DeSantis nearing compromise on cruise vaccination requirements

[Wanna_Cruize]

This quote was interesting: 

 

"We're going to make sure that we open some cabin categories. We closed some cabin categories. We are going to make sure that 95 percent of our guests are vaccinated. That is on us, not you. But you know, you can trust me. You can trust this brand. We will go out at ninety five percent vaccinated on our ships."

 

I wonder if it could be something like passengers who do not offer proof of vaccination will be tested at the port and then those that pass are put on a 'wait list' at the terminal for all the vaccinated passengers. Then allow people on the wait list to board until they reach the mandated 5% threshold, and then send everyone else home.

[cscurlock]

1 hour ago, Saint Greg said:

I don’t understand how they can say they’re going to be 95% vaccinated when they don’t know how many of their guests are going to show up without a vaccination card. What if it’s 20%? Then you’re only 80% vaccinated.

I believe once they reach the 5% of people not providing their vaccination card after than if you don't show proof of vaccination you will not be allowed to board.  That way they can insure the 95%.

[Saint Greg]

3 minutes ago, cscurlock said:

I believe once they reach the 5% of people not providing their vaccination card after than if you don't show proof of vaccination you will not be allowed to board.  That way they can insure the 95%.

Talk about some really ticked off people. Pay for flight, hotel, transportation, cruise, then turned away because they reached 5%. Announce that as a possibility and you’ll get the cancellations you need.

[cscurlock]

7 minutes ago, Saint Greg said:

Talk about some really ticked off people. Pay for flight, hotel, transportation, cruise, then turned away because they reached 5%. Announce that as a possibility and you’ll get the cancellations you need.

I think that is their way of saying.  You might want to get vaccinated or be one of the first people on board.  Good luck.  Oh and if you do make it on, your experience is really going to SUCK.  You have expensive testing before boarding.  Expensive testing to get off at ports and get on at ports plus you will be among the few that need to wear a mask.  Yeah what a dream vacation LOL.

Edited June 9, 2021 by cscurlock

[Wanna_Cruize]

And if Platinum/Diamonds board first, and or/wedding guests, will they might reach 5% right there.

[firefly333]

6 hours ago, cruisingguy007 said:

 Or make it such pain in the arse for unvaccinated that the problem naturally works itself out. 

That's how I took it. As soon as a carnival pax was told they had to pay a unknown amount at the pier for a test to board, they would have canc .. oh look a family of 4 x 4 tests .. canc. Move that cruise into 2022 or 2023. I'm not paying extra. And the sorry if you aren't vaccinated you might not be let off in port. And let's have a special area the unvaccinated cant go on the shop. Problem takes care of itself on carnival at these rates. .

[basil's mom]

As much as some members would like the unvaccinated to be burdened with testing at the pier ( and perhaps have their foreheads stamped with a big scarlet “C”), I don’t think that’s going to happen because (1) there are too many false negatives with the speed test and (2) even if you had the vaccine you can still get the virus.  The more effective test takes days to get results and the cruise line is not going to insist every single passenger get tested at the pier that far in advance.  
 

i am sure there are many attorneys who would be willing to represent the passengers who were denied boarding or treated differently.

[ontheweb]

11 hours ago, ouse456 said:

 Based on my own current yearning to hit the high seas, my bet is that if the Florida law stands,most passengers will grudgingly getting vaccinated. 

 

Most passengers will probably be happy that they are vaccinated, thankful for the scientists who made this possible. Maybe there will be a few who do this grudgingly.

[Aplmac]

11 hours ago, cruisingguy007 said:

 Or make it such pain in the arse for un-vaccinated

that the problem naturally works itself out. 

 

^ Exactly.

 

The grim reality is that, sooner or later, we ALL have to get the shot!

So stop messing about with silly "individual rights and liberties"

and let's got on with the job!

 

Fer cryin out loud, even wimpish Mona Lisa got hers.

 

[TNcruising02]

5 hours ago, firefly333 said:

That's how I took it. As soon as a carnival pax was told they had to pay a unknown amount at the pier for a test to board, they would have canc .. oh look a family of 4 x 4 tests .. canc. Move that cruise into 2022 or 2023. I'm not paying extra. And the sorry if you aren't vaccinated you might not be let off in port. And let's have a special area the unvaccinated cant go on the shop. Problem takes care of itself on carnival at these rates. .

That is true and they have probably already flushed a lot of those people into rebooking with all of the flip flopping.

[Lee Cruiser]

2 hours ago, Aplmac said:

 

^ Exactly.

 

The grim reality is that, sooner or later, we ALL have to get the shot!

So stop messing about with silly "individual rights and liberties"

and let's got on with the job!

Sorry, I absolutely do not agree with that! There is no reason that everyone should ever be forced to take the vaccine. If that happens we may as well throw the constitution in the garbage and say goodbye to our country. 

[MissyKish]

13 minutes ago, Lee Cruiser said:

Sorry, I absolutely do not agree with that! There is no reason that everyone should ever be forced to take the vaccine. If that happens we may as well throw the constitution in the garbage and say goodbye to our country. 

I am no Constitutional Scholar. But I just cannot find anything about Covid Vaccines in it. 

[Lee Cruiser]

19 minutes ago, MissyKish said:

I am no Constitutional Scholar. But I just cannot find anything about Covid Vaccines in it. 

You might want to read the bill of rights again. Also, check the 14th amendment.  It's called right to privacy. It's where the courts found other liberties that aren't spelled out.

 

Edited June 9, 2021 by Lee Cruiser

[chengkp75]

25 minutes ago, Lee Cruiser said:

If that happens we may as well throw the constitution in the garbage and say goodbye to our country. 

I guess we should have thrown out the Constitution way back in 1905, when SCOTUS ruled in Jacobson v Massachusetts that:

 

Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld the authority of states to enforce compulsory vaccination laws. The Court's decision articulated the view that individual liberty is not absolute and is subject to the police power of the state.  (bolding of text is mine)

[jfunk138]

Just now, chengkp75 said:

I guess we should have thrown out the Constitution way back in 1905, when SCOTUS ruled in Jacobson v Massachusetts that:

 

Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld the authority of states to enforce compulsory vaccination laws. The Court's decision articulated the view that individual liberty is not absolute and is subject to the police power of the state.  (bolding of text is mine)

A few things relevant about this case...

1.  So far it has NEVER been retested.  No state has ever tried to force adults to be vaccinated in the years since.   Even today, the most statist nanny states have shied away from mandating themselves and instead tried to pass the buck to businesses.

2.  The fine was a one-time $5.  That is ~$150 in today's money.  Plenty of folks would be more than willing to pay $150 to make this argument go away permanently.

[Dat Cruisin Couple]

4 minutes ago, jfunk138 said:

A few things relevant about this case...

1.  So far it has NEVER been retested.  No state has ever tried to force adults to be vaccinated in the years since.   Even today, the most statist nanny states have shied away from mandating themselves and instead tried to pass the buck to businesses.

2.  The fine was a one-time $5.  That is ~$150 in today's money.  Plenty of folks would be more than willing to pay $150 to make this argument go away permanently.

 

The Supreme Court reaffirmed its decision in Jacobson in Zucht v. King (1922), which held that a school system could refuse admission to a student who failed to receive a required vaccination.[7] Jacobson has been invoked in numerous other Supreme Court cases as an example of a baseline exercise of the police power, with cases relying on it including Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927) (sterilization of those with intellectual disabilities), Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944) (limitations on parents having children distribute pamphlets in the street), and Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton, 515 U.S. 646 (1995) (allowing random drug testing of students).

[graphicguy]

14 minutes ago, jfunk138 said:

A few things relevant about this case...

1.  So far it has NEVER been retested.  No state has ever tried to force adults to be vaccinated in the years since.   Even today, the most statist nanny states have shied away from mandating themselves and instead tried to pass the buck to businesses.

2.  The fine was a one-time $5.  That is ~$150 in today's money.  Plenty of folks would be more than willing to pay $150 to make this argument go away permanently.

To litigate it (which would probably be a losing proposition) would probably cost more than any 20 cruises you might want to take.

 

 

[Lee Cruiser]

2 minutes ago, graphicguy said:

To litigate it (which would probably be a losing proposition) would probably cost more than any 20 cruises you might want to take.

 

 

The original comment had nothing to do with cruises. It was stating that sooner or later ALL are going to have to take the vaccine. I have been, but I don't think it should ever be forced. 

[graphicguy]

Just now, Lee Cruiser said:

The original comment had nothing to do with cruises. It was stating that sooner or later ALL are going to have to take the vaccine. I have been, but I don't think it should ever be forced. 

Point being, cruise or no cruise, to litigate Jacobsen v Mass would be very costly and would probably fail given the ruling will stand due to SCOTUS already rendering a decision.  

 

 

[MissyKish]

1 hour ago, Lee Cruiser said:

You might want to read the bill of rights again. Also, check the 14th amendment.  It's called right to privacy. It's where the courts found other liberties that aren't spelled out.

 

You are taking the 14th and making fit your views. Just like most people take the 2nd and twist it to allow people to have as many guns as they like. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed

[TNcruising02]

45 minutes ago, Lee Cruiser said:

The original comment had nothing to do with cruises. It was stating that sooner or later ALL are going to have to take the vaccine. I have been, but I don't think it should ever be forced. 

 

I don't think anyone should be forced either.  One of my relatives ended up in the hospital after some routine vaccines.  She had genetic testing done and has some type of issue, though I am not quite sure what it is.  She also has reactions to medication.  There is no way that her mother should ever be forced to have her receive a vaccine.  People should be concerned about their own health and quit trying to force other people to do something that should be a personal decision.

Edited June 9, 2021 by TNcruising02

[jfunk138]

1 hour ago, Dat Cruisin Couple said:

 

The Supreme Court reaffirmed its decision in Jacobson in Zucht v. King (1922), which held that a school system could refuse admission to a student who failed to receive a required vaccination.[7] Jacobson has been invoked in numerous other Supreme Court cases as an example of a baseline exercise of the police power, with cases relying on it including Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927) (sterilization of those with intellectual disabilities), Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944) (limitations on parents having children distribute pamphlets in the street), and Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton, 515 U.S. 646 (1995) (allowing random drug testing of students).

How many "adults" are students in public school?  Please read the original message you are quoting.

[jfunk138]

57 minutes ago, graphicguy said:

To litigate it (which would probably be a losing proposition) would probably cost more than any 20 cruises you might want to take.

 

 

Would would I need to litigate if I could just pay the $150 fine?

[B Midged]

15 hours ago, Saint Greg said:

Talk about some really ticked off people. Pay for flight, hotel, transportation, cruise, then turned away because they reached 5%. Announce that as a possibility and you’ll get the cancellations you need.

Good. I hope they just pretend they reached 5% and turn them all away. 

[ALWAYS CRUZIN]

54 minutes ago, Lee Cruiser said:

The original comment had nothing to do with cruises. It was stating that sooner or later ALL are going to have to take the vaccine. I have been, but I don't think it should ever be forced. 

ALL ? Never happen.