Bringing your own alcohol on board Celebrity Eclipse?

[gsb]

If it so a longer cruise I have a walker that holds about 4 bottles of alcohol in the tubes.

 

Drink up ☕

 

THIS IS THE BEST YET!!!:p

[JasonV1]

Buy 2 bottles of cheap wine, drain the bottles and refill with booze. Reseal using heat shrink caps found on Amazon.com. Walk on like you normally would carrying the bottles.

 

I drink beer/cider (and the wife wine) so I don't use this method (I buy packages anyway), but there is no reason why it wouldn't work. It it does just don't brag about it!

 

I only know about this equipment because I have homebrewed in the past, and my parents have made wine.

Edited November 5, 2014 by JasonV1

[jwm51]

Where are these many posts asking about rule breaking? must have missed them.

 

Been asleep for 3 years eh Van Winkle?:eek:;)

[DWhit]

I'd suggest throwing the bottle in your carry-on, along with a bottle of wine. If they take it, (which I doubt they will) they will take it right away, and your luggage delivery will not be affected. No visit to the naughty room.

[cynbar]

Google "Wine Bra" and "Beer Belly" ---- these will help.

 

And no, in case anyone is ready to flame me, I have never tried either.

[cruza]

Read the dress code threads where people want to go to MDR on formal night without formal wear, as an example :D

 

 

 

I'm never going to believe ANYONE who claims to NEVER have broken ANY sort of rule EVER in their life. I'm certain such folks have at some point crossed a street with the don't cross light blinking, or gone 36 MPH in a 35MPH zone while driving.

 

.

 

Curt -great point (as usual!!!), 100 percent agree

 

Mike

[blindrid]

Am I the only one who finds it mind boggling that so many people post questions about whether they can break a rule or how to get around it? :eek:

 

I contend everyone breaks a rule, sometimes inadvertently. Thus when one pulls a holier than thou approach, that when I give up!

[ceder5]

Buy 2 bottles of cheap wine, drain the bottles and refill with booze. Reseal using heat shrink caps found on Amazon.com. Walk on like you normally would carrying the bottles.

 

I drink beer/cider (and the wife wine) so I don't use this method (I buy packages anyway), but there is no reason why it wouldn't work. It it does just don't brag about it!

 

I only know about this equipment because I have homebrewed in the past, and my parents have made wine.

 

 

I have used this method in the past and it works very well. Just make sure you select the right color bottle.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[fortinweb]

I'm never going to believe ANYONE who claims to NEVER have broken ANY sort of rule EVER in their life. I'm certain such folks have at some point crossed a street with the don't cross light blinking, or gone 36 MPH in a 35MPH zone while driving.

 

Spare me the freaking lecture! :rolleyes:

[midwestchick]

I don't understand why they allow 2 bottles of wine but no one can bring a bottle of alcohol....doesn't make sense to me. Why is wine allowed and nothing else....even if you purchase a drink package, it is nice to have something in your room if you don't feel like running to a bar and bringing it back to the room.

One of the things we like about ACC....buy a bottle of wine in a port you're visiting or local beer and bring it back on...no sneaking, since it goes through the x-ray machine. Yes, drinks are included but to be able to have things in your cabin if you so desire.

[cle-guy]

Spare me the freaking lecture! :rolleyes:

 

where's the lecture?

[fortinweb]

where's the lecture?

 

"I'm never going to believe ANYONE who claims to NEVER have broken ANY sort of rule EVER in their life. I'm certain such folks have at some point crossed a street with the don't cross light blinking, or gone 36 MPH in a 35MPH zone while driving."

 

That's you lecturing that you consider them too imperfect to be complaining. I think it is sanctimonious to make such comments about people who are against deliberately breaking the rules. :rolleyes:

Edited November 9, 2014 by fortinweb

[cle-guy]

"I'm never going to believe ANYONE who claims to NEVER have broken ANY sort of rule EVER in their life. I'm certain such folks have at some point crossed a street with the don't cross light blinking, or gone 36 MPH in a 35MPH zone while driving."

 

That's you lecturing that you consider them too imperfect to be complaining. I think it is sanctimonious to make such comments. :rolleyes:

 

This wasn't a lecture, it was my opinion.

 

This was in reply to someone who claimed to have not gone against any cruise ship rule ever, and then asked if it was OK for them to cast judgement on others.

 

In earlier post I basically said only people who've never done the wrong thing can really say how bad it is to go around the bring on board rules. And I stick to that. Logically I don't see how one can complain about one person not following a rule, then go and not follow rules themselves, but in a matter they feel is acceptable to not follow, thats all. In this case, The OP feels it's fine to bend the no liquor rile, so who is it really hurting.

 

Boils down to how illogical it is for one to say "you can't break this rule, but I can brake this other rule and that's just fine."

 

Double standard.

Edited November 9, 2014 by cle-guy

[miched]

This wasn't a lecture, it was my opinion.

 

This was in reply to someone who claimed to have not gone against any cruise ship rule ever, and then asked if it was OK for them to cast judgement on others.

 

In earlier post I basically said only people who've never done the wrong thing can really say how bad it is to go around the bring on board rules. And I stick to that. Logically I don't see how one can complain about one person not following a rule, then go and not follow rules themselves, but in a matter they feel is acceptable to not follow, thats all. In this case, The OP feels it's fine to bend the no liquor rile, so who is it really hurting.

 

Boils down to how illogical it is for one to say "you can't break this rule, but I can brake this other rule and that's just fine."

 

Double standard.

 

You just can't win.

 

The only person that never broke any rules was crucified. I don't want to end up like that so I make sure that I break a rule every now and then.

 

Happy cruising 🌊🚢🇺🇸🌅

[DYKWIA]

". I think it is sanctimonious to make such comments about people who are against deliberately breaking the rules. :rolleyes:

 

Is this triple sanctimony?

 

Aren't you been sanctimonious in your comment about his supposed sanctimonious behaviour in drawing the attention of others sanctimonious behaviour?n:D

[BayAreaBC]

This thread is basically a rerun which has been shown a thousand times.

 

Smuggle if you want but don't complain if you are caught.

 

The end.

[DirtyDawg]

This thread is basically a rerun which has been shown a thousand times.

 

Smuggle if you want but don't complain if you are caught.

 

The end.

 

Definitely a rerun. But a bit more civil than most. ;)

 

And I second"Smuggle if you want but don't complain if you are caught."

 

But then again, I'm not a RCL shareholder.:D

[blindrid]

Is this triple sanctimony?

 

Aren't you been sanctimonious in your comment about his supposed sanctimonious behaviour in drawing the attention of others sanctimonious behaviour?n:D

 

Huh????....;).

 

Thanks for the clarification???

Edited November 10, 2014 by blindrid

[capecodmercury]

Buy 2 bottles of cheap wine, drain the bottles and refill with booze. Reseal using heat shrink caps found on Amazon.com. Walk on like you normally would carrying the bottles.

 

I drink beer/cider (and the wife wine) so I don't use this method (I buy packages anyway), but there is no reason why it wouldn't work. It it does just don't brag about it!

 

I only know about this equipment because I have homebrewed in the past, and my parents have made wine.

 

That's no fun. Why not get two reasonable bottles of wine, enjoy them and then use those bottles. Throwing away good alcohol. Outrageous!;)

[cle-guy]

delete

Edited November 10, 2014 by cle-guy

[Balloon Man]

An interesting point of law is raised by this subject. Not that cruise lines have a right to take hard liquor from you but as to whether they should return it at the end of the voyage.

 

In the UK they would be guilty of theft. Our definition of theft is (briefly) to permanently deprive somebody of their property. Destroying their booze would seem to fit this description. And of course the carrier's terms and conditions etc. do not over ride the law of the land.

 

Whether theft has a similar definition under other legal jurisdictions is something I can't comment on, but it's a pretty simple definition that is probably in use world-wide.

 

So Celebrity could be guilty of a criminal offence and the officer destroying the booze guilty of aiding and abetting. Would they be allowed back in the USA with a criminal record? :confused:

[cle-guy]

An interesting point of law is raised by this subject. Not that cruise lines have a right to take hard liquor from you but as to whether they should return it at the end of the voyage.

 

In the UK they would be guilty of theft. Our definition of theft is (briefly) to permanently deprive somebody of their property. Destroying their booze would seem to fit this description. And of course the carrier's terms and conditions etc. do not over ride the law of the land.

 

Whether theft has a similar definition under other legal jurisdictions is something I can't comment on, but it's a pretty simple definition that is probably in use world-wide.

 

So Celebrity could be guilty of a criminal offence and the officer destroying the booze guilty of aiding and abetting. Would they be allowed back in the USA with a criminal record? :confused:

 

I'm guessing there may be Liquor laws involved for ships that justify it.

 

Or the rule of law would say the person who owns the goods has the ability to follow the policy, or not board the ship and keep their goods of they do not want their goods confiscated and not returned. The passenger in 100% of those cases, will board the ship and allow their goods to be destroyed instead of keeping the $40 bottle of booze and not boarding I imagine.

 

However using your theory, if one tries to get they Heathrow Airport security with a bottle of booze, when liquids are disallowed by policy, is the airport security expected to maintain that bottle of booze in a safe storage for the next time the passenger comes back to claim it - what length of time should be required? Indefinite?

 

And another point on your definition, if police confiscate drugs from a person, are they then required to give them back at some point, thus avoid permanently depriving someone of their goods? Or weapons?

 

When understanding law, one needs to read the whole book of law, not just pull a single piece out. Kilely there are chapters and chapters of exceptions and nuances beyond the simple definition of theft.

Edited November 10, 2014 by cle-guy

[Balloon Man]

Your first two sentences are guesswork whereas I prefer fact, though I agree I would rather give permission for my bottle of liquor to be destroyed than be denied boarding.

 

However you have failed to understand the difference between policy and law. It isn't Heathrow's policy that stops people boarding with banned goods, it's the law. And if drugs are proscribed by law then obviously the police do not have to return them. Common sense?

 

When commenting on the law I suggest guesswork is a poor - possible dangerous - alternative to fact. I admit my lack of knowledge of the law in other jurisdictions but I'm reasonably certain that "exceptions and nuances" do not permit theft.

[DirtyDawg]

I'm guessing there may be Liquor laws involved for ships that justify it.

 

Or the rule of law would say the person who owns the goods has the ability to follow the policy, or not board the ship and keep their goods of they do not want their goods confiscated and not returned. The passenger in 100% of those cases, will board the ship and allow their goods to be destroyed instead of keeping the $40 bottle of booze and not boarding I imagine.

 

However using your theory, if one tries to get they Heathrow Airport security with a bottle of booze, when liquids are disallowed by policy, is the airport security expected to maintain that bottle of booze in a safe storage for the next time the passenger comes back to claim it - what length of time should be required? Indefinite?

 

And another point on your definition, if police confiscate drugs from a person, are they then required to give them back at some point, thus avoid permanently depriving someone of their goods? Or weapons?

 

When understanding law, one needs to read the whole book of law, not just pull a single piece out. Kilely there are chapters and chapters of exceptions and nuances beyond the simple definition of theft.

 

Your Heathrow and police analogies are very different situations than a cruise line and it's passengers. Both Heathrow and the police are government agencies governed by the laws that created them as part of government. I.E. taking a bottle of booze on a plane or possessing drugs is illegal and there are laws that allow government agencies to seize those items. Smuggling booze onto a cruise ship is not illegal, it is simply the breaking a contract made between two private entities, the cruise line and it's passenger. Any seizure of private property by any other private entity would have to be somehow addressed in specific laws or by the contract between those parties. There might be a law that allows Cruise ships to seize and destroy their passengers' private property. Who knows, there are some weird and wonderful maritime laws out there. Heck the British Navy used to be able to seize private citizens right off the streets and not return them. :eek:

[DirtyDawg]

Your first two sentences are guesswork whereas I prefer fact, though I agree I would rather give permission for my bottle of liquor to be destroyed than be denied boarding.

 

However you have failed to understand the difference between policy and law. It isn't Heathrow's policy that stops people boarding with banned goods, it's the law. And if drugs are proscribed by law then obviously the police do not have to return them. Common sense?

 

When commenting on the law I suggest guesswork is a poor - possible dangerous - alternative to fact. I admit my lack of knowledge of the law in other jurisdictions but I'm reasonably certain that "exceptions and nuances" do not permit theft.

 

Further to my previous post there is probably some wording in the cruise contract that allows the seizure of booze by the cruise ship and/or some weird maritime law. But please go ahead and test this out on your next cruise. If they don't return your seized booze call a 'bobby' (that's a policeman on this side of the pond;)) and see what they say. I'll bet you that bottle that they tell you that it's a dispute between yourself and the cruise ship and work it out yourselves.