What to do with boxes?

[markem]

Yet no one provides a cite to an FDA proposal for regulation. Interesting.

[bobarian]

But its Famous Smoke Shop! They never mislead or exaggerate the facts.

[Dude Here]

Originally Posted by bobarian

But its Famous Smoke Shop! They never mislead or exaggerate the facts.

Haha, of course not! I happened to be looking at cigar obsession at the time and just linked the video. Seriously though, why the FDA feels it needs to have a hand anywhere in the cigar industry is just beyond me. I can understand the whole "protecting the kids from the evils of tobacco" angle but come on, how many kids do you see hanging out and lighting up a $10 cigar? Premium cigars aren't marketed tpwards nor are they really affordable to the people these regulations would look to "protect". If they want to lean on cigarettes some more, fine, I quit smoking those nasty things years ago, but keep out of my B&M damn it.

[pnoon]

Originally Posted by Dude Here

Haha, of course not! I happened to be looking at cigar obsession at the time and just linked the video.

And cigarobsession.com is an authoritative source?

[Dude Here]

Originally Posted by pnoon

And cigarobsession.com is an authoritative source?

Huh?

No, and I never said it was. I just happened to have it open in another tab and saw that the FDA topic was brought up here. Cigar obsession had the Famous video on it so I just linked it since it was right there. If I broke any CA rules doing that then I apologize. I never claimed that anyone involved was an authoritative or completely accurate source.

[pnoon]

Originally Posted by Dude Here

Huh?

No, and I never said it was. I just happened to have it open in another tab and saw that the FDA topic was brought up here. Cigar obsession had the Famous video on it so I just linked it since it was right there. If I broke any CA rules doing that then I apologize. I never claimed that anyone involved was an authoritative or completely accurate source.

Didn't mean to imply you did, Steve.

It was more an editorial comment about bloggers

[Dude Here]

Originally Posted by pnoon

Didn't mean to imply you did, Steve.

It was more an editorial comment about bloggers

Gotcha, and I completely agree with you on that! I do enjoy Mr. Glynn's reviews though. Of course, considering that I've won some swag from his site before, makes me a little bias, lol.

[markem]

Originally Posted by markem

Yet no one provides a cite to an FDA proposal for regulation. Interesting.

Looks like it is just this rumor from 2011 being passed around again.

"Currently, the FDA is attempting to put restrictions on how tobacco products are made and sold in the United States. As it stands, premium cigars could be included in these regulations. But, as you well know, cigars are fundamentally different from cigarettes and other forms of tobacco. So in turn, they should be afforded different regulatory treatment. It’s our job to make our elected officials understand this, and also understand that the implications of these regulations could effectively end premium cigars as we know them today.

FDA regulations could potentially require, for example:
Graphic warnings on cigar boxes, advertising and point of sale materials.
Significant advertising restrictions such as black and white only ads.
Only behind the counter sales. This could prohibit walk-in humidors.
Only face-to-face sales. This could prohibit mail order sales.
Ban on flavored cigars.

As cigar enthusiasts, we need to speak as a unified coalition. Please be active, be heard, and ask your U.S. Congressmen, especially your Senators, to support HR 1639/S 1461 "Traditional Cigar Manufacturing and Small Business Jobs Preservation Act of 2011" . This bipartisan legislation clarifies the Tobacco Control Act to exempt premium cigars from FDA regulation and will stand up for our rights as enthusiasts. "

There is a link that points to the CRA website where the reader is informed that the alert is no longer active. http://capwiz.com/cigarrights/issues...ertid=54019671

There is, however, some news about the FDA and deeming rules for tobacco. I'm guessing that the CRA push is merely confusing the deeming issue with the chicken little efforts from 2011. http://www.csnews.com/product-catego...rilla%E2%80%99

[Dude Here]

Originally Posted by markem

Looks like it is just this rumor from 2011 being passed around again.

"Currently, the FDA is attempting to put restrictions on how tobacco products are made and sold in the United States. As it stands, premium cigars could be included in these regulations. But, as you well know, cigars are fundamentally different from cigarettes and other forms of tobacco. So in turn, they should be afforded different regulatory treatment. It’s our job to make our elected officials understand this, and also understand that the implications of these regulations could effectively end premium cigars as we know them today.

FDA regulations could potentially require, for example:
Graphic warnings on cigar boxes, advertising and point of sale materials.
Significant advertising restrictions such as black and white only ads.
Only behind the counter sales. This could prohibit walk-in humidors.
Only face-to-face sales. This could prohibit mail order sales.
Ban on flavored cigars.

As cigar enthusiasts, we need to speak as a unified coalition. Please be active, be heard, and ask your U.S. Congressmen, especially your Senators, to support HR 1639/S 1461 "Traditional Cigar Manufacturing and Small Business Jobs Preservation Act of 2011" . This bipartisan legislation clarifies the Tobacco Control Act to exempt premium cigars from FDA regulation and will stand up for our rights as enthusiasts. "

There is a link that points to the CRA website where the reader is informed that the alert is no longer active. http://capwiz.com/cigarrights/issues...ertid=54019671

There is, however, some news about the FDA and deeming rules for tobacco. I'm guessing that the CRA push is merely confusing the deeming issue with the chicken little efforts from 2011. http://www.csnews.com/product-catego...rilla%E2%80%99

Hmmmmmm, perhaps I'm worrying about nothing then and have been duped?

I did however write to my state rep John Carter who sent me a response saying that he is in support of HR 729, which is the resolution mentioned in the Famous video. No specifics on whether or not this or anything related to it will be coming to vote anytime soon but there is some factual stuff out there on the FDA regs.

If I am dragging up an old/dead issue then my apologies for foolishly pushing along bad info. Too much I guess, lol.

[TFed]

Can't give all the details. But spoke with my brother who has many contacts having worked in a number of U.S. goverment departments despite now being on a 5 year assignment working for the U.N. In Rome. Likely enjoying a CC while we speak.

And, it seems that while the video is a little over the top, it is mostly accurate.

They would like to cover the boxes with U.S. Government supplied pictures of open coffins, skeletons, diseased persons etc.

And they definitely want to ban internet sales as well as not allowing access to B&M humi's. The feeling seems to be that if you take the pleasure out of the purchase, such as the excitement of winning an online auction or the sensual pleasure of the walk in humidor, it will take away the desire to buy.

No info on the other points he makes but from what I understand, FWIW, those two issues are accurate.
Your mileage may vary but i started smoking cigars once a week with my brother. We used to stop at a B&M on Dupont Circle some 32 years ago when he was working for the Reagan administration as a Sovietologist.
I think he has some good contacts. And I trust his word.
But apparently it is nowhere near a done deal. Just talk and planning stage.

As many of you in the in the D.C. Area can attest, there are plenty of black limos and fat men in suits in Shelly's back room when session is just out for a break and guys stop for a smoke and a stiff drink before flying home.

At least there still was last time i knew.

Those guys who light up on the underground tram (Dems And Repubs alike. I have seen them smoking together) are not likely to let that crap happen.
Just my

[mikesr1963]

It's talk like this that puts people to sleep. The fat cats won't lose their smokes. They want votes and they will vote the way that keeps them in fat cat status. Either do your part or don't cry like a little b@#$% when cigars are taken way or forced to be altered so you end up smoking a paper cup.

Originally Posted by TFed

Can't give all the details. But spoke with my brother who has many contacts having worked in a number of U.S. goverment departments despite now being on a 5 year assignment working for the U.N. In Rome. Likely enjoying a CC while we speak.

And, it seems that while the video is a little over the top, it is mostly accurate.

They would like to cover the boxes with U.S. Government supplied pictures of open coffins, skeletons, diseased persons etc.

And they definitely want to ban internet sales as well as not allowing access to B&M humi's. The feeling seems to be that if you take the pleasure out of the purchase, such as the excitement of winning an online auction or the sensual pleasure of the walk in humidor, it will take away the desire to buy.

No info on the other points he makes but from what I understand, FWIW, those two issues are accurate.
Your mileage may vary but i started smoking cigars once a week with my brother. We used to stop at a B&M on Dupont Circle some 32 years ago when he was working for the Reagan administration as a Sovietologist.
I think he has some good contacts. And I trust his word.
But apparently it is nowhere near a done deal. Just talk and planning stage.

As many of you in the in the D.C. Area can attest, there are plenty of black limos and fat men in suits in Shelly's back room when session is just out for a break and guys stop for a smoke and a stiff drink before flying home.

At least there still was last time i knew.

Those guys who light up on the underground tram (Dems And Repubs alike. I have seen them smoking together) are not likely to let that crap happen.
Just my