Carnival Embarkation Drug Searches

[ProgRockCruiser]

1 minute ago, mz-s said:

But given how out of control the drug problem has been on Carnival lately, and the violence and all that often goes hand-in-hand with drug use

Out of curiosity, what violence on board can you attribute to drug use?  And Are you referring to pot or some other type of drugs?

 

The only violence I see associated with pot is the gangs attempting to control distribution, and they are losing those battles in the states where MJ use is being legalized.

 

As the stereotype goes:

 

With alcohol, fights break out.

 

With MJ, folk-hippy bands break out.

[Tom-n-Cheryl]

On 11/10/2023 at 7:41 AM, MJSailors said:

This kind of security check ,most likely, is a Carnival policy.

We have taken cruises on Princess,Celebrity, Cunard and NCL.

We were never checked for drugs etc and never saw a security dog either at the port and never on any ships.

We have sailed from NYC, Ft Lauderdale,Bayonne, Seattle , Port Canaveral and Southampton, England.

To the OP, if you are fed up with being called over before boarding a ship, perhaps you could choose another cruise line and see if you are selected for a security check.

MJ

I think it's either more a Carnival policy, compared to other lines, or the port or local law enforcement officials recognize that there's a higher likelihood (of contraband) targeting Carnival cruisers.

 

I have experienced the dog sniff line on several Carnival cruises, but honestly can't recall having encountered that during embarkation with other cruise lines.

 

 

[VentureMan_2000]

I'm not sure why anyone is saying or suggesting that this is due to Carnival.  Anything that takes place before stepping aboard the ship is US Customs, TSA, local Law enforcement, etc.  And I'm willing to guess that US Customs has full rights to bring their dogs on board while the ship is in port -- or probably even while the ship is in US waters.

This is not a cruise specific activity.  There are drug sniffing dogs that everyone has to pass by at Disneyland before entering the park... and they search every bag and stroller -- EVERY BAG.  And there are drug sniffing dogs at airports... and I'm sure other places of travel.  

[mz-s]

2 hours ago, ProgRockCruiser said:

Out of curiosity, what violence on board can you attribute to drug use?  And Are you referring to pot or some other type of drugs?

 

The only violence I see associated with pot is the gangs attempting to control distribution, and they are losing those battles in the states where MJ use is being legalized.

 

As the stereotype goes:

 

With alcohol, fights break out.

 

With MJ, folk-hippy bands break out.

That's a cute little saying but it's far from the reality of the situation of course. Marijuana today is much more potent than the stuff Cheech and Chong paraded.

[jsglow]

So here's one thing everyone needs to remember in terms of 'unwarranted' searches. Cruising is a voluntary activity, not a right. So the threshold for some kind of 4th Amendment rights violation is necessarily higher. There is a big difference between conducting searches prior to boarding a cruise ship (or an airplane, or going to a baseball game, etc.) as opposed to detaining a person on the street minding their own business without reasonable articulable suspicion.

[mz-s]

12 minutes ago, jsglow said:

So here's one thing everyone needs to remember in terms of 'unwarranted' searches. Cruising is a voluntary activity, not a right. So the threshold for some kind of 4th Amendment rights violation is necessarily higher. There is a big difference between conducting searches prior to boarding a cruise ship (or an airplane, or going to a baseball game, etc.) as opposed to detaining a person on the street minding their own business without reasonable articulable suspicion.

 

The fact that a cruise is an optional activity does not allow the government the right to unreasonable search and seizure in my opinion.

 

"They are a private company" is a misleading statement that is thrown around a lot these days - and is often not telling the entire truth.

[Tom-n-Cheryl]

Not that I'd care to smell either, but I find mj smoke less obnoxious than tobacco. Probably from going to high school in the late 70's...

 

 

On 11/10/2023 at 7:41 AM, MJSailors said:

 

[jsglow]

1 hour ago, mz-s said:

 

The fact that a cruise is an optional activity does not allow the government the right to unreasonable search and seizure in my opinion.

 

"They are a private company" is a misleading statement that is thrown around a lot these days - and is often not telling the entire truth.

We don't disagree mz. I guess it's all about what's reasonable v unreasonable. My only thought is that line moves a bit when one engages in a voluntary activity. We walk through TSA when we board a plane. But TSA doesn't have any right to stop us on the street. I'm totally opposed to government overreach too. 👍

[ray98]

It truly makes me happy that Carnival is finally doing something to stop the unlawful behavior on their ships.

[Haljo1935]

2 hours ago, mz-s said:

 

The fact that a cruise is an optional activity does not allow the government the right to unreasonable search and seizure in my opinion....

Seizure? At what point did OP ever mention anything about seizure?

[mz-s]

9 minutes ago, Haljo1935 said:

Seizure? At what point did OP ever mention anything about seizure?

 

Didn't - slip of my mind I suppose - I am so used to those words going together I just typed it out of habit I suppose.

[chengkp75]

2 hours ago, mz-s said:

 

The fact that a cruise is an optional activity does not allow the government the right to unreasonable search and seizure in my opinion.

 

"They are a private company" is a misleading statement that is thrown around a lot these days - and is often not telling the entire truth.

The ISPS (International Ship and Port Security) Code makes the port terminal a federally regulated zone, and defines the security measures that go on there.  This makes the port terminal the same as an airport from a security standpoint (TSA at airports, USCG and CBP at ports).  Further, the cruise ticket contract specifies what are prohibited items and you agree to random screening, and once something illegal is found, the ISPS then requires that the illegal substance be turned over to CBP/USCG.  Cruising is no more an "optional" activity than air travel.

[momof3cruisers]

I’m all for the drug dogs (though I am paranoid that my bags will have some residual scent from my medical use in my home state.)  However, the random searches if a dog has not alerted seem not only inefficient but I can understand how if you’ve experienced it a few times like the OP, it could set your cruise off on a negative note. 
 

OP perhaps your name matches closely a known drug offender. At any rate, that would be aggravating and I understand what you are saying. 

[txcruiser1234]

just to jump back in for a minute...I'm all for drug screening when it's used effectively - i.e. if you are not carrying drugs and do not smell like drugs, you should have no issues. We should have no issues. Random inspections used judiciously sound ok - as in if I'm selected once in a blue moon, that's cool. Twice in 3 months, however I was selected, is a little less random than I'd like.

 

These were the reasons for making my original complaint to Carnival (inpo):

 

1) the volume of people selected for searches on these two occasions

The first time (aug 2024) I was the 28th cruiser in the room (yes I counted) On my way out, the room was still full meaning roughly the same amount of folks were brought in behind me while I was going through the 30 minute process.

The second time (nov 2024) I was the 25th cruiser in the room with the room being just as full behind me on the way out. 40 min to get in and out this time.

If my math is correct, that is an intake rate of about 50 cruisers and hour. Yes, that is a lot of people. Each time they were staffed up with 8 people running inspections, frisks and paperwork. The load was planned for. The time of day did not seem to matter - we arrived at port at about 11a the first time and 1p the second time.

 

2) The apparent inefficiency of the process

Out of the 50+ searches (combined) I witnessed in front of me, not a single person was found to have had anything. That's a lot of collective wasted time and resources (imho). It's a wide net approach that does not serve as an efficient solution to the problem.

 

3) The nature of the inspections

So when it's finally your time to go, they put your bags on a table and do a challenge-response inspection of your things. For example, they pull out a ball of socks and ask "am I going to find anything in this?" and watch your body language as you respond. Or when I shift my body weight they ask "Are you okay?"...that sort of thing for about 5-7 minutes while they take just about everything out of your bags (clothes, toiletries, camera gear, electronics), inspect it and place it in a pile in the middle of the table. Then they ask you a few questions about the nature of your drug use. I had no problem per se with this part - these staffers were just doing their job as trained. It's simply not what I want to be doing instead of being on my vacation.

 

Now the pat downs - different people have different tolerances for these - bothered me. These were not your typical 10 second airport pat downs and move on (which nine times out of 10 do not bother me). They were as thorough a body inspection as I could imagine while still keeping my clothes on.. My wife asked me "How'd it go?"... I just said, "They gave me a new definition of 'Faster to the Fun'." It's was kind of like when you see something disturbing and can't unsee it for a while.. yeah, I'll leave it that.

 

Again, nothing against the staffers in all of this, just doing their jobs. My complaint is directed at the decision-makers who put these things in motion. And again, we're two (of the apparently few) cruisers who have not experienced pot issues onboard 15 cruises/100+ sea days since the restart, so this kind of wonky solution to a problem we have not experienced seems like jumping the shark. Good on ya if you like this solution... you have more patience/tolerance than me! I'm normally a Carnival cheerleader.. a 10 out 10 guy on surveys, but I had to drop this one to a 9... maybe they'll take notice..ha

[ontheweb]

21 minutes ago, txcruiser1234 said:

just to jump back in for a minute...I'm all for drug screening when it's used effectively - i.e. if you are not carrying drugs and do not smell like drugs, you should have no issues. We should have no issues. Random inspections used judiciously sound ok - as in if I'm selected once in a blue moon, that's cool. Twice in 3 months, however I was selected, is a little less random than I'd like.

 

These were the reasons for making my original complaint to Carnival (inpo):

 

1) the volume of people selected for searches on these two occasions

The first time (aug 2024) I was the 28th cruiser in the room (yes I counted) On my way out, the room was still full meaning roughly the same amount of folks were brought in behind me while I was going through the 30 minute process.

The second time (nov 2024) I was the 25th cruiser in the room with the room being just as full behind me on the way out. 40 min to get in and out this time.

If my math is correct, that is an intake rate of about 50 cruisers and hour. Yes, that is a lot of people. Each time they were staffed up with 8 people running inspections, frisks and paperwork. The load was planned for. The time of day did not seem to matter - we arrived at port at about 11a the first time and 1p the second time.

 

2) The apparent inefficiency of the process

Out of the 50+ searches (combined) I witnessed in front of me, not a single person was found to have had anything. That's a lot of collective wasted time and resources (imho). It's a wide net approach that does not serve as an efficient solution to the problem.

 

3) The nature of the inspections

So when it's finally your time to go, they put your bags on a table and do a challenge-response inspection of your things. For example, they pull out a ball of socks and ask "am I going to find anything in this?" and watch your body language as you respond. Or when I shift my body weight they ask "Are you okay?"...that sort of thing for about 5-7 minutes while they take just about everything out of your bags (clothes, toiletries, camera gear, electronics), inspect it and place it in a pile in the middle of the table. Then they ask you a few questions about the nature of your drug use. I had no problem per se with this part - these staffers were just doing their job as trained. It's simply not what I want to be doing instead of being on my vacation.

 

Now the pat downs - different people have different tolerances for these - bothered me. These were not your typical 10 second airport pat downs and move on (which nine times out of 10 do not bother me). They were as thorough a body inspection as I could imagine while still keeping my clothes on.. My wife asked me "How'd it go?"... I just said, "They gave me a new definition of 'Faster to the Fun'." It's was kind of like when you see something disturbing and can't unsee it for a while.. yeah, I'll leave it that.

 

Again, nothing against the staffers in all of this, just doing their jobs. My complaint is directed at the decision-makers who put these things in motion. And again, we're two (of the apparently few) cruisers who have not experienced pot issues onboard 15 cruises/100+ sea days since the restart, so this kind of wonky solution to a problem we have not experienced seems like jumping the shark. Good on ya if you like this solution... you have more patience/tolerance than me! I'm normally a Carnival cheerleader.. a 10 out 10 guy on surveys, but I had to drop this one to a 9... maybe they'll take notice..ha

In think everyone should take note of how you pointed out how inefficient this process was .When no one is found with anything while at the same time we hear all these complaints, it has to mean this process is not working while at the same time putting some passengers though unnecessary hassles.

[Old Fart Cruisers]

22 minutes ago, txcruiser1234 said:

1) the volume of people selected for searches on these two occasions

The first time (aug 2024) I was the 28th cruiser in the room (yes I counted) On my way out, the room was still full meaning roughly the same amount of folks were brought in behind me while I was going through the 30 minute process.

The second time (nov 2024) I was the 25th cruiser in the room with the room being just as full behind me on the way out. 40 min to get in and out this time.

So are you saying that are predicting you are will have a bad experience next year when you cruise (August 2024 & August 2024)?

[txcruiser1234]

30 minutes ago, txcruiser1234 said:

The first time (aug 2024)

2023

 

30 minutes ago, txcruiser1234 said:

The second time (nov 2024)

2023

[chengkp75]

30 minutes ago, txcruiser1234 said:

Twice in 3 months, however I was selected, is a little less random than I'd like.

When I was working for NCL, they used a random number generator to generate the crew numbers of the 10% of crew to be drug tested each week.  In a 120 day tour, I was selected 3 times.  Then, for the remainder of my 4 years there, I wasn't chosen again.  Random can make some unusual circumstances.

[chengkp75]

13 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

In think everyone should take note of how you pointed out how inefficient this process was .When no one is found with anything while at the same time we hear all these complaints, it has to mean this process is not working while at the same time putting some passengers though unnecessary hassles.

So, the OP saw 50 cruisers searched with no result.  In two cruises, that is about a total of 6000 passengers, so that 50 is 0.8% that were searched and found compliant.  Were others searched at other times than when the OP was present in the terminal?  Was anything found?  OP is looking at a very small data set, IMHO, and extrapolating to inefficiency.

[mz-s]

22 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

So, the OP saw 50 cruisers searched with no result.  In two cruises, that is about a total of 6000 passengers, so that 50 is 0.8% that were searched and found compliant.  Were others searched at other times than when the OP was present in the terminal?  Was anything found?  OP is looking at a very small data set, IMHO, and extrapolating to inefficiency.

 

In my book, 50 searched with nothing found is a 0% success rate. Only in government is 0% success considered acceptable.

[sfaaa]

55 minutes ago, mz-s said:

 

In my book, 50 searched with nothing found is a 0% success rate. Only in government is 0% success considered acceptable.

This is precisely what prevention & deterrence are all about. Nil drug finding means the practice is working and meeting its target.

[carol louise]

41 minutes ago, sfaaa said:

This is precisely what prevention & deterrence are all about. Nil drug finding means the practice is working and meeting its target.

Thank you. I was thinking that, too. The ultimate goal is not to find lots of people smuggling drugs on board, but to deter people from doing it in the first place.

[Tom-n-Cheryl]

I wonder if anything would change in, say 5 (or 25!) years when they eventually get around to federal decriminalization or legalization.

 

 

[IndyKid]

The OP didn't mention any demographic information about himself, but if he's getting singled out more than normal it might be profiling?

[mz-s]

1 hour ago, sfaaa said:

This is precisely what prevention & deterrence are all about. Nil drug finding means the practice is working and meeting its target.

 

Spoken like a fed. We found nothing so our search program is working.

 

Meanwhile the ships reek of pot every week.

Edited November 12, 2023 by mz-s