# FDA Minor Ban Compliance Checks



## Spydro (23/9/16)

https://vaping.com/blog/news/fda-minor-ban-compliance-checks/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=ECF23092016&bt_email=lv120@cox.net&bt_ts=1474664263786

*FDA Minor Ban Compliance Checks*

*True to their word, FDA have conducted their first sting operations on both brick and mortar and online stores, sending kids to attempt to purchase newly regulated products and issuing sternly worded letters to any vendor who let them.

You can find the list of companies that got letters here.

In their letters, FDA warn companies about the provisions that vapour products are now subject to:

“FDA has determined that your e-liquid is misbranded under section 903(a)(7)(B) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. § 387c(a)(7)(B)) because you sold this product to a person younger than 18 years of age” the letters begin.

They go on to explain that during an FDA investigation, a minor was able to purchase eliquid from the store or website. They do not go on to explain exactly how this happened: whether a fake ID was used, for example.

Recipients of these letters were told to write back within 15 days of receipt detailing “corrective actions, including the dates on which you discontinued the violative labeling, advertising, sale, and/or distribution of these tobacco products and your plan for maintaining compliance with the FD&C Act”.

Vaping.com understands that a second violation will lead to a fine, while a third could result in a no-tobacco sale order lasting anything up to a month, something that would cripple any vape business.

One web storeowner, for ePipeMods.com, took part in a conference call with the FDA which he recorded and posted on YouTube. He asked FDA whether use of a fake ID would move liability from store operators, and was told that “there is no provision that makes it illegal for a minor to purchase a regulated tobacco product. Every state has different laws regarding the legality of the minor purchasing”.

Interestingly, no vape shops were caught in the recent stings – unlikely because they were not targeted, but rather thanks t information campaigns targeted at them by organisations like theVapor Technology Association.

But giant nationwide convenience and pharmacy chains were caught with their pants down. Walgreens stores in Iowa, Missouri and Washington State sold Grape cigars and blu ecig products to minors sent by FDA to test age verification systems, while a 7 Eleven in Washington State was caught selling Mark Ten eliquid to a minor.

Vaping.com uses age verification software from Veritad 
to ensure that our products are never sold to minors.
*

First warning issue letters issued to:
*http://www.fda.gov/downloads/TobaccoProducts/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Retail/UCM520813.pdf*

Reactions: Informative 4


----------



## DaveH (24/9/16)

Using children ................... thought there are laws against that sort of thing.
Dave


----------



## zadiac (24/9/16)

DaveH said:


> Using children ................... thought there are laws against that sort of thing.
> Dave



Yeah, it's called entrapment, but I don't know about over there. Here it's illegal to use entrapment. We used to do it to catch shebeens in the past, but not allowed to do that anymore.


----------



## kev mac (24/9/16)

Spydro said:


> https://vaping.com/blog/news/fda-minor-ban-compliance-checks/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=ECF23092016&bt_email=lv120@cox.net&bt_ts=1474664263786
> 
> *FDA Minor Ban Compliance Checks*
> 
> ...



More B.S. from our government,looking out for our best interest.Talk about putting the cart before the horse.me thinks there is more to this than meets the eye.Good night America,where are you?

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## Spydro (24/9/16)

zadiac said:


> Yeah, it's called entrapment, but I don't know about over there. Here it's illegal to use entrapment. We used to do it to catch shebeens in the past, but not allowed to do that anymore.



Entrapment is a common law enforcement tool in the US and is used by local police all the way up to the federal government agencies. 

Just one example of law enforcement entrapment is "bait cars" that are left unattended in conspicuous places, often with something elaborately done to make sure people on the street in the area saw it being left, with an open or unlocked doors and the key in the ignition, valuable contents, etc... to lure then catch car thieves who steal it or rob it's contents. Grand theft auto can be a felony or a misdemeanor depending on the circumstances and the state here. The fines and imprisonment can vary as well, whether a first offender or a known repeat criminal, whether it is a Class 1 to Class 6 mitigating, minimum, presumptive, maximum or aggravated offense. Accordingly a prison sentence can be from less that a year up to 99 years, and fines from $500 to $10,000 common, but even to 10's of thousands of dollars is some cases.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Spydro (24/9/16)

kev mac said:


> More B.S. from our government,looking out for our best interest.Talk about putting the cart before the horse.me thinks there is more to this than meets the eye.Good night America,where are you?



The America I was born in doesn't exist anymore, it hasn't for a long time and it will never be again for the younger generations IMO. I had a great life, but in too many ways to count I'm glad that I'm near the end of my trail.

Reactions: Like 2 | Agree 1 | Can relate 2


----------



## RichJB (24/9/16)

Entrapment is illegal and sometimes charges have to be dropped but it's a difficult thing to define and quantify. In the linked article, it talks about the Attorney General's guidelines that a legitimate sting traps "the unwary guilty" rather than "the unwary innocent". 

The way I've heard it explained, a sting that places an undercover cop posing as a hooker in a red light district is not entrapment. The person approaching the hooker is "the unwary guilty", i.e. he went to the red light district with the aim of procuring the services of a hooker so he is guilty of intent to commit an offense. The police did not do anything to induce him to break the law, he would have hired a hooker anyway. It was just his bad luck that he chose the undercover cop to approach. But if the police get that same undercover cop to visit a neighbourhood bar, approach individuals and make them offers, then it's entrapment. The bar patrons didn't go there with the intent of hiring a hooker, they just wanted to have a drink. They would have gone to a red light district if they wanted a hooker. So they are now "the unwary innocent" who could claim that they went to the bar with no intent to commit an offense but were induced into it, in a moment of weakness, by the direct action of the police.

In this case, it's a bit of a grey area. Do these vendors have the habit and intent to boost profits by selling to minors ("the unwary guilty") or were they generally honest vendors who got caught out in a moment of weakness by the sting ("the unwary innocent")? Considering the AG's guidelines that stings should not be random but rather targeted at known offenders, I doubt these checks would hold up in a court of law. The FDA would have to show probable cause that the vendors are habitual offenders. But considering that no punishment has been levied, merely warning letters, it's unlikely that any of the parties caught in the sting will pursue it that far. They'll write mea culpa letters to the FDA and just tighten up their systems for the future.

Although I'm not sure how online vendors can do that. Call me skeptical but I doubt minors are going to be stymied by a pop-up box which asks "Are you of legal smoking age?"

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## YeOldeOke (24/9/16)

This issue of retailers having to verify the age of the person they're selling to - be it alcohol, cigs, whatever - is one that irks on me. Especially a teenager. In bricks 'n mortar it's difficult, online very difficult unless you put every customer through a multitude of hoops if they want to buy, just to prevent the 1 in a 1000 that is underage.

So everybody's got to jump through hoops for the parent who can't take responsibility for his kid. Sure, kids have to be protected, and the internet is a difficult one for parents, but it's still your kid not everybody else's responsibility. maybe I'm just old-fashioned.

Entrapment is another story. I've never seen the problem with it. There are good laws and bad laws, but succesful societies rely on the rule of law. If you're going to break it don't hide behind the fact that you were trapped. You were tempted and went for it. You still broke the law. I'm sure there are laws everybody breaks at times, but I don't consider the cops setting up a trap and me falling into it a violation of my rights.


----------



## Duffie12 (24/9/16)

As mentioned above there is a difference between entrapment, which is not allowed, and a general bait and catch (for lack of a better term). It can be grey but entrapment is where the offender is trapped or coerced into doing something that they don't normally do. So a kid gong into a store and buying tobacco is a perfectly legal tactic. Sending a kid inside with an adult outside who smiles and waves and nods to the cashier who then sells to his son because it's for his dad outside could be seen as entrapment because the cashier was coerced into selling to the kid even though they might not normally do do in the course of business.


----------



## DaveH (25/9/16)

Spydro said:


> I'm glad that I'm near the end of my trail.



No you're not near the end of your trail it's just your eyes can't see that far any more. 
Dave

Reactions: Like 1 | Funny 1


----------



## Lord Vetinari (25/9/16)

zadiac said:


> Yeah, it's called entrapment, but I don't know about over there. Here it's illegal to use entrapment. We used to do it to catch shebeens in the past, but not allowed to do that anymore.


What CAN you still do mate?! Sorry but if it works, it works.


----------



## Lord Vetinari (25/9/16)

Spydro said:


> The America I was born in doesn't exist anymore, it hasn't for a long time and it will never be again for the younger generations IMO. I had a great life, but in too many ways to count I'm glad that I'm near the end of my trail.


 Pretty sad. I hardly want to visit any more. Only northern Cali and Colorado for the nature.


----------



## Waine (25/9/16)

"Entrapment" without the necessary authority is illegal in SA. In order to do a legal "trap", the police must first obtain a "Section 252" authority from the appointed Senior public prosecutor. Once that authority is obtained, there is no stopping the police from sending in a consenting 17 year old kid from buying e-liquid from one of our vendors. Interestingly, as far as I am aware, in South Africa, it is not illegal for a minor under 18 to buy a *vaping device,* but to buy cigarettes or nicotine under 18 is illegal.

So I would caution all South African vendors to ask for an ID card / book if a youngster enters your shop and wants to buy e-juice.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## zadiac (25/9/16)

FogFace said:


> What CAN you still do mate?! Sorry but if it works, it works.



Unfortunately, we can't use it anymore, even if it works. As soon as a prosecutor finds out we used a trap without a court order, the case is thrown out. You can, however, get a court order that authorizes entrapment, but the process to get one is a lengthy one and normally when we need to get one, we need it like yesterday. Such a court order can take up to two weeks if you're lucky.

Reactions: Like 1 | Informative 1


----------



## RevnLucky7 (25/9/16)

What bugs me, that even now in the face of it all, many vape shops are still not heading the FDA's warnings and there are still MANY small time US liquid companies still putting products on the market, after the August 8th deadline. So while most of the bigger guys who have been in business for a long time are trying their best to adhere to FDA regs so that the vaping industry is not entirely demolished, there's going to be hand few people who don't give a crap about playing by the rules who is going to make it so much harder for everyone.
I honestly for one welcome these string operations. It's tough times and I feel for the guys who are burdened by this while honesty trying to adhere to the requirements, but make no mistake, 99% of these guys have given the FDA the finger.... en as jy nie wil hoor nie, dan moet jy maar voel.

Most of these letters seem to have been issued (in addition to the fact that they were sold to minors) due to the fact that there were no warning labels on bottles. This is something many people have been doing for over a year now. Which simply tells me that whoever didn't have them, was really just not paying much attention to anything.


----------



## Lord Vetinari (25/9/16)

zadiac said:


> Unfortunately, we can't use it anymore, even if it works. As soon as a prosecutor finds out we used a trap without a court order, the case is thrown out. You can, however, get a court order that authorizes entrapment, but the process to get one is a lengthy one and normally when we need to get one, we need it like yesterday. Such a court order can take up to two weeks if you're lucky.


Wow times change hey. I Cant think of any other way one can prove sale to minors though. And I like the idea my daughter cant just buy booze or even vape gear I still want those decisions to definitely come via my house. I dont mind people making certain she doesn't. Not one bit.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Spydro (25/9/16)

FogFace said:


> Wow times change hey. I Cant think of any other way one can prove sale to minors though. And I like the idea my daughter cant just buy booze or even vape gear I still want those decisions to definitely come via my house. I dont mind people making certain she doesn't. Not one bit.



I think most parents that care about their children like you do feel the same. But in America kids can and will get whatever they want whenever they want to despite what the laws are, and neither the parents nor the law is very effective at stopping that. In some liberal states parents are so afraid to punish their kids that they don't. That leaves it entirely up to law enforcement.


----------

