The other side of the Freedom/tobacco story

[Rockfordcruiser]

Nothing against you but why do people who continue to post here refer to "facts". There are only published accounts (by the OP and CC) and none by any authority. This CC thread as well as the one started by the OP are nothing but a Soap Opera. We should all just eat our popcorn and relax.

 

Or smoke our pipe and relax?:eek:

[Aquahound]

Not really. RCL have stated that this couple carried onboard, and tried to conceal, an illegal substance. It was apparently proven later that the substance was not THC so in fact the couple did not commit an illegal act as far as can be proven, but RCL is standing by their statement that they did bring on an illegal substance. That is a rather significant issue to me.

 

The couple on the other hand, have not been totally upfront in that the item was put in that hairspray can, but given the item was not an illegal item, then really, I don't see that has any relevance to their "presumed" guilt. Stupid perhaps, but illegal intent - Nope.

 

Pushka, what we know is what we read here. And that can hardly be taken as fact.

 

You have taken sides and that's your right. But you have to understand that negative THC does not mean it was a legal substance.

 

The op already lied to all of us about what it was. Why would she do that if she thought she was doing the right thing?

[Pushka]

I NEVER said I had all the facts, or know exactly what happened.

 

Have you seen the port report? If so, please provide a link.

 

Cruise critic have received a copy of the report and it confirms the couples story. ;). End of discussion.

[co2stay]

My point is they are being punished (better word than convicted) on what illegal things they might be able to do.

 

So where does it stop then? My cruise in September is the 1st part of a 3 week trip. I am packing collapsible wine glasses, flatware, and EMPTY rum runners (for the second two weeks on land). Because they can find EMPTY rum runners, with that logic, I would be at risk for concealing prohibited alcohol elsewhere?

 

IMHO, is it any different? Do I plan my trip differently because of this action? I don't want to, but we are boarding in a Spain and I am in the US. I certainly don't want any issues on foreign soil. Is there some action I can take before hand to avoid something along these lines happening?

[mickeysgal]

According to the OP and the article the OP was denied boarding because they were high risk. They were not denied boarding because they were transporting tobacco (a legal substance).

 

They were deemed high risk because they were transporting a green herb substance resembling marijuana in false-bottom hairspray can. This description was given by the OP's husband in the article.

 

The OP only described it as tobacco purchased from a store. Everyone assumed, through intentionally misleading statements by the OP, that it was regular brown tobacco transported in a plastic zip-loc bag only.

 

The OP went into detail about the zip-loc bag being placed in a diving bag but failed to mention the hairspray can.

 

The OP's husband admitted the substance looked suspicious and judging by their website, Halo Hooka products are sold in tin cans not plastic bags.

 

Rather than transporting a very legal substance in it's original packaging her husbands decides to conceal a marijuana-like substance along with a pipe in a false-bottom hairspray can further concealed in a dive bag. That seems high-risk. As already stated before it appears someone was testing security to see if they could get away with it. A "dry run."

 

I would think if this person tried this while boarding a plane they would have an even more difficult time with TSA.

 

While in the original thread I was starting to buy what the OP was selling...there appears far more to this story we don't know and at the very least they are "high risk." :cool:

 

Not quite right...HE was deemed "high risk". SHE was not.

[Pushka]

Pushka, what we know is what we read here.

 

You have taken sides and that's your right. But you have to understand that negative THC does not mean it was a legal substance.

 

The op already lied to all of us about what it was. Why would she do that if she thought she was doing the right thing?

 

I haven't taken sides. I have looked at the information that has been presented. The couple were refused to reboard as they were originally thought to have been carrying onboard THC that was later found to be tobacco. What else is there to consider?

[Pushka]

So where does it stop then? My cruise in September is the 1st part of a 3 week trip. I am packing collapsible wine glasses, flatware, and EMPTY rum runners (for the second two weeks on land). Because they can find EMPTY rum runners, with that logic, I would be at risk for concealing prohibited alcohol elsewhere?

 

IMHO, is it any different? Do I plan my trip differently because of this action? I don't want to, but we are boarding in a Spain and I am in the US. I certainly don't want any issues on foreign soil. Is there some action I can take before hand to avoid something along these lines happening?

 

Those empty rum runners are enough to have you be accused of future potential contraband concealment, apparently. :rolleyes:

[Aquahound]

I haven't taken sides. I have looked at the information that has been presented. The couple were refused to reboard as they were originally thought to have been carrying onboard THC that was later found to be tobacco. What else is there to consider?

 

One more time. It is impossible to prove it to be tobacco. We do not know it was tobacco.

[PH8]

So where does it stop then? My cruise in September is the 1st part of a 3 week trip. I am packing collapsible wine glasses, flatware, and EMPTY rum runners (for the second two weeks on land). Because they can find EMPTY rum runners, with that logic, I would be at risk for concealing prohibited alcohol elsewhere?

 

IMHO, is it any different? Do I plan my trip differently because of this action? I don't want to, but we are boarding in a Spain and I am in the US. I certainly don't want any issues on foreign soil. Is there some action I can take before hand to avoid something along these lines happening?

Not for nothing,but why bother packing all those things and transporting them to Europe........wouldnt it be just as easy to buy some cheap wine glasses and flatware?? And why rumrunners(Im guessing you have to buy the alcohol anyway when you get to your final destination)?

[Cruising89143]

But how do you know your side to be facts? You don't. None of us were there and falsehoods have been stated by both the op and RCI. The only fact we know so far is that we don't know the facts.

 

Didn't we have another poster (who by the way hasn't shown up yet) who kept telling us what the facts were. This person was going by the OP's comments only. Where did that get her? LOL.......

[BND]

One more time. It is impossible to prove it to be tobacco. We do not know it was tobacco.

 

This just hits too close to home for people who smuggle booze onboard. As I said in the other thread "we don't know what we don't know" and that applies still. But, this thread shines another light on what we weren't told by the OP.

[time4u2go]

Nothing against you but why do people who continue to post here refer to "facts". There are only published accounts (by the OP and CC) and none by any authority. This CC thread as well as the one started by the OP are nothing but a Soap Opera. We should all just eat our popcorn and relax.

 

So do you think CC's article citing the police report is not fact? Do you really think that the actual police report is different than what is in CC's article?

 

If so, is there any news article about anything that you actually believe? What "authority" would you believe?

[Pushka]

One more time. It is impossible to prove it to be tobacco. We do not know it was tobacco.

 

OK, let's call it the "substance that can be smoked but which was not THC" then shall we? It doesn't change anything, does it?

[Big_G]

since reading the earlier posts on this topic, and hence finding out that this may have resembled a substance that is illegal, and it was not that susbstance, the person's should have been able to cruise after the substance as confiscated and destroyed and the "can" was destroyed as well....with that being said....how is it that hairspary and nsucjh can not be carried on a plane ?? but allowed to be in a person's possesion boarding a cruise ship? What is said can was a illegal device? what if it had the potential to cause serious harm to fellow passengers? i commend the RCI security detail for recognizing a potential something that looked odd. But how much of this stuff goes un detected...maybe time for stricter security procedures ???? JUST SAYING....PLEASE do not frag me...this is a question? and my own opinion...

 

It was in his checked baggage and not his carry on. This also would be allowed on an airline.

[beer1234]

Why woud anyone need to take rumrunners anywhere????

[Langley Cruisers]

Why woud anyone need to take rumrunners anywhere????

 

Welcome to the conversation. :p:confused::D

[Aquahound]

OK, let's call it the "substance that can be smoked but which was not THC" then shall we? It doesn't change anything, does it?

 

Sorry. I just realized you are in Australia. Do you all have spice/k2 there?

 

It is a huge problem in the US right now and if you were familiar with it, you may understand a little better where I am coming from in my posts. There is currently no field test for it, and it is 100% illegal. The circumstances and items described so far sound a lot like spice.

[Pushka]

Why woud anyone need to take rumrunners anywhere????

 

Hot water bottles? Actually, I guess if you wanted spirits or wine you could use them instead of having glass in your suitcase that could break.

[Rockfordcruiser]

It was in his checked baggage and not his carry on. This also would be allowed on an airline.

 

Yes allowed on an airline.. passenger would not have access to it til after the flight.

[Cruising89143]

Sorry. I just realized you are in Australia. Do you all have spice/k2 there?

 

It is a huge problem in the US right now and if you were familiar with it, you may understand a little better where I am coming from in my posts. There is currently no field test for it, and it is 100% illegal. The circumstances and items described so far sound a lot like spice.

 

A major issue here in Atlanta right now. Just watched yet another story on the news this evening. Kids were/are able to purchase it at convenience stores even though it's now illegal due to the way it's packaged and sold.

[Pushka]

Sorry. I just realized you are in Australia. Do you all have spice/k2 there?

 

It is a huge problem in the US right now and if you were familiar with it, you may understand a little better where I am coming from in my posts. There is currently no field test for it, and it is 100% illegal. The circumstances and items described so far sound a lot like spice.

 

OK, fair enough. I wouldn't know about spice, but its probably here too although I haven't heard any mention of it.

 

If there is no way of proving it is an illegal substance then still the benefit of innocent until proven guilty has to remain as a guiding principle. Otherwise our legal systems are in danger.

 

Believe it or not, smoking THC and even growing up to five plants for personal consumption is not a criminal offence in the state I live. You can be reported for it but it is only a fine and a small one at that.

[johneeo]

So where does it stop then? My cruise in September is the 1st part of a 3 week trip. I am packing collapsible wine glasses, flatware, and EMPTY rum runners (for the second two weeks on land). Because they can find EMPTY rum runners, with that logic, I would be at risk for concealing prohibited alcohol elsewhere?

 

IMHO, is it any different? Do I plan my trip differently because of this action?

 

You darn well better.

 

According the the RCI Cheerleaders, the Captain is god.

 

If the Captain finds you with empty rumrunners, he could easily conclude your intent is to use them to smuggle alcohol in a future port.

 

It is then his duty to remove you, and probably your whole family from the cruise.

[Scotty G]

Cruise critic have received a copy of the report and it confirms the couples story. ;). End of discussion.

It would be nice if Dan Askin would publish a copy of the report.

[beer1234]

I don't know, If I want a drink I just find a bar. Carrying it with you seems like a pain. And if you need a drink during the miniscule time a bar isn't open or available you have a problem.

[Cruising89143]

You darn well better.

 

According the the RCI Cheerleaders, the Captain is god.

 

If the Captain finds you with empty rumrunners, he could easily conclude your intent is to use them to smuggle alcohol in a future port.

 

It is then his duty to remove you, and probably your whole family from the cruise.

 

You really need to get over yourself with this cheerleader BS. Just because someone has a different opinion does make them a cheerleader.