Thieves Rob Chelsea 7-11 Store of $20,230 Worth of Tobacco and E-Cigarettes

Aug.03.2022
Thieves Rob Chelsea 7-11 Store of $20,230 Worth of Tobacco and E-Cigarettes
Thieves robbed a 7-11 store in Chelsea and stole over $20,000 worth of tobacco and e-cigarette products. Police are searching for suspects.

According to the police, two thieves robbed a Chelsea 7-11 store at night, taking over $20,000 worth of tobacco and electronic cigarette products.


New York Police: Someone spotted the suspect walking through the subway turnstile.


Around 4:30 am, two burglars broke the front glass door of a 711 convenience store near West 21st Street. The police released surveillance footage of the two suspects on Monday evening. According to authorities, the suspects walked behind the cashier and grabbed several tobacco products, cigarettes, and e-cigarettes, totaling $20,230 in cash. The robbers fled the scene and escaped into the nearby West 23rd Street and 7th Avenue train station.


Footage released by the New York Police Department shows two individuals passing each other through revolving doors in opposite directions. One of them can be seen looking up at a surveillance camera while carrying an orange DoorDash branded messenger bag.


Another suspect was wearing a black vest with the words "We are weirdos" printed on it. Currently, the police are still searching for and tracking them.


This article is compiled from third-party information and is only intended for industry exchange and learning purposes.


This article does not represent the views of 2FIRSTS and 2FIRSTS cannot confirm the authenticity and accuracy of the content. The compilation of this article is only intended for communication and research within the industry.


Due to limitations in translation ability, the translated article may not fully reflect the exact meaning of the original text. Please refer to the original text for accuracy.


2FIRSTS maintains complete alignment with the Chinese government regarding any domestic, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, or foreign-related statements and positions.


The rights to compile information belong to the original media and author. Please contact us for removal if there is any infringement.



Disclaimer

This article is provided solely for professional research, industry discussion, and informational purposes. Any references to brands, companies, products, technologies, or policies are made for factual reporting and analytical purposes only, and do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, promotion, or advertising by 2Firsts.

Nicotine-containing products, including but not limited to cigarettes, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and nicotine pouches, carry significant health risks. Readers are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions, including age restrictions and access limitations.

The information contained in this article should not be regarded as investment, legal, medical, regulatory, or commercial advice. While 2Firsts strives to ensure the accuracy and reliability of its content, it does not assume liability for any direct or indirect loss arising from errors, omissions, inaccuracies, or reliance on the information contained herein.

This article is not intended for individuals below the legal age for accessing tobacco or nicotine-related information in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright Notice

This article is either original content produced by 2Firsts or content reproduced, translated, summarized, or adapted from third-party sources with attribution where applicable. The intellectual property rights of the original content remain with 2Firsts or the respective original rights holders.

No individual or organization may copy, reproduce, distribute, republish, modify, translate, or otherwise use this content without prior authorization. Any unauthorized use may result in legal action.

For copyright-related inquiries, corrections, or removal requests, please contact: info@2firsts.com.

 

AI-Assisted Translation and Editing Notice

Portions of this article may have been translated, edited, or reviewed with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools to improve efficiency and readability. Due to the limitations of AI-assisted translation and editing, discrepancies, omissions, or inaccuracies may exist when compared with the original source.

Where applicable, readers are advised to refer to the original source for the most complete and accurate information. If you identify any errors or believe that any content infringes upon your rights, please contact us at info@2firsts.com, and we will review and address the matter promptly.

Minnesota Sues Loon as State Enforcement Targets U.S. Vape Brand Operators
Minnesota Sues Loon as State Enforcement Targets U.S. Vape Brand Operators
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison sued Maduro Distributors, Inc., doing business as Loon, on July 15, 2026, alleging that the company illegally manufactured, distributed and sold flavored vapes that appeal to minors.
Jul.16
Australia’s Tobacco Tax Debate Intensifies as One Nation’s Barnaby Joyce Warns of Illicit Market Growth
Australia’s Tobacco Tax Debate Intensifies as One Nation’s Barnaby Joyce Warns of Illicit Market Growth
Australian One Nation MP Barnaby Joyce has criticised continued tobacco excise increases, arguing that higher taxes are driving consumers toward illicit tobacco markets and benefiting organised crime groups.
Regulations
Jul.13 by 2Firsts Perspectives
Sesh touts independence, 8VC backing and retail reach as it challenges tobacco-owned pouch brands
Sesh touts independence, 8VC backing and retail reach as it challenges tobacco-owned pouch brands
U.S. nicotine pouch brand Sesh has emphasized its independence from Altria, Philip Morris International and British American Tobacco, along with backing from investors including 8VC, celebrity supporters and a retail footprint of more than 7,500 stores, as it seeks to differentiate itself in a market where major pouch brands are owned by large tobacco companies.
Regulations
Jul.07 by 2Firsts Perspectives
Philippines Weighs Unified Vape Tax as Lawmakers Back Risk-Based Rates and Government Seeks to Fill ₱66 Billion Revenue Gap
Philippines Weighs Unified Vape Tax as Lawmakers Back Risk-Based Rates and Government Seeks to Fill ₱66 Billion Revenue Gap
Philippine lawmakers are considering an overhaul of the country's vape excise-tax regime to eliminate the wide gap between taxes on nicotine salt and freebase nicotine liquids and reduce incentives for misdeclaration. House Bill 5364, filed by Rep. Rufus Rodriguez and Rep. Maximo Rodriguez Jr., would impose a unified ₱10-per-milliliter tax on vapor products, with 5% annual increases beginning in 2027. Rodriguez says the proposal could generate an average ₱6 billion in annual collections from 2027 through 2030. The debate comes as the Philippine government considers tobacco, vape and other health-tax reforms to help offset around ₱66 billion in revenue expected to be forgone under a proposed tax-relief package.
Aug.18
UAE Sets Dh1-Per-ml Minimum Excise Price for Vape Liquids From Sept. 1 While Keeping 100% Tax Rate
UAE Sets Dh1-Per-ml Minimum Excise Price for Vape Liquids From Sept. 1 While Keeping 100% Tax Rate
The UAE Ministry of Finance will introduce a minimum excise price for e-liquids used in vaping and electronic smoking devices from September 1, 2026. The minimum excise price will be set at AED 1 per millilitre. The existing 100% excise tax rate will continue to apply to tobacco and electronic smoking products. The measure changes the minimum taxable base rather than the tax rate, with the UAE government saying it aims to establish unified tax standards, improve market compliance and prevent pricing loopholes.
Regulations
Aug.07 by 2Firsts Perspectives
U.S. Fifth Circuit Vacates NicQuid Vape MDO, Says FDA Comparative-Efficacy Standard Violated APA Procedures
U.S. Fifth Circuit Vacates NicQuid Vape MDO, Says FDA Comparative-Efficacy Standard Violated APA Procedures
According to VitalLaw on August 27, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated an FDA marketing denial order (MDO) against NicQuid LLC, ruling that the agency’s comparative-efficacy standard for electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) applications had become a substantive rule requiring notice-and-comment rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The court did not reject FDA’s authority to compare the public health benefits and risks of flavored vapes, but held that the agency could not establish a broadly binding standard through informal adjudications. The case was remanded to FDA for further proceedings.
Aug.28