Casino open on Sun reposition from Hawaii???

[discjoker]

 

Of course you wouldn't because US Law trumps Hawaiian law and you know that.

 

 

Of course I do. If you bothered to read the link I posted regarding the federal law relating to gambling in Hawaii you would see that Federal law also bars cruise ship gambling in regards to Hawaii. I just don't understand why you can't admit you were wrong when you said:

 

Hawaii Law does NOT exist no matter how much they want to think it does

 

and

 

I think no one else has responded to my last statement on the thread because they know I'm right.

 

You were proven wrong, not sure why you are having a hard time seeing that.

[dbsb]

I feel sorry for the future Mrs. Holg.

[discjoker]

never mind......;)

[RLJPHX]

This article sheds some additional light on the issue.

 

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=travel&res=9D07E5D71F39F935A35756C0A9679C8B63

[denims]

I think I'll start taking Hawaiian cruises! I'll save a lot of money, because the casino will be closed!!!!:) :D

[discjoker]

This article sheds some additional light on the issue.

 

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=travel&res=9D07E5D71F39F935A35756C0A9679C8B63

 

If you look at page one of this thread you will see I posted this same exact thing yesterday. :) Definitely does pretty much sum it up though.

[jerhardt]

If you look at page one of this thread you will see I posted this same exact thing yesterday. :) Definitely does pretty much sum it up though.

 

 

All the bickering aside, nobody in this thread has summed it up.

 

Mike has (I think) in stating that the ships that have run Alaska, then over to Hawaii have had the casino open in the past (like the Wind).

 

But with all the bickering back and forth, it's not really be confirmed. Wan't that the original reason for this thread? How it got into debating US/State law, well who knows.

 

Just to throw so more fuel at it. In Canada, there are Federal Laws and Provincial Laws. The Provincial Laws *can* supercede the Federal laws with respect to gambling, age of drinking and age of driving (just some examples). In Alberta, the drinking age is 18, whereas in BC it's 19. So, with that in mind, Hawaii's response to gambling is much the same - they have decided that they don't want it no matter where it is (land or sea). The Federal Gov in the US has deemed that a State issue and has left it at that. Other jurisdictions can be a little more flexible.

 

Heck, I remember years ago cruise ships needed to close their casinos when they were in Oregon waters because of their law, but that's been relaxed for cruise ships.

 

Let the flames begin!!

[RLJPHX]

Discjoker,

 

Totally missed your previous posting of the link.

 

I think the article does sum it up pretty well. The law preventing cruise ships from having casinos while cruising Hawaii is Federal. It only applies to cruises starting and ending in Hawaii.

 

I think its fairly clear that the casinos will be open on the Sun to and from Hawaii.

 

Numerous cruise lines do repo cruises to Hawaii each year. If the casinos were closed on all of these cruises, there would be posts all over these boards complaining about it. I say case closed!

[jerhardt]

Discjoker,

 

Totally missed your previous posting of the link.

 

I think the article does sum it up pretty well. The law preventing cruise ships from having casinos while cruising Hawaii is Federal. It only applies to cruises starting and ending in Hawaii.

 

I think its fairly clear that the casinos will be open on the Sun to and from Hawaii.

 

Numerous cruise lines do repo cruises to Hawaii each year. If the casinos were closed on all of these cruises, there would be posts all over these boards complaining about it. I say case closed!

 

Got it. Thanks!

[GregInCharlotte]

At least no one has called Holg a !#$%&*! Haole yet.

 

My question is, what would Hawaii lose if they didn't try to prevent cruise ship casinos from operating on cruises that start and end in Hawaii and travel to other countries? Since Hawaii has no casinos there is no competition.

 

If the sole reason is some sort of moral objection to gambling then that's just silly. Problem gamblers are going to find a way to place a bet - in downtown Honolulu - easier than going to all the trouble and expense of booking a cruise.

 

It's a stretch to think Hawaii wants to control cruise ships that are flagged in other countries while they are outside of Hawaiian waters. Should a cruise that startes and ends in Dubai be required to follow Islamic law?

 

Maybe Disney Cruise Line should base one of their ships in Hawaii. They have no casinos, it would be a perfect match - unless Hawaii has a law against Donald Duck.

[Holg]

I feel sorry for the future Mrs. Holg.

 

THAT was out of line.

[beachchick]

Hello,

 

Here's the thing: Duh, of course if there was a way to make the casinos work then the NCL lawyers would've figured it out. They figured out "go to Fanning Island and you get to use a foreign-flagged shiP" thing.

 

As far as the International Waters things goes, I just don't understand what makes Hawaii think they're so damned special. Again, RT Charleston cruise: Casino open. Alaska crusie: casino open. RT Miami, RT New Orleans, etc etc etc. Again, Hawaii is a sovereign state and can pass what ever law they like for their terrotory but why do they get to trump maritime laws, some of which have been in place since around the same time humans first set foot on the islands?

 

Which brings us back to the original point of this thread: A casino on a cruise ship is NOTHING like building on on land, or even a riverboat casino that "cruises." It does NOT attract crime. A thousand old people do NOT show up once a month to lose their Social Security checks. It does NOT promote gambling addiction since gambling addicts are too broke to pay for the cruise in the first place. Think about it: a cruise ship casino is like a casino in a hotel in Vegas, if that hotel only allowed people staying at the hotel to gamble and required them to be staying for a week or longer.

 

So I will say it again: I simply don't understand why Hawaii would not just allow the casinos and tax the hell out of it.

 

PS.. I realize you're trying to bait me into saying something I shouldn't, like my opinion of the people of Boston, to get me banned from the board, but I'm not going to take the bait.;)

 

I'm sorry, but I cannot let these two statements go without rebuttal.

 

First, what makes Hawaii "so damned special" is the same thing that makes each state "so damned special": The tenth and fourth amendments of the United States Constitution. The tenth amendment states, in part, the premise that each sovereign state retains its sovereignity in all areas that are not voluntarily given over to the federal government. The states have not ceded authority over gambling laws to the federal government. The forth amendment contains the "full faith and credit" clause regarding how states are required to honor the laws of other states. Although federal maritime law prevails in most cases, when no uniform law specifically applies, then "local" (state level) maritime law applies. As well, the "no gambling to/from Fanning Island," etc. bill sponsored by Sen. Inouye was at the federal level; so it isn't trumping federal law, it is federal law.

 

Second, considering that the first settlers arrived in Hawaii somewhere between 300 and 500 AD, I'd like you to explain which maritime laws might have been in place at that time.

 

You are certainly free to have and express your opinions. However, you might want to make sure that you've got the facts first.

 

beachchick

[weary traveler]

hey guys thanks i think... i guess they'll be open enroute to Mexico.. :rolleyes:

 

Weary