Balcony Smoking ending !

[Cats2010]

Who are theese smokers to dictate me to smell their stinking odours?

 

There is no reason to discuss the rights of smokers as they are the only malicious party in this relation.

 

And - hadn't it been a cigarette being thrown over board and blown back into the aft of a cruise ship incending the lines store recently?

 

Just stop smoking - as I did 24 years ago. It is easy and saves lives.

 

Calm down, will you please, cunardaddict? Nobody dictates nor you nor anybody else to smell odours of any kind - there is always a way out. In addition, there is sufficient reason to discuss the rights of "minorities", since any ships' company would try to satisfy the needs of ALL of their passengers the best possible.

 

It has been suggested in this forum before that a complete ban of smoking on balconies would make sense as long as a ship is in a harbour. When it is at sea, this ban could be lifted, since cruising speed and wind or storm do their best to have odours disappear.

 

May I also remind you that QM2, for instance, has 3 decks with in-hull cabins, making it difficult for fume to bother non-smokers.

 

Another way-out would be e-cigs. In addition, as this has been mentioned before, this would create additional profit for Carnival/Cunard/Seabourn.

 

I hope you can agree.

[andhow]

It has been suggested in this forum before that a complete ban of smoking on balconies would make sense as long as a ship is in a harbour. When it is at sea, this ban could be lifted, since cruising speed and wind or storm do their best to have odours disappear.

 

I quite agree - and have already sent Peter Shanks a letter with this exact point.

 

Can't wait for the reply!

 

andhow

[Cats2010]

When a ship is at sea the master is in complete charge. So theoretically he/she could decide to allow smoking in all ares of the ship. Or put all the smokers and the smoke complainers ashore at the next port and there have been times when trouble makers have been evicted: no jury trial, just dumped on the key side.

 

The laws of Bermuda or anywhere else have nothing to do with the case. In practice of course policy comes from management as we have seen but forget Bermuda.

 

David.

 

Maybe, but there is also something like the International Maritime Law, which most probably does not cover the subject. This is an expert question. Anyway, a captain is not necessarily a master of the universe.

[ToadOfToadHall]

Who are theese smokers to dictate me to smell their stinking odours?

 

There is no reason to discuss the rights of smokers as they are the only malicious party in this relation.

 

That's exactly the problem. Smokers will make a compromise about their smoking but non-smokers wont compromise (well not all, just the vocal minority.

 

You have underlined my entire point.

[Cats2010]

I quite agree - and have already sent Peter Shanks a letter with this exact point.

 

Can't wait for the reply!

 

andhow

 

Thanks. Let's keep our fingers crossed!

[karl_nj]

I quite agree - and have already sent Peter Shanks a letter with this exact point.

 

Can't wait for the reply!

 

He's probably busy sending out resumes, as he will be out of a job at the end of September...

[capnpugwash]

He's probably busy sending out resumes, as he will be out of a job at the end of September...

 

I believe he is going to MSC

[Yoshikitty]

I find the developement of the smoking discussion interesting.

 

Before the ban, it was like "It's allowed so I do what I please - deal with it!".

Now after the ban - the same people who told others to deal with their behaviour (because it's not allowed) are now asking for understanding for something which will be then not allowed.

 

My father (heavy smoker) died at the age of 61 with lung cancer and I can tell you that it's not a heroic death! It influences your loved ones, your kids, your entire family.

 

Since I was young, I decided to expose myself to as little second hand smoke as possible - it's my health and I don't want anyone to harm me in that way.

 

We are now facing the cold and rainy season and I am fed up by people lighting up a cigarette in the bus hut (because it's allowed) and force me to go out in the cold and rain just because I don't want to second-hand smoke their stuff.

 

Is it so difficult to understand that your smoking addiction influences the health of others in a bad way - no matter if they inhale your smoke on places where it is allowed or not?

 

And I am sure that this kind of discussion took place when the last airlines decided to ban cigarettes on board many years ago.

 

That said, smoke addicts need convenient places where to smoke without affecting others and I am sure that Cunard will organize some additional spots for you.

 

And the argument: " I can't smoke on my balcony - you I won't use your company anymore"......

 

If your addiction is so strong and you care so less how you influence others with your smoke - you should seriously consider your priorities in life and how much your addiction dictates your real life.

[Whitemarsh]

I find the developement of the smoking discussion interesting.

 

Before the ban, it was like "It's allowed so I do what I please - deal with it!".

Now after the ban - the same people who told others to deal with their behaviour (because it's not allowed) are now asking for understanding for something which will be then not allowed.

 

My father (heavy smoker) died at the age of 61 with lung cancer and I can tell you that it's not a heroic death! It influences your loved ones, your kids, your entire family.

 

Since I was young, I decided to expose myself to as little second hand smoke as possible - it's my health and I don't want anyone to harm me in that way.

 

We are now facing the cold and rainy season and I am fed up by people lighting up a cigarette in the bus hut (because it's allowed) and force me to go out in the cold and rain just because I don't want to second-hand smoke their stuff.

 

Is it so difficult to understand that your smoking addiction influences the health of others in a bad way - no matter if they inhale your smoke on places where it is allowed or not?

 

And I am sure that this kind of discussion took place when the last airlines decided to ban cigarettes on board many years ago.

 

That said, smoke addicts need convenient places where to smoke without affecting others and I am sure that Cunard will organize some additional spots for you.

 

And the argument: " I can't smoke on my balcony - you I won't use your company anymore"......

 

If your addiction is so strong and you care so less how you influence others with your smoke - you should seriously consider your priorities in life and how much your addiction dictates your real life.

 

Hardly the same, smoking in an enclosed space in which no one has the option to leave (an aeroplane in flight) has no comparison to smoking outside on a balcony on a fast moving ship.

[cunardaddict]

I have not only been referring to the annoying smoke but to the general odours of a smoker. I. e. sharing the elevator with a heavy smoker is a nightmare.

[Whitemarsh]

I have not only been referring to the annoying smoke but to the general odours of a smoker. I. e. sharing the elevator with a heavy smoker is a nightmare.

 

Is it really? Do you ever find yourself waking up in a lift covered in sweat? How embarrassing..... :(

[Yoshikitty]

Hardly the same, smoking in an enclosed space in which no one has the option to leave (an aeroplane in flight) has no comparison to smoking outside on a balcony on a fast moving ship.

 

You just confirm that you did not understand my post.

 

I was referring to similarities in the arguments and the entire discussion and not in the situations.

[Whitemarsh]

You just confirm that you did not understand my post.

 

I was referring to similarities in the arguments and the entire discussion and not in the situations.

 

I'm pretty sure I got the gist of your post. As I understand it, you don't like people smoking outside because it might rain, and you might have to move.

 

I understand why smoking in restaurants and inside the cabins has been banned (I don't agree with it, but I understand the logic) however when it comes to banning smoking outside then I don't understand.

[Cats2010]

You just confirm that you did not understand my post.

 

I was referring to similarities in the arguments and the entire discussion and not in the situations.

 

 

Hhmm :(. Was the subject not that smoking on balconies is not permitted anymore?

[Cats2010]

I have not only been referring to the annoying smoke but to the general odours of a smoker. I. e. sharing the elevator with a heavy smoker is a nightmare.

 

Well, obviously you never went through a real nightmare.

[BlueRiband]

...Is it so difficult to understand that your smoking addiction influences the health of others in a bad way - no matter if they inhale your smoke on places where it is allowed or not?...

 

I know what you mean because I take a parallel attitude towards the evening dress code. "Is it so difficult to understand that your ignoring formal dress influences the evening atmosphere for others in a bad way?"

 

...And the argument: " I can't smoke on my balcony - you I won't use your company anymore"......

 

If your addiction is so strong and you care so less how you influence others with your smoke - you should seriously consider your priorities in life and how much your addiction dictates your real life.

 

It's a consumer business decision no more and no less. If a customer doesn't like the policies of a business one can choose not to do business with them. (I don't sail Disney because I don't want to be on a ship with a lot of kids. I know that's the deal so I why book and then whine about children being children.)

[Thaxted]

 

Oh, and can anyone point me towards a legitimate scientific paper proving a link between smoking outside and a health risks to others? After all, it is outside we are discussing.

 

Mary

 

The last thing I want to do is get entangled in this little contretemps. I need all the time I can spare for arguments about the dress code. Nevertheless, since you asked, here is a paper that at least is worth pondering. http://www.repace.com/pdf/Repace_Ch_15_Outdoor_Smoke.pdf

[Norfolk Brit]

Many thanks, Thaxted. I shall make a cup of coffee, light an imaginary cigarette, and have a good old read.

 

Before settling down to do that, I thought I'd google the chap who wrote it. He appears to earn at least part of his living from second-hand smoking, and has a company called Repace Associates, Inc. Secondhand Smoke Consultants...

 

Mary:D

[spobird]

I have not only been referring to the annoying smoke but to the general odours of a smoker. I. e. sharing the elevator with a heavy smoker is a nightmare.

 

I am sorry but this has got to be the single most ridiculous and hyperbolic statement on any of these smoking threads. My jaw dropped ( and the cigarette fell out - only joking ) when I read it. It's A NIGHTMARE having to spend a few minutes in an elevator with someone who has an odour you don't like? People have so many unpleasant odours ( I won't name the worst of them ) that we all must be permanently having NIGHTMARES while sharing an elevator - let alone anywhere else!

 

It also gives the lie to hue and cry of "it's about our health as passive

smokers" !

[BlueRiband]

The last thing I want to do is get entangled in this little contretemps. I need all the time I can spare for arguments about the dress code. Nevertheless, since you asked, here is a paper that at least is worth pondering. (link)

 

I'll grant you that it is a well written and reviewed article. The bias however comes in the conclusion: "..Recent field studies plus controlled experiments demonstrate that, regardless of which way the wind blows, individuals...are always downwind from the source and are thus subject to being enveloped in a cloud (my emphasis) of obnoxious, irritating, asthmagenic, carcinogenic, and atherogenic fumes.

 

It is a physical impossibility to be "enveloped" in a cloud of anything if one is upwind from it. But the man makes his living as a zero tolerance advocate so what else would one expect.

 

Alas, nowhere in the Cunard brochure does it state that the wind may blow the ship's exhaust toward the port aft end, making those balconies unusable.

[seasidegal]

Many thanks, Thaxted. I shall make a cup of coffee, light an imaginary cigarette, and have a good old read.

 

Before settling down to do that, I thought I'd google the chap who wrote it. He appears to earn at least part of his living from second-hand smoking, and has a company called Repace Associates, Inc. Secondhand Smoke Consultants...

 

Mary:D

 

 

BENEFITS OF SMOKE-FREE REGULATIONS IN

OUTDOOR SETTINGS: BEACHES, GOLF COURSES,

PARKS, PATIOS, AND IN MOTOR VEHICLES

 

I skimmed the article but couldn't determine if the author is

classifying 'motor vehicles' as an outdoor space.:confused:

 

I think if someone authors an article on a subject like this they

should disclose this:

 

He appears to earn at least part of his living from second-hand smoking, and has a company called Repace Associates, Inc. Secondhand Smoke Consultants.

 

Wonder if he is one of those lawyers who have big bulletin boards along the highway encouraging people to sue for this or that reason...just sue! :eek:

 

 

 

Originally Posted by Yoshikitty View Post

...Is it so difficult to understand that your smoking addiction influences the health of others in a bad way - no matter if they inhale your smoke on places where it is allowed or not?...

 

I know what you mean because I take a parallel attitude towards the evening dress code. "Is it so difficult to understand that your ignoring formal dress influences the evening atmosphere for others in a bad way?" BlueRiband

 

BlueRiband: A post containing the two most heated topics on this forum...smoking/non smoking/dress code-obey/disobey. Next year, we will be reduced to just dress code threads.:eek:

 

best regards to smokers/non-smokers,

seasidegal.

[balf]

I can tell a tale that I am sure could be repeated by many non smokers which shows why smokers can never understand the non's views.

 

The local club room is quite large and of course smoke free since the ban came in.

 

Sitting maybe a dozen yards from the entrance door and a guy who had just been outside for a drag comes in. Instantly I can smell smoke. And my mate who packed in many years ago is even more smoke sensitive than I am.

 

I can understand why they can't grasp this, their whole bodies are saturated with nicotine, so they would never notice the smell in any situation.

 

I do feel sorry for smokers in many ways and a few ( we will wait and see) will not cruise with Cunard again. But, smokers need to realise that what others experience re smoke is beyond their understanding.

 

David.

[Thaxted]

In providing the link to Mr Repace's paper on second-hand smoke, I made no claims for its worth other than to suggest that its argument was worth pondering. Its probative value will have to be determined by people more scientifically alert than I or, I suspect, most of us.

 

One of the problems with this sort of research is that it has to be funded by somebody, and that somebody (be it a public health interest group or the tobacco industry) may well have a vested interest in the results as, perhaps, will the researcher. If this makes us inclined to be wary of Repace's conclusions (or anyone else's), that is all to the good. But being dubious does not mean that we should be dismissive.

 

After all, Repace is no ambulance chasing lawyer. He is a biophysicist with a respectable research record. He gives a link to his business website on the very first page of his paper and he's well known in the field, so there's no reason to accuse him of hiding how he earns his keep. He may be wrong, of course, but that's another matter.

 

And now I take my leave of this beclouded subject. Cheers to you all, smokers and non-smokers, be you enveloped or not!

[david,Mississauga]

Cunard ships are registered in Bermuda, ergo the laws of Bermuda apply on Cunard ships.

 

My understanding is that Bermuda law allows smoking on open-air balconies and patios.

 

Cunard, having disallowed smoking on open-air balconies, appears to be in contradiction to the laws of Bermuda.

 

Corrections/comments welcomed. Thanks, -S.

 

Salacia, whether smoking is permitted or against the law is irrelevant. The ships are owned by "Carnival plc, an English company trading as Cunard Line" (according to the brochures.) If the owner of the property says you may not smoke on certain parts of their premises, then so be it.

 

The following comments are not directed to Salacia, but as I have neither the time nor the desire to join the "100 postings a day club" I will include them in one posting.

 

Yoshikitty, thank you for being brave enough to say what you have. On this forum you can get in big trouble for daring to say you do not want to share other people's addictions. You could be called an anti-smoker or even a zealot for daring to want some control over what drugs you consume.

 

The phrase "anti-smoker" has been bandied about in this thread. I know many people who have strong opinions about banning smoking where it may affect others and not one of them is an "anti-smoker." A chap I worked with over 30 years ago was attempting to have the work-places in Government of Ontario buildings declared no smoking. (He was way ahead of his time, but it finally happened in the mid-1990s.) He always said: "I'm not against people smoking, but I insist they keep it to themselves."

 

As for those who will no longer sail with Cunard - how sad. I can't think of anything they could ban that would cause me to take that position, not even my afternoon G&T or a glass of wine with dinner (well, maybe a ban on chocolate would cause me to reconsider that!) The list of other cruise lines that allow smokers to share their smoking habit with others is dwindling rapidly. As for other transportation and vacation options - airplanes, trains, buses, many hotels - oh well, welcome to the real world.

 

Every hotel I have stayed in in the UK for the past five or six years has had a strict no-smoking policy throughout. I don't know whether this is the law or whether simply the policy of the owners.

 

Those who have suggested that people should write to Cunard to complain have given me a good idea. Those of us who agree with the new policy should write to congratulate Cunard. I have done so already.

 

Let me re-iterate what I have said before: I strongly believe that a smoking room should be made available for smokers as long as no-one who does not wish to partake doesn't have to. In other words, just put a double door (vestibule) on the smoking room and a sufficient ventilation system.

[spobird]

I can tell a tale that I am sure could be repeated by many non smokers which shows why smokers can never understand the non's views.

 

The local club room is quite large and of course smoke free since the ban came in.

 

Sitting maybe a dozen yards from the entrance door and a guy who had just been outside for a drag comes in. Instantly I can smell smoke. And my mate who packed in many years ago is even more smoke sensitive than I am.

 

I can understand why they can't grasp this, their whole bodies are saturated with nicotine, so they would never notice the smell in any situation.

 

I do feel sorry for smokers in many ways and a few ( we will wait and see) will not cruise with Cunard again. But, smokers need to realise that what others experience re smoke is beyond their understanding.

 

David.

 

Not so that we can't smell it. On my last voyage every time I walked past a certain area of the ship I could smell cigarette smoke. May have been from a cabin, I think it more likely came from a nearby private area for staff. If my husband has gone outside ( anywhere ) for a cigarette and I haven't I can smell it when he comes back in. And vice-versa. How can you possibly know as a non-smoker what a smoker can or can't smell? Just not possible, David.

 

And I for one smoker can certainly understand how you can be offended by the actual smoke. I can understand that you can smell it when someone has just been smoking. As can I and other smokers. What I can't understand is why you find that particular smell so much more offensive than any other such as cheap perfume, sweat, or worse things. I prefer the smell of smoke to some of those. And I also don't understand why some people think they have more right than anyone else to decide what odours are the ones that are the most offensive and should be banned.

 

You'll never admit it but anti-smoking is a campaign that some just take to fanatical and nonsensical lengths. They make statements that cannot be substantiated or are patently untrue. As you have done above. And it does the campaign harm to do this. Sticking to the facts and what you can and do actually know is always better.