates has fallen, while the numbers vaping have gone up and up. Why can’t politicians takenotice of those figures and work out just what they mean?It means the number of people smoking deadly tobacco cigarettes and putting their lives atrisk is falling. E-cigarette use increasing is a major contribution to those tobacco cigaretteuser figures falling but will it ever get credit for doing so?McClay blames the under-threat tobacco industry for a lot of the ill-feeling shown against e-cigarettes. It’s hardly surprising of course that industry is worrying about their future.McClay says “if e-cigs had become known by any other name -‘vaporizers, atomizers,inhalers’ – perhaps municipal officials would not be so inclined to conflate vaping andsmoking.”He makes it clear that the vast majority of vapers are adults and former smokers. He addsthat most e-cigarette stores actively discourage non-smokers from trying e-cigarettes ontheir site. As for minors using e-cigarettes he puts it down to experimentation and thewillingness to “do anything that makes them feel “cool” and look older, especially if it’s notlegally accessible, which makes it all the more fun.”Why can’t politicians see that? They were young once and you can bet your bottom dollarthat some of them tried a cigarette before reaching legal age. The same probably goes for aquick drink of alcohol, going into a bar or driving a car. They should realize that ifyoungsters are vaping then it’s not because the e-cigarette industry has targeted them.They should also be happy that they are using e-cigarettes rather than heading down thedeadly route that tobacco cigarette use will take them on.John McClay used e-cigarettes to end his addiction to tobacco. He smoked a pack a day for55 years and started as a teenager because he thought it was “mature, sophisticated andoh-so-cool.” When he realized how dangerous smoking is he tried to give up but despitetrying cold turkey, nicotine gum, lozenges and Zyban nothing worked for him but e-cigarettesdid.When politicians try and be clever they should listen to all sides of the story. They may hatethe fact that vaping looks similar to smoking and the product includes the name ‘cigarette’but they should delve deeper into the matter. McClay says that the fact e-cigarettes allowyou to “mimic the smoking experience” that’s why they help so many people give upsmoking.Politicians and health officials will complain about the fact e-cigarettes contain nicotine. Butthe fact is that nicotine is not especially harmful and not carcinogenic unlike the manychemicals in tobacco cigarettes. McClay asks the question if nicotine was severely harmfulwhy is it available over the counter, unprescribed in gum and lozenge forms.So come on politicians, why can’t you listen to people like John McClay or pay attention tothe opinions of newspapers and the occasional blog. They can’t just pass laws because itseems to be the flavor of the month. Health officials in particular should be pointing out thefact that e-cigarettes can be used to stop people smoking tobacco. That fact alone shouldbe enough to stop the witch-hunt that politicians are carrying out without overwhelmingpublic support for doing so.