Passport "confiscation"

[Heidi13]

5 hours ago, K32682 said:

 

I don't have to keep track of which countries require visitors to carry their passport and which ones do not. It is a lesser benefit of always carrying my passport when in foreign countries (U.S.A excepted.) 

This is standard practice when I plan any cruise and is completed when checking requirements for medications, Visas, etc.

 

Our next cruise visits over 50 ports and I believe the entire spreadsheet took about 2 hours. I also check requirements for both Canadian & UK passports, so definitely not an arduous process.

[K32682]

2 hours ago, SantaFeFan said:

 

Sorry for your challenges, but for many of us keeping track of which countries require visitors to carry their passports isn't difficult. We can actually walk and chew gum at the same time. 😁

 

And yet despite all your evident pride in having achieved simultaneous ambulation and mastication the simple challenge of securely carrying a passport is firmly beyond your grasp.    

   

Edited August 20, 2019 by K32682

[whogo]

It is a shame that we will never hear from all those cruisers who lost their passports and were therefore without a country and imprisoned or sold into slavery while their passports were used to traffic undesirables into their home countries.

[chipmaster]

10 minutes ago, whogo said:

It is a shame that we will never hear from all those cruisers who lost their passports and were therefore without a country and imprisoned or sold into slavery while their passports were used to traffic undesirables into their home countries.

 

Depending on who and what you believe maybe ~ 2%  lose their passports or have it stolen, but fret not you can get it replaced, just go here, read carefully and decide which side you like to be on with or w/o passport?

 

In the last fiscal year alone, the State Department reported 253,037 lost passports and 60,984 stolen worldwide. In 2011, there were more than 109 million valid United States passports.

 

At first it looks like not many, but how many people travel, not 109Million, do you feel un-lucky?

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/31/business/act-promptly-when-replacing-a-stolen-or-lost-passport.html?_r=4&pagewanted=all&

 

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/passports/after/lost-stolen.html

[SantaFeFan]

3 hours ago, K32682 said:

 

And yet despite all your evident pride in having achieved simultaneous ambulation and mastication the simple challenge of securely carrying a passport is firmly beyond your grasp.    

   

 

What challenge? If I don't need something, I don't carry it. I also don't carry a tent, cooking stove and gear, food, satellite phone, water purification tablets, hunting knife, or any number of other items just to protect me in very rare case I am become stranded ashore without an Uber nearby. Your "holier than thou" attitude has been tiresome for quite some time. Beating your dead-horse of an issue isn't making it any more valid. Must be a lot of work being the one-trick-pony that you are. Too bad you cling to your passport like 3 year old children cling to their Blankies. Most of us, however, have matured well past being so dependent on a thing. We have learned how to make reasonable decisions based on facts instead of living our lives in constant fear that a mysterious and elusive "something bad" will happen.  🙄

Edited August 20, 2019 by SantaFeFan

[CPT Trips]

6 hours ago, SantaFeFan said:

 

Sorry for your challenges, but for many of us keeping track of which countries require visitors to carry their passports isn't difficult. We can actually walk on water and chew gum at the same time. 😁

 

Fixed it for you . . . 😋🤓😎

[SantaFeFan]

9 minutes ago, CPT Trips said:

 

Fixed it for you . . . 😋🤓😎

 

You forgot to include "change water to wine" and "raise the dead". But I do understand and appreciate your envy. 😎

[CPT Trips]

Yo, I'm in the galley with the loaves and fishes and my passport safely stowed in the safe.

[ducklite]

On 8/19/2019 at 3:47 AM, SRF said:

 

Yes, some cities are known for pick pockets.  But as I have stated before on this forum, they are looking for money, so carry your passport in a different pocket than your money.

 

And in Europe, how far will you have to travel?  You can drive across most of Europe in a day.  And if in the Schengen zone, you don't have to have a passport.  But since you are in Europe, there is an Embassy in every country.  And the countries are NOT that large.

 

OK, so how many Consulates were closed in 82 - 97?  And I guess you might not know that a number of new Consulates (and I include Consulates General in that term) have been opened in the past few years.  It is based on need.  If they closed one, it was because it had too little traffic to justify the expense.

 

It takes more than a day to drive across Europe.  And you won't be able to rent a car without your passport.

[SantaFeFan]

2 hours ago, ducklite said:

 

It takes more than a day to drive across Europe.  And you won't be able to rent a car without your passport.

 

And for such PLANNED activities that require a passport, such as renting cars, checking into hotels during an overnight stay, etc., I would expect that the people who are smart enough to leave their passports secured in the safe are also quite smart enough to know to bring them for those special activities.

 

But thanks anyway for lecturing us on the obvious. 😏

Edited August 21, 2019 by SantaFeFan

[AmazedByCruising]

Double

 

Edited August 21, 2019 by AmazedByCruising

[AmazedByCruising]

On 8/19/2019 at 11:30 PM, Donald said:

If he finds his love in Vietnam and decides to stay there without informing Vietnamese Immigration, he will be an illegal alien if the ship leaves.

When an international cruise ship enters the waters of most countries, local immigration authorities grant a blanket visa to all the passengers and crew onboard. That visa is valid so long as the ship remains in port. The minute the ship departs, the visa is cancelled. Anyone who stays behind without informing immigration officials is an illegal alien.

Vietnam is different for some nationalities. They sell you a special visa for cruise ship passengers. But if you leave the ship in Vietnam without telling the authorities, the visa is invalid and you are illegally there.

 

And yes, the idea is to get the passenger out of the country more easily.

 

Thank you, again.

 

The way pax are handled in an airport ("in transit") and how we simply walk of a ship (except the exceptions, I remember vividly the grumpy Russians when visiting St Petersburg and I must admit we shouldn't have booked such an early excursion as I was even grumpier at 8AM) and then are expected to simply go away is huge. How did the cruise lines get such a deal with most countries? 

[Donald]

This special deal has been in place for several decades.

Most countries realize that the vast majority of cruise passengers are not actively trying to immigrate to the country the ship is visiting. Most just want to spend the day - and a wad of cash, before sailing away to the next country.

If the ports required face to face immigration inspections for each passenger on a 5,000 passenger ship, people would be standing in line so long that they would not have any time to go ashore to spend money.

Aside from that, many countries simply do not have the manpower to conduct comprehensive immigration checks on such large numbers.

If you investigate the history of cruising, the number of passengers intentionally "getting lost" while on a cruise is very low. If that situation changed, you would probably see a change in the procedures.

[K32682]

5 hours ago, SantaFeFan said:

 

What challenge? If I don't need something, I don't carry it. I also don't carry a tent, cooking stove and gear, food, satellite phone, water purification tablets, hunting knife, or any number of other items just to protect me in very rare case I am become stranded ashore without an Uber nearby. Your "holier than thou" attitude has been tiresome for quite some time. Beating your dead-horse of an issue isn't making it any more valid. Must be a lot of work being the one-trick-pony that you are. Too bad you cling to your passport like 3 year old children cling to their Blankies. Most of us, however, have matured well past being so dependent on a thing. We have learned how to make reasonable decisions based on facts instead of living our lives in constant fear that a mysterious and elusive "something bad" will happen.  🙄

Some people live in fear of thieves and absent mindedness and require a competent adult to hold their passports for them.  Others are sufficiently able to securely carry their essential documents without having to depend on someone else delivering them should the need arise.  Pick your category and conduct yourself accordingly.    

[sloopsailor]

24 minutes ago, K32682 said:

Some people live in fear of thieves and absent mindedness and require a competent adult to hold their passports for them.  Others are sufficiently able to securely carry their essential documents without having to depend on someone else delivering them should the need arise.  Pick your category and conduct yourself accordingly.    

 

Your ignorance shows in these posts accusing people of living in fear. We simply don't. And it is blatantly obvious that you don't have a clue how we live our lives, and are not adult enough to accept that we have our own preferences that work for us. It is all about convenience, not fear. But your mind is so stubbornly made up that you denigrate and insult anyone who doesn't follow your preferred methods. Not sure why you need to be such a jerk about people preferring to not carry around items they don't need. But you certainly act like one. If you were a decent human being, you would accept that smart people don't have to do it your way to be smart. In fact, many of us would argue that the smarter ones don't do as you do. 

 

Fear has nothing to do with it. Try to get that through your thick skull. 

Edited August 21, 2019 by sloopsailor

[AmazedByCruising]

1 hour ago, Donald said:

This special deal has been in place for several decades.

Most countries realize that the vast majority of cruise passengers are not actively trying to immigrate to the country the ship is visiting. Most just want to spend the day - and a wad of cash, before sailing away to the next country.

If the ports required face to face immigration inspections for each passenger on a 5,000 passenger ship, people would be standing in line so long that they would not have any time to go ashore to spend money.

Aside from that, many countries simply do not have the manpower to conduct comprehensive immigration checks on such large numbers.

If you investigate the history of cruising, the number of passengers intentionally "getting lost" while on a cruise is very low. If that situation changed, you would probably see a change in the procedures.

 

 

Of course most of the cruisers are on vacation and very welcome to come spend their money. So are most visitors coming by plane. The vast majority of people on planes don't carry cocaine. The vast majority of people on planes don't flush their passports. 5000 pax could be checked once when visiting Norway. Amsterdam airport had 200,000 people a day on average in 2018, it would be just an annoying "muster drill" in Oslo that you need to attend.

 

I mean, there's a huge difference between ships and planes for as it appears not much more than lawmakers thinking "these are people who even like formal nights, who cares. And there is a manifest and everything. Let them roam our country for a few seconds (ok, that's my pet peeve)  and they'll certainly be on board when the ship sails".

 

Anyway, did the lines or CLIA actually make such a deal with 190+ countries having ports visited, or wasn't there an actual deal and it just stayed the same as it was 50 years ago?

 

Edited August 21, 2019 by AmazedByCruising

[Donald]

23 minutes ago, AmazedByCruising said:

 

 

Of course most of the cruisers are on vacation and very welcome to come spend their money. So are most visitors coming by plane. The vast majority of people on planes don't carry cocaine. The vast majority of people on planes don't flush their passports. 5000 pax could be checked once when visiting Norway. Amsterdam airport had 200,000 people a day on average in 2018, it would be just an annoying "muster drill" in Oslo that you need to attend.

 

I mean, there's a huge difference between ships and planes for as it appears not much more than lawmakers thinking "these are people who even like formal nights, who cares. And there is a manifest and everything. Let them roam our country for a few seconds (ok, that's my pet peeve)  and they'll certainly be on board when the ship sails".

 

Anyway, did the lines or CLIA actually make such a deal with 190+ countries having ports visited, or wasn't there an actual deal and it just stayed the same as it was 50 years ago?

 

CLIA has nothing to do with it. Many countries see cruise ships and cruise passengers as the golden goose. They want to take as much advantage of cruise ship visits as possible. That explains why Canada and the USA agreed to allow US Immigration Officials to work in ports like Vancouver - pre-clearing passengers on cruises to Alaska, so they will not have to waste precious time going through immigration formalities once they arrive in Alaska. The sooner they get ashore, the sooner they start spending money.

Most countries do not have the same sunny opinion of airplanes and airplane passengers.

An airplane sends a manifest to the next airport just a few hours before it arrives, giving the authorities very little time to investigate any possible trouble-makers. A cruise ship sends a manifest several days before arrival, giving authorities much more time to look for and prevent trouble.

 

[AmazedByCruising]

35 minutes ago, Donald said:

CLIA has nothing to do with it. Many countries see cruise ships and cruise passengers as the golden goose. They want to take as much advantage of cruise ship visits as possible. That explains why Canada and the USA agreed to allow US Immigration Officials to work in ports like Vancouver - pre-clearing passengers on cruises to Alaska, so they will not have to waste precious time going through immigration formalities once they arrive in Alaska. The sooner they get ashore, the sooner they start spending money.

Most countries do not have the same sunny opinion of airplanes and airplane passengers.

An airplane sends a manifest to the next airport just a few hours before it arrives, giving the authorities very little time to investigate any possible trouble-makers. A cruise ship sends a manifest several days before arrival, giving authorities much more time to look for and prevent trouble.

 

 

The bolded part is exactly what I mean. While most people (the vast majority) on planes aren't trouble-makers, and most people on ships aren't trouble makers, the people on a ship don't need the TSA scanners and are free too roam almost everywhere. Only because they arrived by ship. That's a weird distinction. The bad guys can buy a cruise, too.

 

Re: manifest time, what would the authorities do with the extra time when the computer says "No problem" in 2 seconds? Interviewing the neighbours?  "You should know that ms X and mr Y are on a cruise. To Portugal. Your neighbours. Portugal! " Ain't nobody got time for that.

 

 

[SantaFeFan]

4 hours ago, K32682 said:

Some people live in fear of thieves and absent mindedness and require a competent adult to hold their passports for them.  Others are sufficiently able to securely carry their essential documents without having to depend on someone else delivering them should the need arise.  Pick your category and conduct yourself accordingly.    

 

You clearly are incapable of getting it. We don't fear losing our passports. And we don't fear being caught without it as you obsess about. We are motivated by not having to carry around something we don't need other than for predictable activities or the rare occasion where one is required to be on our person, occasions that can easily be planned for. Not sure why this simple concept is so difficult for you to accept. Your continued insults and insinuations that we incapable of taking care of ourselves and need to rely on others to protect our passports is asinine. You display your arrogance with nearly every post. Must be miserable to be you. Thank heaven the majority of us aren't as dysfunctional as you appear to be. 

Edited August 21, 2019 by SantaFeFan

[SRF]

9 hours ago, AmazedByCruising said:

 

I only remember St Petersburg having an actual border office that wanted to see a passport. I looked up how Amsterdam Airport handles "in transit" passengers which is quite similar to visiting a port in an 8 hour window (when lucky). https://insideflyer.nl/schiphol-central-security/ I haven't flown in 10 years so may be I misunderstand but this is what I gather. Pax on planes are certainly not allowed to go see windmills, tulips or the Rijksmuseum but are basically "locked up" till their next flight. The only reason not to go through full checks once again is when your flight to Amsterdam was "clean", meaning the airport relies on the previous airport which can only be in Schengen area, EU or US. 

 

In most countries, if you fly in from outside their country (or Schengen area) and you are departing on a flight to outside their country (or Schengen) you do not "enter" the country and your passport is not checked by immigration.  So fly US to AMS to say Moscow, you don't pass through immigration, you do not enter the Netherlands (or Schengen zone), and cannot go out and see windmills.

 

But fly US to AMS to Frankfurt (both Schengen), you will have to show your passport and you will enter the Schengen zone at the Amsterdam airport, and go to a separate section of the airport.  And you could go out and see windmills before your next flight.

 

The US is different.  You must go through immigration and customs at your first airport in the US, regardless of whether you will remain in the US or not.  So you fly AMS to JFK to Toronto, you will clear immigration and customs at JFK and again in Toronto.

 

One trip I flew from Africa to Brussels.  I cleared immigration and customs.  I flew to Vienna, then had to clear immigration again to catch my flight to Sofia, Bulgaria, where I cleared immigration and customs to enter BG.  Departing, clear immigration out of BG, then clear immigration into Schengen in Zurich, then to Brussels, where I cleared immigration out of Schengen, flew to the US where I cleared immigration and customs into the US.

 

When you cruise to a port, you "enter" that country.  But in most cases, immigration is handled by the cruise line providing the manifest, with citizenship and ID info on every passenger.  And since, when the ship leaves, everyone is on it, or they know exactly who is not, they have different requirements for "entry."

 

 

[SRF]

4 hours ago, AmazedByCruising said:

 

The bolded part is exactly what I mean. While most people (the vast majority) on planes aren't trouble-makers, and most people on ships aren't trouble makers, the people on a ship don't need the TSA scanners and are free too roam almost everywhere. Only because they arrived by ship. That's a weird distinction. The bad guys can buy a cruise, too.

 

Yes, and that is why all luggage, checked and carry on, is x-rayed.

 

TSA is not involved, as a cruise is not transportation.  But remember, before there was TSA, there was airport security.

 

And yes, cruise ships HAVE been hijacked.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achille_Lauro_hijacking

 

[K32682]

8 hours ago, SantaFeFan said:

 

You clearly are incapable of getting it. We don't fear losing our passports. And we don't fear being caught without it as you obsess about. We are motivated by not having to carry around something we don't need other than for predictable activities or the rare occasion where one is required to be on our person, occasions that can easily be planned for. Not sure why this simple concept is so difficult for you to accept. Your continued insults and insinuations that we incapable of taking care of ourselves and need to rely on others to protect our passports is asinine. You display your arrogance with nearly every post. Must be miserable to be you. Thank heaven the majority of us aren't as dysfunctional as you appear to be. 

 

There have been many times in my travel adventures when having a passport was very helpful and I've outlined those in this thread.  In fairness to those who feel otherwise perhaps my travels are more independent and interesting than theirs.  Perhaps their outlook is the result of primarily traveling on cruises or organized bus tours that more often resemble high school field trips than independent travel.  Some people are more comfortable being part of a herd than on their own.  

 

[capriccio]

28 minutes ago, K32682 said:

 

There have been many times in my travel adventures when having a passport was very helpful and I've outlined those in this thread.  In fairness to those who feel otherwise perhaps my travels are more independent and interesting than theirs.  Perhaps their outlook is the result of primarily traveling on cruises or organized bus tours that more often resemble high school field trips than independent travel.  Some people are more comfortable being part of a herd than on their own.  

 

 

Perhaps not!

[John Bull]

32 minutes ago, K32682 said:

 

There have been many times in my travel adventures when having a passport was very helpful and I've outlined those in this thread.  In fairness to those who feel otherwise perhaps my travels are more independent and interesting than theirs.  Perhaps their outlook is the result of primarily traveling on cruises or organized bus tours that more often resemble high school field trips than independent travel.  Some people are more comfortable being part of a herd than on their own.  

 

 

I figured some time ago that this deluded idiot has switched to playing the troll and trying to wind folk up..

It's been fun, but now you bore me.

 

JB 

[sloopsailor]

50 minutes ago, K32682 said:

 

There have been many times in my travel adventures when having a passport was very helpful and I've outlined those in this thread.  In fairness to those who feel otherwise perhaps my travels are more independent and interesting than theirs.  Perhaps their outlook is the result of primarily traveling on cruises or organized bus tours that more often resemble high school field trips than independent travel.  Some people are more comfortable being part of a herd than on their own.  

 

 

And right on queue, here he is posting more insulting innuendos to bolster his own frail ego. Predictable as always and obnoxious as on past posts. A legend in his own mind. 

 

The troll is strong in this one. 

Edited August 21, 2019 by sloopsailor