wine in carry on??

[Demonyte]

What's next? Banning playing cards from being brought aboard, or charging $15 to bring a deck aboard, because, well, if you want to play cards you really ought to be playing them in our casino at our odds?

 

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope

 

Nuff said.

Edited October 9, 2014 by Demonyte

[punkincc]

Yes, she was wrong and was arrested for breaking the law. I'd like to see the same thing happen to smugglers myself.

 

But you are free to boycott NCL to make your point if you so choose.

 

 

I don't know how this thread ever got on the topic of Rosa Parks, but she is the perfect example of a situation in which the rule was WRONG and the violation of said rule by her and others at that time was absolutely the RIGHT thing to do. And I think the history books agree with me.

 

Most people will follow the laws of the land most of the time whether we agree with them or not. But most of us have done 50 mph in a 45 mph zone on many occasions. Does that mean we are immoral characters? When it comes to complying with arbitrary rules, everyone will have to make their own decisions. I for one am not going to call someone a thief for skirting a rule on a cruise ship.

[conandrob240]

Oh, my. I also agree that NcLs rule on alcohol is stupid but to compare this situation to Rosa Parks and standing up for the rights of an entire race of people is pretty damned stupid.

[calex]

This is directly from the NCL website:

 

Wine & Champagne Policy

Guests may bring bottles of wine and champagne on board. When bottles are brought on board and served or consumed in any restaurant, public room area or in their stateroom, a corkage fee will be charged according to bottle sizes noted below.

 

750 ml Bottle: $15.00

1,500 ml Magnum: $30.00

 

Wine or champagne sent directly to the ship by travel agents, friends, family, etc. or from another retail source, are subject to the same fees. Box wines are not allowed on board.

 

* Norwegian encourages the responsible use of alcohol and accordingly reserves the right to permanently or temporarily revoke the drinking privileges of any guest who violates Norwegian's Guest Code of Conduct or who is deemed a danger to himself, herself or others by vessel management. Continued abuse of alcohol while sailing and/or

violation of Norwegian's alcohol policy may result in immediate disembarkation

.

 

I don't know how often they enforce this policy, but is it worth the RISK saving $15 per a bottle?

[punkincc]

This is directly from the NCL website:

 

Wine & Champagne Policy

Guests may bring bottles of wine and champagne on board. When bottles are brought on board and served or consumed in any restaurant, public room area or in their stateroom, a corkage fee will be charged according to bottle sizes noted below.

 

750 ml Bottle: $15.00

1,500 ml Magnum: $30.00

 

Wine or champagne sent directly to the ship by travel agents, friends, family, etc. or from another retail source, are subject to the same fees. Box wines are not allowed on board.

 

* Norwegian encourages the responsible use of alcohol and accordingly reserves the right to permanently or temporarily revoke the drinking privileges of any guest who violates Norwegian's Guest Code of Conduct or who is deemed a danger to himself, herself or others by vessel management. Continued abuse of alcohol while sailing and/or

violation of Norwegian's alcohol policy may result in immediate disembarkation

.

 

I don't know how often they enforce this policy, but is it worth the RISK saving $15 per a bottle?

 

Most of us know what the rules are. Although it may be within NCL's right to do so, I have never heard of anyone ever being taken off the ship for stowing alcohol in their suitcase. Has anyone else? It is just confiscated if liquor, or in the case of wine, I presume you are given the option of paying the fee or having it held until you leave the ship. Happens I'm sure multiple times every single cruise. Not worth the hassle to me, but I am not going to call someone who makes that judgement call another way a thief. Judge not, IMO.

[luddite]

There's no basis for it other than a money-grab.

 

Well, this isn't the case.

Part of the reason for the rule is to control some drinking. zzzzzz

Well,....excessive drinking.

[punkincc]

Well, this isn't the case.

Part of the reason for the rule is to control some drinking. zzzzzz

Well,....excessive drinking.

 

Huh?

 

So they provide a UBP package ( for a hefty fee, of course ;) ) which allows for unlimited drinks from daylight till dark? I don't get what you're saying?

[luddite]

Part and parcel of the ship's alcohol policies are so that THEY have a bit of control. UBP or not, they can cut you off at the bar.

[garycarla]

If you are too cheap to pay the $15 cocking fee, you shouldn't be cruising because it costs you $$$$ to go. Those who abuse the system are the ones ruining it for rule-abiding passengers. Get a grip please or just stay home.

 

Abusing the system?

 

Think. Think really deep.

 

You are saying that those that do not buy drinks, or pay a corkage fee are ABUSING the system. I am guessing your though is they are not giving NCL money for drinks. Right?

 

If that statement is true, then those that do not drink at all and do not buy drinks are also ABUSING the system. After all, they are NOT giving NCL any corkage fees, or buying any drinks, therefore SHORTING the cruise line.

 

Think it through.

[Out to sea!]

I don't know how this thread ever got on the topic of Rosa Parks, but she is the perfect example of a situation in which the rule was WRONG and the violation of said rule by her and others at that time was absolutely the RIGHT thing to do. And I think the history books agree with me.

 

Most people will follow the laws of the land most of the time whether we agree with them or not. But most of us have done 50 mph in a 45 mph zone on many occasions. Does that mean we are immoral characters? When it comes to complying with arbitrary rules, everyone will have to make their own decisions. I for one am not going to call someone a thief for skirting a rule on a cruise ship.

 

The poster in post #92 is the one who brought up Rosa parks. I will concede, the law (which was not right or wrong, it was just a law) was a bad law but that doesn't give anyone the right to break it. There are plenty of legal things that can be done to get laws changed without breaking them. Supposedly a boycott got that law changed. Why wasn't the boycott started without breaking the law? Do they think the outcome would have been different? Good or bad laws are no reason to go breaking them because who get's to decide whether a law is good or bad?

 

Does breaking a law or rule make one immoral? Not really because morals are not the issue. Integrity and honesty are the issues. I think I've made my thoughts know on those subjects concerning smugglers.

Edited October 10, 2014 by Out to sea!

[Out to sea!]

Most of us know what the rules are. Although it may be within NCL's right to do so, I have never heard of anyone ever being taken off the ship for stowing alcohol in their suitcase. Has anyone else? It is just confiscated if liquor, or in the case of wine, I presume you are given the option of paying the fee or having it held until you leave the ship. Happens I'm sure multiple times every single cruise. Not worth the hassle to me, but I am not going to call someone who makes that judgement call another way a thief. Judge not, IMO.

 

So what is a Judge supposed to do with his/her day? :p

[sparks1093]

Abusing the system?

 

Think. Think really deep.

 

You are saying that those that do not buy drinks, or pay a corkage fee are ABUSING the system. I am guessing your though is they are not giving NCL money for drinks. Right?

 

If that statement is true, then those that do not drink at all and do not buy drinks are also ABUSING the system. After all, they are NOT giving NCL any corkage fees, or buying any drinks, therefore SHORTING the cruise line.

 

Think it through.

 

I think that's at least the third time that you've brought this scenario up. If you can show me in the contract where anyone is obligated to spend a dime on board on anything then I might possibly see this POV, but since you cannot show me that we're back to this- a person that doesn't buy drinks has no contractual obligation to do so, a person that is smuggling booze on is violating the cruise contract. It is really that simple and I cannot understand how you can't see it.

[garycarla]

I think that's at least the third time that you've brought this scenario up. If you can show me in the contract where anyone is obligated to spend a dime on board on anything then I might possibly see this POV, but since you cannot show me that we're back to this- a person that doesn't buy drinks has no contractual obligation to do so, a person that is smuggling booze on is violating the cruise contract. It is really that simple and I cannot understand how you can't see it.

 

I would agree with you that this is in violation of the cruise contract. No argument there.

 

My issues were with people that say it is stealing, and depriving the cruise line of revenue.

[punkincc]

Does breaking a law or rule make one immoral? Not really because morals are not the issue. Integrity and honesty are the issues. I think I've made my thoughts know on those subjects concerning smugglers.

 

Are not integrity and honesty part and parcel of morality? Morality is defined as a persons standard of behavior or beliefs concerning what is and is not acceptable for them to do. Each has their own moral code, or code of ethics, or values.

 

So according to you, Rosa Parks should not have broken an egregiously bad law. Perhaps she felt that the segregation laws themselves were not moral or ethical. And if you go back and read history, you will find that this single act of bravery and defiance started a chain of events which led to the boycott and civil rights movement. She is great example of someone with plenty of morality, integrity and honesty even though, gasp, she actually broke a law.

 

So enough about Rosa. This issue is about an arbitrary cruise line rule set up to gain some extra revenue for the ship, and some who choose to ignore the rule and how some others here pass judgement on them. If doing what they do violates your principals and standards, then don't do it, and let others do as they see fit.

[Demonyte]

I would agree with you that this is in violation of the cruise contract. No argument there.

 

My issues were with people that say it is stealing, and depriving the cruise line of revenue.

 

Most people who carry their own wine onboard do it because they are planning to drink wine onboard. I have to agree that smuggling wine or liquor onboard really is "depriving the cruise line of revenue". There are always people not drinking at all to begin with but they wouldn't usually smuggle their wine oboard either.

[sparks1093]

I would agree with you that this is in violation of the cruise contract. No argument there.

 

My issues were with people that say it is stealing, and depriving the cruise line of revenue.

 

People don't have to drink but if they do they have to buy it from the cruise line. If they don't buy it from the cruise line but bring it themselves and consume it then they are depriving the cruise line of the revenue they are entitled to (yes, we are a captive audience in this regard).

 

If it didn't impact their revenue they wouldn't have the rule in the first place (Disney doesn't rely on bar sales for its profit and they allow people to bring liquor aboard). And finally, if you deprive someone of something of value that is rightfully theirs then that is stealing (it's not grand theft and not the end of the world and wouldn't get anyone locked up but it is what it is). I equate it to snacking on produce at the grocery store before it is weighed and paid for, it's just a few grapes (and I can guarantee you the grocery store calls that stealing).

[newbe dave]

I agree with you totally and I am amazed at the glee with which some here are quick to label some as thieves.

 

This is the exact problem with a couple posts here. I stated that I have paid corkage on all bottles of wine I have ever brought on board. Then the "Gladys Kravitz's" on this blog call me names and make false accusations. And I am returning the favor.

 

My position is that by NCL or their port agents having their "Barney Fife" run over and grab my bag immediately out of the scanner as if it was going to explode may be unproductive. I was told to be quiet as I was telling them how many bottles I had with me. "Barney" did not want any help with his high powered job. There is an easier way for this process and that was my point.

 

I just hope these loud mouths on this blog never leave their deck chair more than 30 minutes, never reserve a theater chair for any amount of time, never skip a washy washy station, never budge in line at the buffet and never, ever take a picture when there is a photographer or any art work present.

 

Have a great day. I have to go find hiding places in my carry on so that Barney has something to do later this month as I board.

Edited October 10, 2014 by newbe dave

[cruzsnooze]

After I pay the corkage fee how do I send it to the dining room for use at dinner? When we don't finish the bottle will they keep it chilled for another night?

[garycarla]

...And finally, if you deprive someone of something of value that is rightfully theirs then that is stealing (it's not grand theft and not the end of the world and wouldn't get anyone locked up but it is what it is). I equate it to snacking on produce at the grocery store before it is weighed and paid for, it's just a few grapes (and I can guarantee you the grocery store calls that stealing).

 

If I steal a grape, it is stealing. Who here would not think that is stealing? Of course it is stealing. The grocer paid for those grapes and is not getting money back for it.

 

So, what is it that is being stolen from the cruise line?

[Shawnino]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope

 

Nuff said.

 

Yeah, except we actually did that in colonial Canada.

[sparks1093]

If I steal a grape, it is stealing. Who here would not think that is stealing? Of course it is stealing. The grocer paid for those grapes and is not getting money back for it.

 

So, what is it that is being stolen from the cruise line?

 

There are a lot of people that would not consider eating the grape stealing. The cruise line has the right to the revenue from all alcohol consumed on board and if you bring you own alcohol in violation of the policy then that's lost revenue to the cruise line. So if someone brings a liter of rum on board and their profit margin for a liter of rum for drinks sold through the bar is $100 that is what is being taken from them. If someone bring on a bottle of wine and doesn't pay the corkage then that is $15 that is being taken from them. Yes, we are a captive audience. Yes, they have a monopoly on booze. It doesn't matter, they are entitled to that revenue.

 

I have the same debate with one of my sons regarding pirated movies. He says watching a pirated movie isn't stealing because no one is losing anything "I wouldn't go watch it in a theater anyway so what difference does it make". The producers and theaters have a right to the revenue generated from everyone watching the movie and obviously if someone isn't paying for watching the movie that is a loss to them.

[Demonyte]

After I pay the corkage fee how do I send it to the dining room for use at dinner? When we don't finish the bottle will they keep it chilled for another night?

 

 

Just hand it over in any restaurant or bar. They can take unfinished bottles and keep them too. You'll get a receipt and can give that in any restaurant or bar and they will get your bottle back to you.

[cruzsnooze]

Just hand it over in any restaurant or bar. They can take unfinished bottles and keep them too. You'll get a receipt and can give that in any restaurant or bar and they will get your bottle back to you.

 

Thank you for responding.

[Out to sea!]

I would agree with you that this is in violation of the cruise contract. No argument there.

 

My issues were with people that say it is stealing, and depriving the cruise line of revenue.

 

You'e right, those are stupid arguments. But so are all of the rationalizations used by smugglers.

[Out to sea!]

Are not integrity and honesty part and parcel of morality? Morality is defined as a persons standard of behavior or beliefs concerning what is and is not acceptable for them to do. Each has their own moral code, or code of ethics, or values.

 

So according to you, Rosa Parks should not have broken an egregiously bad law. Perhaps she felt that the segregation laws themselves were not moral or ethical. And if you go back and read history, you will find that this single act of bravery and defiance started a chain of events which led to the boycott and civil rights movement. She is great example of someone with plenty of morality, integrity and honesty even though, gasp, she actually broke a law.

 

So enough about Rosa. This issue is about an arbitrary cruise line rule set up to gain some extra revenue for the ship, and some who choose to ignore the rule and how some others here pass judgement on them. If doing what they do violates your principals and standards, then don't do it, and let others do as they see fit.

 

IMO, no, honesty and integrity are not the same as morals. Honesty is black and white (and again IMO so is integrity). Morals are acquired by where one grows up, what nationality they are and so forth and therefore differ depending where you are.

 

I know what Rosa Parks thought. They way she went about trying to correct a bad law is what is wrong. There are legal ways to do things and illegal ways to do things. She decided to choose and illegal way when if it meant that much to her she should have organized a legal way. They could have had the same boycott and probably achieved the same results without violating the law.

 

The rule is not arbitrary. It is a rule set in place for a certain reason by a privately owned company. Said company has no requirement to disseminate said reasoning to it's customers, only to make said customers knowledgeable of the rules and enforce them. Your legal options are to follow the rules or don't cruise with said company. By violating the rules one stated they understood and agreed to comply with (when you booked said cruise), said person created a breech of honesty (same around the world) and integrity (at least in this country and most others).