RCCL New Smoking Policy Discussion (merged)

[Captain Jake]

And you have the right to walk everywhere and not drive your car and inflict a health risk as well....you choose.

 

When are non-smokers going to get off their hypocritical mentality? They act as if they don't cause any health risks themselves.

 

I challenge every non-smoker to put their actions where their mouths are, start walking to your cruises...don't drive and don't fly....because these two methods of transportation are a health hazard to everyone..including Mother Earth(its been proven already). Just remember, while you are walking to your cruise, I'll be passing you in my Hummer while smoking a cigarette and listening to my favorite cruise music. ;)

 

Fausto

 

Give me a break.You must be desperate if all you come up with a rebuttle is this nonsense.Now I'll quit driving and flying if you do.I got the ball rolling by not smoking .It seems like you are one step behine.Now get going you have some catching up to do before you call anyone a hypocrite

[bluejeans]

Sorry to say I smoke. BUT, my question is I just never liked the taste of alcohol. So, I do not drink. I'd love to know why do people drink? Does it give them a high? Can't they have fun without drinking on the ship. What upsets me is when the ships open some bars at 9a.m. To me, this is for drunks. We know the ship makes MONEY from this, but I can't understand what drinking does for people. My addiction/high is smoking. What about drinkers? Just curious. How come drinking does not fall under their vitality/wellness program?

 

But, this doesn't affect anyone but the drinker, that is what the non-smoker would say.

But you are right, if they are indeed pushing the healthy lifestyle onto their customers, this should be right up there with limiting the smoking space. Wow, seems to me they have a problem only with smokers.

[DC2OC]

Well there's a compromise! So you're saying the smokers have no rights and the non-smokers have ALL the rights? So much for freedom.....

 

From what I've seen on this thread, as well as the numerous other "smoking vs. non-smoking" threads, it seems the smokers are the ones MOST willing to compromise, because we just want OUR OWN SPACE to smoke (our cabins and balconies, that we're paying the same thousands of dollars for you are) while you non-smokers don't think we shoud be allowed to smoke ANYWHERE. Heck, some go so far as to say we shouldn't even be allowed to smoke in our own cars or homes for pete's sake! COMPROMISE...look it up in the dictionary, then revisit with the meaning, not your opinion of what compromise SHOULD mean. I would gladly stay in my cabin and ONLY in my cabin (and/or balcony) to smoke if that were the only place I could smoke, but that's not good enough because I just might offend someone 4 decks higher and 200 feet forward of my location with my "puffing":rolleyes:

 

Again, as it was said earlier.....to us smokers, RCCL has gone too far, and to you non-smokers, they haven't gone far enough. SO, as I said, let them find a FAIR compromise that will appease all-but in order for that to happen, there HAS to be give and take on BOTH sides, not one side gets their way and the other just has to deal with it.....:mad:

 

The non-smokers want their space to be smoke free and most correctly feel they need not compromise on this right.Smokers have a right to smoke in their space.I have no problem with that.Where RCL did not go far enough was in providing balconies where both sides can have it their way.There should be bars for smoking and non-smoking,but the tie has to go to the non-smoker because afterall the non-smokers right smoke free space overrides the smokers right to smoke.Heck,my smoking friends agree with this

[Captain Jake]

For the exact same reason you shouldn't have any special right NOT to smoke there I guess.....touche'

 

 

Apparently, the opinions on this topic only belong to those who do not smoke, because those of us that DO smoke are the ones being told we don't have rights, we set fires, we are just BAD, BAD, ROTTEN, people....and by golly all those who don't smoke are just perfect angels who don't do anything ever that could be construed as offensive to others...so I'll leave this thread to all of you who's poo doesn't stink, but I'll still smoke on my balcony as long as the rules allow, and if you don't like it, well then I would suggest staying in forward, or inside cabins....because, by God, it's YOUR RIGHT!:rolleyes:

 

Talk about blowing things out.Most folks know nobody's perfect.No one said smokers are rotton,Non-smokers are angels.Non-smokers just want smoke free space and will demand and with the changes RCL is listening.RCL is in fact putting in restrictions one step at a time.2009 will bring in more welcomed steps.More will come in 2010 and since I booking a balcony cruise for this year and another booked for 2009 I guess I'm willing to live with the way things are.I'm sure I'll book a balcony for 2008.I'm also willing to bet on each cruise RCL or X will be making more healthy changes.Its something you'll have to learn to live with.I love the direction things are going.We just need to move them along a bit faster

[DON M.]

Now back to the "press release". A cruise co. wants me to make a new years resolution while selling cig. in the gift shop for $18.00 a carton, come and get them before we sell out. And, I have big brother telling me every day about "wellness and vitality" I dont need them to. Just state it was by popular demand (P.C.) and a possible fire hazzard and leave it at that.

[Captain Jake]

But, this doesn't affect anyone but the drinker, that is what the non-smoker would say.

But you are right, if they are indeed pushing the healthy lifestyle onto their customers, this should be right up there with limiting the smoking space. Wow, seems to me they have a problem only with smokers.

 

 

By golly am I missing something? Does drinking cause a health risk for the person on the next bar stool? Besides folks on this thread are saying the drinker is more likely to be a smoker:cool:

[cincicruisers]

I personally dont care either way on the smoking... In all the cruises I have been on I have never encountered a rude smoker or someone who is smoking in an area where they should not. I usually get a balcony and I have not had a bunch of smoke there or any smells in the cabin.

I agree with the non smoking cabins b/c hotels seem to hold the smell and over time no matter what they did to clean it would smell up the cabins.

 

Can't we all just get along?

[vator90]

I would like to caution the nonsmokers who are cheering so wildly over these descisions. As they are market driven to accomodate not only the cruisers but the shareholders as well. Considering the number of "idiots overboard" I can see the day when the cruiselines say "enough". If they say they are going to limit the number of drinks a person can order in a day, to reduce the risk of a person overboard, will you still not feel as though your freedom has been trampled upon? If they claim that in the new vein of "wellness" they are going to limit and re-work the menu to serve only healthy low fat, low salt meals will you not feel slighted? With the cost of food rising almost daily I can see them justifying a budget minded menu in some fashion or another. In the same vein, if they will be closing some bars that maybe you frequent, so they can expand the exercise and workout areas will you accept this as a change in the times?Yes, I will conceed that one smoker probably started the fire on Princess last year. But, will you then conceed that the ships have had to make numerous search and resue missions in the last year alone to retrieve a drunk who fell overboard has risen dramaticly? Also the Exxon Valdeze wasn't run aground in Alaska by a captain who had smoke in his eyes, he had booze for breakfast. The number of claims about unwanted physical contact being reported is a factor as well. If a drunk or anyone else who is being careless goes overboard you can't just move to another part of the ship. So, to say that peoples alcohol consumption only affects the drinker is ludicrous at best. Lets be true to ourselves for a moment, how many people come back from a cruise with a little more of themselves than when they left? Lets be realistic, the cruiselines are in business to show a profit, and when something you do is no longer profitable, they will adapt and change. As so many have stated on here the shareholders rights must be accounted for. Once you begin to trample on the freedoms of others, don't be so sure that your freedoms aren't next. So before you hoist your soymilk lattes giving cudos to the cruiselines, just bear in mind, your vice may be next.

[cruisinMike]

Well, until then, let's just enjoy the moment. ;)

[Mark_K]

By golly am I missing something? Does drinking cause a health risk for the person on the next bar stool? Besides folks on this thread are saying the drinker is more likely to be a smoker:cool:

I'd guess the probabity that the drink will fall over and injure you is at least equal to the probably that you're going to suffer any injuries from a few minutes of second hand smoke.

[rsscaptain]

Once you begin to trample on the freedoms of others, don't be so sure that your freedoms aren't next.

 

;) ;) ;)

 

This made the most sense to me. I think that's how many non smokers feel as well. I want the freedom to not be subjected to smoke, past or present in my cabin, and in all public places. I'm all for a compromise on the subject if I can be protected and not subjected to unwanted smoke.

 

I would be willing to kindly work out an arrangement on the balcony with a neighbor that smokes. Or agree to have one side of the ship smoking and one side non. RCCL must just not want to deal with the wear and tear of the rooms. ???

 

As it stands now it seems smokers are feeling that the balcony compromise may not likely happen, and in all honesty I can understand their reluctance as their backs are up against the wall.

 

Hey this is a very RULE oriented board. If the rules state that smokers can do so on their balconies then so be it.

 

Peace!:)

 

I don't really know of course.

[cruisinMike]

I'd guess the probabity that the drink will fall over and injure you is at least equal to the probably that you're going to suffer any injuries from a few minutes of second hand smoke.

 

I guess, then, RCCL will kill two birds with one stone if they ban smoking in all public indoor areas since someone has stated smokers spend more money at the bar. One, they'll stop that odor that somehow transcends a room and stays with your clothes, and two, reduce the chances of a drunk going overboard or knocking a drink over on someone else....oops. ;)

[Captain Jake]

I'd guess the probabity that the drink will fall over and injure you is at least equal to the probably that you're going to suffer any injuries from a few minutes of second hand smoke.

 

 

:p I would guess there would be a better chance of me winning Mega bucks or Power Ball than that being true

[Karshrimp]

What a great laugh to a great day!!!!

Thanks for that, I needed it.

My insurance also pays for the getty up pill, but won't pay for the new pill to quit smoking. Go figure!!!!!!

Many people at work have tried to quit smoking unsuccessfully, and would love to try it, but can't afford it.

 

The Bad News: Because of insurance not covering Chantix, my husband and I had to do it one person at a time. You are suppose to take it for 3 months. At a cost of $120 per person a month, I took it for 3 months, and then it was his turn. ;)

The Good News: After 35+ years of smoking each, we both quit though!! :D More money now for cruising!!

[Mark_K]

:p I would guess there would be a better chance of me winning Mega bucks or Power Ball than that being true

Especially if you don't buy tickets.

 

But the fact is that while smoke, first or second hand, is smelly and disgusting, the studies that show actual adverse health risks relate to people with significant exposure over a length of time. e.g. people who work in places that allow smoking, family members of smokers. The adverse health effects of short term, infrequent exposures are so small as to be completely unmeasurable.

[crystalblue0610]

That doesn't sound bad at all. The majority of the staterooms onboard are balconies so just step out on the balcony....don't smokers like blowing the smoke in the air anyway

[vjmatty]

Especially if you don't buy tickets.

 

But the fact is that while smoke, first or second hand, is smelly and disgusting, the studies that show actual adverse health risks relate to people with significant exposure over a length of time. e.g. people who work in places that allow smoking, family members of smokers. The adverse health effects of short term, infrequent exposures are so small as to be completely unmeasurable.

 

I have wondered about this too.... what is the rate of lung cancer from second hand smoke for those who do NOT either live or work in a smoke-filled environment, i.e. cruisers walking through a casino over a 5-7 day period three or four times per year?

[rakes5]

Of 10 cruises, I have had only one bad experience, but one is one too many. We were on a 14 day Hawaii cruise, with 10 days at sea, and heavy smokers on both sides. The balcony was simply unusable.

 

In the press release, they stated that on some ships, smoking would still be allowed on deck on the Starboard side.

 

Why not make the entire Port side non-smoking, including rooms and balconies??? Then it will be like a restaurant, where you can wait longer for non-smoking, or take a chance in the smoking section. Not everyone in the smoking area smokes, but no one in the non smoking should.

[MaryZ]

;) ;) ;)

 

I would be willing to kindly work out an arrangement on the balcony with a neighbor that smokes.

 

 

The arrangement has already been made. RCCL says smoke on the balcony.

[Mark_K]

Of 10 cruises, I have had only one bad experience, but one is one too many. We were on a 14 day Hawaii cruise, with 10 days at sea, and heavy smokers on both sides. The balcony was simply unusable.

 

In the press release, they stated that on some ships, smoking would still be allowed on deck on the Starboard side.

 

Why not make the entire Port side non-smoking, including rooms and balconies??? Then it will be like a restaurant, where you can wait longer for non-smoking, or take a chance in the smoking section. Not everyone in the smoking area smokes, but no one in the non smoking should.

There aren't enough smokers to do a side and their goal is to sell out the ship.

[Mark_K]

I have wondered about this too.... what is the rate of lung cancer from second hand smoke for those who do NOT either live or work in a smoke-filled environment, i.e. cruisers walking through a casino over a 5-7 day period three or four times per year?

Don't know, but I would guess that spending a week in the relatively clean air of the ocean areas and walking though the casino a few times a day is better for you than living in a big city and never going anywhere near second hand tobacco smoke.

[charlesjoy]

as well as the inconvinience placed on the hotel when the place is sold out and all you have is smoking rooms for non smoking guests. I work for a company that owns 4 hotels here in Southern California...3 of the 4 are completly non smoking

 

We never have problem getting a smoking hotel room. But hey this is Texas, haven't been to California lately.

[Jhawktx]

Smokers would like people to believe second hand smoke is not dangerous to non-smokers. It is dangerous to non-smokers. 3,400 lung cancer deaths per year to non-smokers from second hand smoke. mHere are some articles about it:

 

Second-hand smoke

 

Secondhand Smoke Fact Sheet - American Lung Association site

 

ACS :: Secondhand Smoke

[DON M.]

Smokers would like people to believe second hand smoke is not dangerous to non-smokers. It is dangerous to non-smokers. 3,400 lung cancer deaths per year to non-smokers from second hand smoke. mHere are some articles about it:

 

Second-hand smoke

 

Secondhand Smoke Fact Sheet - American Lung Association site

 

ACS :: Secondhand Smoke

 

Read this in case you missed it in your research of finding articles other than what support your view. http://www.davewitt.com/facts/index.html

Also, if you believe the EPA, 25,000 lung cancer deaths are caused by Radon Gas. Have you had your house tested?

[DON M.]

I have wondered about this too.... what is the rate of lung cancer from second hand smoke for those who do NOT either live or work in a smoke-filled environment, i.e. cruisers walking through a casino over a 5-7 day period three or four times per year?

 

It would be impossible for anyone to know the answer as to how much second-hand smoke contributes to lung cancer. Because, you have to factor in all of the other risk factors:diesel, radon, plutonium, asbestos, industrial waste, industrial poluution, workplace dust, vehicle emissions, perfumes and make up, diet, cooking fumes, natural gas, infection, genetics, cleaning agents, diet, physical inactivity, bacteria and viruses. Could it be just a coincidence that lung cancer deaths increased during the industrial revolution as smoking decreased?