Printable View
Hmmm... it would appear as though the State of California is attempting to make it extremely difficult to promote "any electronic music dance event of the type commonly referred to as rave" and to require the event promotors to prove they will be able to keep any participants from using any drugs. Does it make sense that rave promoters seem to be being singled out here?
Link to the proposed bill is here.
No effect here..
yeah, im kinda past that stage too. I guess getting married at 24 puts a damper on those kinds of activities...
whatever... I guess is you going to drugs at one of these things you have to do it before you get there...
My point isn't that "oh, whoa is me - I can't rave anymore." First off, I don't tend to go to those things (except as medical support) - never really have... second of all, drugs are - well, they're not for me, and never have been.
The thing that bothers me here is that it's yet another encroachment on your personal freedoms, folks. This is "a security-minded site," correct? Likewise, it's pertinent info, in my opinion, as it starts to affect what you can and can not do... and what these "big brother type agencies" can hold you personally responsible for... it's not a good trend - and just shows you what sorts of things your legislators are quietly passing (ie. because if they let it hit the news, there'd be huge backlash from privacy/freedom advocates and they'd likely be sunk).
http://www.i-mockery.com/antirave/idiots-old.asp
Think I'll stick to the bar.
Gentlemen..the whole point that draziw was trying to present isn't that you can't rave anymore..but that the government is restricting you from doing something based on the theory that there is a high drug use at that particular type of event.
Quote:
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 53087.6 is added to the Government Code, to
read:
53087.6. (a) As used in this section, "rave party" means any
electronic music dance event of the type commonly referred to as rave
parties that may be attended by 500 or more persons.
What he is trying to point out is that this is the begining and while you may not be concerned becouse it doesn't affect you, it affects your neighbor and next time it could affect you.
Yea that sucks. A party we had in niagra falls Groove Attack 3 (peple from all over the country were there) There were 22 cops walking the floor and cops on the rafters with binoculars and camaras leading to the big mobile crime unit outside and there were 12 arrests for Unlawful Criminal sale of E and K.
Like someone said before, this is an invasion of your personal life. I have never (and never will) go to a rave, but still i dont think they should ban it. Also, i saw it said: "As used in this section, "rave party" means any
electronic music dance event of the type commonly referred to as rave
parties that may be attended by 500 or more persons. " so i guess if it is 499 people they will allow it? ;-)
Yea i am going to WEMF (World Electronic Music Festival) in toronto in a couple of months . Usually thousands of people there 3 days of good times.
I party sober though ( well no Synthetic stuff. Alchohol and other stuff yes )
I agree with your arguement concerning encroachment on personal liberty but also think that in this age of 9/11 knee jerk "let's protect ourselves from everythinkg" attitude of a lot (if not the majority) of the US public that there wouldn't be such an outcry. I mean look at how many people are saying lets give up more of our rights for security -- after all it's only temporary (yeah right).Quote:
... - and just shows you what sorts of things your legislators are quietly passing (ie. because if they let it hit the news, there'd be huge backlash from privacy/freedom advocates and they'd likely be sunk). [/B]
Ben Franklin said it best -- Those willing to give up a little liberty for a little security deserve neither security nor liberty.
btw Raves don't really pertain to me either but they do to a lot of folks and I think they should have the right to assemble as they please. Hmm that's in the US Constitution somewhere I think.
Good quote... another one I like: "There's nothing more permanent than a temporary fix."Quote:
Originally posted here by bigbird
(9/11 aftermath) I mean look at how many people are saying lets give up more of our rights for security -- after all it's only temporary (yeah right).
Ben Franklin said it best -- Those willing to give up a little liberty for a little security deserve neither security nor liberty.
But - one of the ultimate conspiracy theories? The government helped with 9/11 such that they'd have an easier time justifying limiting personal freedoms and increasing big-brother type monitoring systems without public resistance. (yeah, I'm not the first person to say it (even sarcastically) and I know it's a stretch, but... *shrug* One hell of a grassy knoll, eh? *chuckle*)
Yes indeed. Not much a believer in conspiracies but am a fan of the lengths some will go to prove their point. Sometimes ya even learn something in the process. Me on the other hand have other things to do than prove that[*] THEY[*] did something or other. But it makes for a good read/watch etc. I mean X-Files was really popular for a while. ;)Quote:
But - one of the ultimate conspiracy theories? The government helped with 9/11 such that they'd have an easier time justifying limiting personal freedoms and increasing big-brother type monitoring systems without public resistance. (yeah, I'm not the first person to say it (even sarcastically) and I know it's a stretch, but... *shrug* One hell of a grassy knoll, eh? *chuckle*)
This has already happened to me. In Gainesville FL, University of Florida, they put this law into affect. It stated that any place that was open past 2am could not get a lliquor license. If you had one you needed to close at 2am, which puts a damper on dancing the night away. How did we deal with it, well, we moved the scene underground to warehouses and such. They couldn't do anything because we weren't serving any liquor or beer. We also moved the events to outside fairgrounds and the such. Another thing that clubs did was, hold the parties during the day. This was great and worked very well. I guess my point is, the scene will never die, it will only reorganize itself.
x
this is a violation of our freedom of asebly as earlier stated by bigbird,
also tho i do not often goto raves i have a friend who is a frequenter of such events, and tho he pointed out to me that the only reason the govt and news organizations care is because they are no longer underground events but rather have gone main stream due to mdma, he uses it at raves but he is mad because people goto raves for the sole purpose of using drugs as he said to me: "i can do drugs at home, i goto raves for the music and the dancing"
anyways thats my input
xmaddness you reminded me of a New Orleans law (maight be city ordinance tho) that went into effect about 4 months ago outlawing the sale of glowsticks and pacifier candy at clubs because they are "drug parafenalia". Also after hours clubs can no longer have chill rooms where people can hang and come down.
This isn't having the effect of 'stamping out drug use' but rather to put the club biz under. And you are right -- the scene will simply reorganize and survive.
btw for anyone interested in E or other psychotropics check out dancesafe.org for pretty good unbiased info.
> glowsticks and pacifier candy
same ones they hand out at carnivals, baseball games, zoos, etc?
My brother use to go to those and my cousin use too also. It really depends on the person who goes to the raves. My brother or my cousin just go there to hang out and probably dance. I do know how to rave, but it is fun in a way that there a lot of stuff people can learn. For example, you might learn how to dance and move in a different/cool way, but drugs are only for idiots who want to mix in in a stupid way.
California is full of underground parties, not even the government can stop them. If the government is trying to protect our freedom and protect us, why not show our freedom by doing the things americans do?
Well lets look at the letter of the law it targets Rave so then legally speaking a Raven would be different than a Rave as the law reads. It is a law that takes away the right to choose using drugs as the excuse, when in fact most Raves are an artistic expression of the musicans and other art at the events. Drug yourself out if you want is your choice but really these events are about ART and artists. After all the labels will not sign these artists they are to busy promoting fluff like Britney, and N'Sync what ever canned marketing people and bands, and they wonder what CD's sales are down. Artist are always the forst to speak out first to challange, first to push limits, first to question and always first to expose their works. 9/11 excuses can only go so far point being our own intellgent community was more into their own little power trips then into what their job was about and missed all the warning signs. It is a dangerous time right now personal freedoms are being taken in the name of National Security.
I am all for dancesafe (www.dancesafe.org) discourage drug use threw awareness. They provide pamphlets all about certain drugs and what they do (IE is ectacy nurotoxic). They also provide free pill testing booths to make sure that people are not taking any harmful stuff like (dxm or PMA wich could kill them).
It's sad that so many people need drugs in order to have fun...
I attend raves for the pure energy of the music, dancing and friends.....thats my drug.
Ravers who attend raves solely for the purpose of drugs, give drug-free ravers like me a very bad name. :(
**** all that drug **** this goes out to all you partying sober - MC Flipside
The next thing to go will be concerts "for our own protection." Why is this paticular group being singled out? Everytime someone says "oh that dosen't apply to me" it gives regulating commisions more room to operate. Eventually, it will be you.
Actually it would appear as though they left that suitably ambiguous:Quote:
Originally posted here by Palemoon
Well lets look at the letter of the law it targets Rave so then legally speaking a Raven would be different than a Rave as the law reads.
So, technically, they could "target" someone with a largeish event (which they eye-ball guesstimate, actually) where any sort of "electronic music" was played. And yes, there is precedent that they're eyeballs are somehow calibrated enough that they use them to bill events based on "population" (or, specifically "estimated population").Code:SECTION 1. Section 53087.6 is added to the Government Code, to read:
53087.6. (a) As used in this section, "rave party" means any
electronic music dance event of the type commonly referred to as rave
parties that may be attended by 500 or more persons.
The next action I'd expect on this law would be the deletion of the "commonly referred to as rave parties" in natural response to terminology changes... followed by the removal of "electronic dance music" to simply "music" as that changes or is too specific. Eventually it will become "any event attended by X or more persons."
<edit>
Now, if we approach this more like we might in a good game of chess and "think several more moves ahead," so to speak... how does/would/might this extrapolate out? Can anyone please tell me how this doesn't apply to basically everyone? (and you people in other states aren't "safe" either - think about it)
</edit>
yea we ravers are known terrorists and must be stop. The spread of love and happiness and dancing all night and getting to know our fellow human beings has gone to far.
This divided states of embarresment will not let us have fun
euclid brought up an interesting point in a round about way...
anyone remember this one...?
sorry, i couldn't help it.Quote:
we can dance if we want to....
we can leave your friends behind
cause your friends don't dance and if they don't dance...
well they're are no friends of mine...
i say, we can go where we want to...
a place where they will never find...
and we can act like we come from out of this world...
leave the real one far behind...
...and we can dance.
omg that anti-rave website had me ****ing weak. Props to whomever created that.
I'm rather surprised you all are concerned with this. I seriously doubt this passes in Cal. And if it does it will more than likely be overturned. They may pass a weakened version that makes the owners semi-responsible for the bahavior of their patrons, but this is a bit strong to make it in Cal.
Party on guys, but leave the drugs out of it. You may think you are only hurting yourself, but you are hurting others as well.
Um..that's kind of the point..if people aren't concerned with it, it runs the risk of getting quietly passed. History repeating itself, etc etcQuote:
I'm rather surprised you all are concerned with this. I seriously doubt this passes in Cal....
This isn't strictly about raves, partying drug free or whatever..it's about your rights and your freedom.
Ah... you're right... what was I thinking... not like California doesn't have many other similiar laws, starting with forbidding smoking in places of work... moving to not being able to smoke withing 15 feet of the door to a public establishment... moving onwards to banning smoking in barsQuote:
Originally posted here by Reality
I'm rather surprised you all are concerned with this. I seriously doubt this passes in Cal.
Yes, I'm obviously very far off-base here... thanks for the reality check.
<edit>
Point is, this is an assembly bill... I'm not really sure anyone will have much of a choice. (I must confess I'm still a little unclear as to if this has passed or is about-to-pass or...)
And yes folks... it is illegal to smoke inside any public establishment including bars anywhere in California - though they are a couple "single establishment exception," it's actually a law.
</edit>
Actually, In gainesville we had huge protests about it, we also had people out signing people up to vote, and if you voted you got into all the nightclubs free for two weeks. We signed nearly 4,000 students up to vote. But it still passed. Figure that one out. The whole town was up in arms about it.
x
Draziw ans TC that is the point if one becomes passive and shows no concern then such things have passed and will passed. Drugs are not the issue more people attend and do not use drugs then take drugs, because the high is the event music, frinds, a sense of community. Not the right to Rave because you use drugs but the freedom of choice and not to use drugs and attend an expression of art. Art is not defined by me nor my generation not your generation but by the artist that express their works in any medium. Rave is not equal to drug use, drug use is that and if there are booths that test if it is real all the better it is a matter of personal responsibility. There is no law that can be passed to prevent a junkie, is it no more wise then to ask what and why do people use or experiment with drugs? Has nothing to do with a Rave or number of people, has to do with social, family, and money problems. Outlaw the result or find the reason? And as my father god rest his soul said the world is not perfect nor it's people and things go on about you you may not like then remove yourself from there no need to pass a law for common sense, world is not here for you and your view.
Here in the Milwaukee area of Wisconsin every summer for 11 days there is a music festival called Summerfest, it consists of various stages all playing music that you can go watch throughout the day. This year I attended everyday and i spent most of my time at the stage playing electronic music and as the night grew on this place filled(the stage area that is) to a point of at least 500 persons. Most were dancing and if a law like this were to pass in Wisconsin it could endanger even this which out side of cigarettes and beer was almost without drugs. Laws like this infringe on our basic rights and allowing them to pass is a good way for polititions to loose constituants that apreciate this music. I regret to say that I remain unsprised that bills like this exsist as people bend t4o media ideals. And **** Extacy and such at raves, if I'm going to do drugs I'll do them if the conformt of my own home, there at least I'm less likely to get into legal trouble.
This is a very bad idea.
FACT: Making raves illegal increases instances of ecstacy related deaths.
I am 30 now, but when I was younger (and from time to time to this day) I was a clubber. I remember, about 15 years ago, when the dance scene kicked off in the UK. Most raves were Illegal here then. This didn't stop raves from happening (or stop me from being there :)) it just forced them underground.
Because clubs were underground there was no supervision of how they were run. Some raves would turn off the water supply in the toilets to force people to buy water. Most underground raves were held in premises that would have horrified any self respecting health and safety official.
With legalisation comes state control, or at least oversight - UK clubs are now obliged to provide free water, clubs are not allowed to pack a venue to over capacity and in many cases medical staff are on hand in case anyone goes into antiphilactic shock from MDA allergy (MDA is the active constituent of ecstacy - or at least it was before the current wave of Kettamin pills - kettemin is a horse tranquilliser btw).
The bottom line here is that you are not going to stop people taking drugs and you are not going to stop 'raves'. Given this fact the only way to protect the dance community is to licence these events and in doing so make the promoter responsible for the safety of the club goers.
driziw im totally with you on the subject.. I go to jungle parties and the occassional massives. Most the people I know that are totally into the music(most of the ppl at raves) are not promoting drugs ( herbalz are welcomed ;) ). Its the little rich kids that hear that some drug is cool so they do go ahead and pop a couple pills for their first time. They are the ones giving the rave scene a "druggie" look. I get madder and madder every day I hear about some club being shutdown because their county makes "raves" illegal. (Thanks gay davis youre really helping musicians and artists).
Note:
I guess the government just wants us more boring and plain by taking away our rights to express ourselves. If we are punished for being creative and exploring technology and how it is unperfected, learning how it is being compromised, the government will have that much more power and knowlege than the common man.
PS Euclid -- you have any demos of you MCing? what do you spin?
Here they have these same parties organised by cigaret companies but it's illegal for people to go to parties like that which are associated with cigarets...so what these companies do is they send sms's to these people like: You wanna party? Go to this postoffice ask for a package for Mr. Somebody and your invitation will be in there, then you have to send a reply sms with some code on it. Nobody knows where these parties will be until the last minute...
Well I too am open minded and liberal about certian things like Greek Goddess. I too have been to raves, and have MANY friends in the "scene" that either go to or promote these events.
I have to bite my tongue every time one of the promotors starts to rant about how they are not promoting drug use at their own parties, but these very same people go and roll, or do some other drug while there, and THEN they brag to me about the different types of pills that they found available at their own parties. The lack of self control for these people astounds me, and makes me wonder at the future of this world.
I don't agree with this law however, as it DOES encroach upon our civil rights and constitutional liberties. If you are going to single out one type of event then you are discriminating. I worry about this law, not because it directly affects me, but because it's laying the groundwork for future violations of your contitutional rights. The big picture here is that for years there has been a movement in this country, on both sides of the aisle, to take away small parts of your rights until you become so used to it that you don't notice when they start taking bigger chunks. Take a look at the last 30 years of laws, and look at how much of your rights have actually been taken away from you while you turned a blind eye because it didn't affect you directly.
El Diablo
is not a conspiracy theory freak either :p
werd el diablo... lol