Ashes to Ashes

[KarinaGW]

OK. You're right. Lots of smokers will book a cruise on which they cannot smoke at all for 7 days.

 

I can't find any cruise except for Trans-Atlantics/Pacifics that have 7 straight days at sea. Otherwise, there are plenty of ports where smoking is allowable even encouraged.

[Evilgrin72]

I can't find any cruise except for Trans-Atlantics/Pacifics that have 7 straight days at sea. Otherwise, there are plenty of ports where smoking is allowable even encouraged.

 

Smokers aren't going to go multiple days without cigs whether it's 2, 3, or 7. They're going to find an alternate vacation option. If you're a smoker, you can't go 2 days without one until you get to port unless you're a very casual smoker. No one wants to go through physical withdrawal on vacation.

[KarinaGW]

Smokers aren't going to go multiple days without cigs whether it's 2, 3, or 7. They're going to find an alternate vacation option. If you're a smoker, you can't go 2 days without one until you get to port unless you're a very casual smoker. No one wants to go through physical withdrawal on vacation.

 

I was. And, yes I could. If you're a non-smoker as you've claimed (or even if not), please don't claim to also know what will and will not motivate other people. Unless someone died and made you god...in which case why are you wasting your time here?

 

PS Why/How did I quit? Because I was (relatively speaking) a non-addictive personality and my DH (who must definitely wasn't/isn't) wanted to quit. Not that ANY of that is your business in any way, but I try to anticipate the snark.

Edited September 14, 2014 by KarinaGW

[Evilgrin72]

I was. And, yes I could. If you're a non-smoker as you've claimed (or even if not), please don't claim to also know what will and will not motivate other people. Unless someone died and made you god...in which case why are you wasting your time here?

 

PS Why/How did I quit? Because I was (relatively speaking) a non-addictive personality and my DH (who must definitely wasn't/isn't) wanted to quit. Not that ANY of that is your business in any way, but I try to anticipate the snark.

 

Wow. I guess I'm not surprised seeing as this is a touchy subject, but why the need to get so defensive? Take a deep breath.

 

I'm a former smoker and I know many current and fellow reformed smokers. Extraordinarily few habitual smokers ate going to choose a vacation that prohibits them from smoking for a week when they can choose one that affords them even one place to satisfy the nicotine craving. If you're the type to have 1 or 2 a day, sure. But the vast majority of smokers are habitual and aren't going to voluntarily abstain for a week. Clearly your perspective and opinion is different and that's fine.

 

All I would day is find any pack a day smoker on the street and ask him or her if they would spend thousands of dollars on a vacation which gives them literally no place to smoke. I think you'd find almost all of them would say no. You may not have had an addiction but most smokers do. I mean, if smokers would continue to have no issue booking under a total ban, why hasn't it yet happened.

[Sitzmark]

If you're a smoker, you can't go 2 days without one until you get to port unless you're a very casual smoker. No one wants to go through physical withdrawal on vacation.

 

 

I was a pack to pack and a half a day smoker for nearly 20 years and I had many occasions during that time when I would abstain for several days due to vacation choices I made.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jstraw20]

All of this is moot until ships can be completely staffed with non smokers. As of now they cannot.

[LetsGetWet!]

Smokers aren't going to go multiple days without cigs whether it's 2, 3, or 7. They're going to find an alternate vacation option. If you're a smoker, you can't go 2 days without one until you get to port unless you're a very casual smoker. No one wants to go through physical withdrawal on vacation.

I was a pack to pack and a half a day smoker for nearly 20 years and I had many occasions during that time when I would abstain for several days due to vacation choices I made.

Wait! That's simply impossible! He said so, and claimed to KNOW that for EVERY smoker! :rolleyes:

[Sitzmark]

All of this is moot until ships can be completely staffed with non smokers. As of now they cannot.

 

I doubt that they cannot, it would be more accurate to say that they have not.

[LetsGetWet!]

All of this is moot until ships can be completely staffed with non smokers. As of now they cannot.

I doubt that they cannot, it would be more accurate to say that they have not.

That's a completely separate issue from making all passenger areas smoke-free.

 

Having said that, I don't think we'll see 100% passenger smoking bans anytime soon. But I'll bet good money that the places you can smoke on RCI ships will continue to dwindle, starting with the casinos, which I predict will be smoke-free within 2 years or less (except Asian cruises.)

[Sitzmark]

That's a completely separate issue from making all passenger areas smoke-free.

 

Having said that, I don't think we'll see 100% passenger smoking bans anytime soon. But I'll bet good money that the places you can smoke on RCI ships will continue to dwindle, starting with the casinos, which I predict will be smoke-free within 2 years or less (except Asian cruises.)

 

Correct. They will do it incrementally. It is never done all at once.

[SteveH2508]

That's a completely separate issue from making all passenger areas smoke-free.

 

Having said that, I don't think we'll see 100% passenger smoking bans anytime soon. But I'll bet good money that the places you can smoke on RCI ships will continue to dwindle, starting with the casinos, which I predict will be smoke-free within 2 years or less (except Asian cruises.)

 

It is not a separate argument. The 'famous' Carnival totally non-smoking ship experiment foundered, (at least partly), on the difficulty of staffing the ship with non-smokers (a lot of the ship's crew members being from Asia). As you have yourself acknowledged, the prevalence of smoking in Asia is much higher than in the West.

 

This trend will take a good many years to overcome.

 

I agree that the areas for smoking are getting more and more restrictive (and, as a smoker, there may come a point where I decide that cruising is no longer for me).

 

I do not understand why the cruise lines do not set aside a few inside areas for smoking (e.g. cigar bars - note the plural). The casino being the only inside smoking area is daft.

 

I understand that there are some RCI ships which do not have cigar bars - that to me is a deal-breaker (I smoke cigars BTW).

[LetsGetWet!]

It is not a separate argument. The 'famous' Carnival totally non-smoking ship experiment foundered, (at least partly), on the difficulty of staffing the ship with non-smokers (a lot of the ship's crew members being from Asia). As you have yourself acknowledged, the prevalence of smoking in Asia is much higher than in the West.

I really don't think what Carnival tried well over a decade ago has much bearing on the present (the non-smoking ship experiment ended in 2003. I will note that while doing a quick search for that information, I found a much more recent link on Carnival's site saying that according to a 2011 survey of their customers, less than 10% were smokers.

 

And it certainly WOULD be possible to declare all passenger-accessible areas smoke-free while still allowing crew to smoke in designated crew-only areas.

[Evilgrin72]

Wait! That's simply impossible! He said so, and claimed to KNOW that for EVERY smoker! :rolleyes:

 

Believe what you want. Post all the sarcastic smileys you want, too, they show the caliber of your ability to intelligently discuss an issue.

 

What's kind of funny is that I came in this thread to propose an alternative that would enable full smoking bans. I figured if anything, it would the smokers that would flame me and instead I'm getting jumped by the non-smokers. Amazing.

 

You guys go ahead and continue to believe that RCL could ban smoking without taking a hit on the bottom line and/or sacrificing the vast majority of their smoking customer base. I still contend that smoking hasn't been banned because they want to give smokers someplace to smoke so they'll continue to book. Some of you disagree fervently. Still haven't seen one other reason why anyone thinks they still allow it though.

[jstraw20]

What's kind of funny is that I came in this thread to propose an alternative that would enable full smoking bans. I figured if anything, it would the smokers that would flame me and instead I'm getting jumped by the non-smokers. Amazing.

 

As a non smoker/one who vapes/one who will eventually quit vaping too, I for one would like to thank you for trying.

[Starry Eyes]

Believe what you want. Post all the sarcastic smileys you want, too, they show the caliber of your ability to intelligently discuss an issue.

 

What's kind of funny is that I came in this thread to propose an alternative that would enable full smoking bans. I figured if anything, it would the smokers that would flame me and instead I'm getting jumped by the non-smokers. Amazing.

 

You guys go ahead and continue to believe that RCL could ban smoking without taking a hit on the bottom line and/or sacrificing the vast majority of their smoking customer base. I still contend that smoking hasn't been banned because they want to give smokers someplace to smoke so they'll continue to book. Some of you disagree fervently. Still haven't seen one other reason why anyone thinks they still allow it though.

Personally, I appreciate that you are espousing a considered opinion. I do understand your point. currently, I do not think there is data to show that e-cig are so safe as to make your proposed solution acceptable. It would be nice if e-cigs were shown safe (really, I want them to be safe second hand, hopefully also first hand) that a corporation could defend their widespread allowance, but, sadly the data are not there. So your solution, kindly meant as it may be, is at best premature.

 

looking at the progression of events, the likelihood is that smoking will gradually be restricted. Fewer and fewer indoor options, still with some outdoor options. And smokers will avail themselves of the outdoor options, as they do here in Winsonsin, even in winter. and some you do not wish to go to those public outdoor will, as you previously mentioned, surreptitiously use e-cigs in more private areas (again as you mention, with a well chosen product and location, they likely will not be caught...sort of an under the table variant of your suggestion;)).

 

I know there are a few so fervently anti-smoking that they'd find even a few designed, out of the way, outdoor smoking areas to be too many. really, I think that is a tiny minority. In fairnesswhen smoking areas become more and more restricted, those very sensitive sorts can and should take the responsibilty to avoid smoking areas. So, I do not think totally non-smoking ships are necessary or probable for quite some time, if ever.

Edited September 14, 2014 by Starry Eyes