Still unpleasant to smell though. Was in a restaurant in London a while back and some American guy (vapourizers weren't as known over here then) pulled out his e-cig and started puffing clouds of the stuff over to our table. Seemed to think that because it wasn't actually a cigarette it was suddenly fine to use indoors in a place filled with non-smokers.
Still an unpleasant smell though. Was in a restaurant a while back and some woman sat close to me reeking of cheap perfume. She seemed to think that because it was perfume it was acceptable to pollute the air with it, and splashed yet more of it all over herself every time she went to "powder her nose". She even got the bottle out at the table and sprayed yet more of the noxious substance on herself.
The second statement is as good an argument for banning women from wearing perfume in enclosed public spaces as the first is for banning vaping in enclosed public spaces. Would a restaurant ask a woman to leave if she was wearing a perfume that a couple of diners found it unpleasant? Or a man with cheap aftershave? If not (and most wouldn't) then why would you ask someone to stop vaping?
Smoking is a different case altogether, as there are health risks associated with second hand smoke.
In short, using the argument of "it smells" is no argument for the backing of a ban. Using it as such is an authoritarian approach, attempting to force your own will onto other people. Come up with some real evidence for a health risk and I will support such a ban.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
