Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
The Courts

Journal memfree's Journal: RAVE act -- S. 226 : Illicit Drug Anti-Proliferation Act 4

This is a bunch of snippets from a local music mailing list that I get. Emphasis and [editorial comments] are mine; CAPS are theirs. They're, ummm... rather hysterical on the subject, but as someone who goes to tiny live shows, I don't want to see promoters/venues scared out of holding such events. Also, I'm happy they included an opposing view (two at bottom).

We continue to receive email from people asking why we oppose the RAVE act when we do not, in fact, have anything to do with the rave scene. The fact remains that law enforcement officials could use this law to shut down ANY kind of music-oriented event that they deem "undesireable".... The decision to press charges, make seizures, and shut down events (which can put small promoters right out of business) is at the discretion of LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT and not judges!

You may recall that last year's RAVE Act was incorporated into Sen. Daschle's domestic security bill (S. 22). It gets worse. Senators Biden (D-DE), Grassley (R-IA), Feinstein (D-CA), and Lieberman (D-CT) have introduced it as a stand-alone bill (S. 226). It's not called the RAVE Act. Nor does it have a findings section talking about raves or electronic music. It's now called the Illicit Drug Anti-Proliferation Act. DON'T BE FOOLED! It's the RAVE Act in new clothing. If enacted, it would harm innocent business owners, undermine public safety, and stifle free speech and musical expression.

For more information on the RAVE Act and how the S. 22 "crack house" provisions will affect public health, free speech, and property rights see this link [ed. yes, the source is biased]

Your help is needed to stop this disguised RAVE Act from becoming law!!!

** Please forward this action alert to your friends and family. The Senate needs to know that voters find this bill unacceptable.


*** Call your two Senators. You can contact your Senators through the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121. To find out who your Senators are go [here].

Tell them:
1) You oppose the "crack house statute" amendments in S.22.
2) These provisions are just like the provisions in the RAVE Act last year.
3) The provisions would endanger public health, free speech, and property rights.
4) Urge them to contact Daschle's office and work to get these provisions removed from S.22.

** Fax Senator Daschle (even if he is not one of your two Senators).

To fax Senator Daschle go [here]. [ed. if you do this, it would be best to edit the letter]

*** Fax your two Senators. Tell them to oppose S. 226 the Illicit Drug Anti-Proliferation Act. [ed. if you do this, it would be best to edit the letter]

If you'd like to hear both viewpoints on the RAVE act, you can hear an interesting discussion about the subject on , a nationally syndicated show on NPR radio. An audio stream is available.

Another article can be found at [this National Review link].

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

RAVE act -- S. 226 : Illicit Drug Anti-Proliferation Act

Comments Filter:
  • Prohibiting people from enjoying artforms such as music because it would be a danger to society makes think me of something. Ah got it, Afghanistan.

    Sometimes I wonder whether America is gliding back into some kind of medieval culture where the new noblesse are the owners of big industry. I mean those are the ones becoming president, have the money to arrange settlements in court, etc.

    • the new noblesse are the owners of big industry

      I think you have something there. Problem is: I don't see a way around it. News is owned by Big Industry, so the masses only get to hear what Big Industry chooses to say. Take the recent anti-war ad that was pulled from view during the State of the Union address.

      The typical citizen isn't going to have the time or resources to hunt out the whole story, and pretty much has to rely on News Reports and Campaign ads. Candidates too frequently run negative campaigns -- which makes silence from the accused look like guilt. That creates a situation where political candidates simply do _not_ get elected unless they advertise, and they can't do that without money, so candidates with wealth (or with friendly connections to the wealthy) tend to win.
      • Well I guess there must be ways to force equality in terms of opportunities when it comes to a political career. Something like the trias politica, but in a different way. For example seperation or limitation of power. But I'm afraid Americans will see this as something unconstitutional, something that limits their freedom.

        Perhaps the right to defend yourself is usefull. For example if I X runs a campain against Y, Y should be able to defend him/herself. As we all know a good duel needs both camps to have equal weaponry. So if Y does not own any money X can only run a very cheap campain or should enable Y to defend him or herself in equality, in other words: fund Y. That may seem strange, but the goal is to have the public make a reasonable choice, which it can't if the poor side is muted.
        But I'm running offtopic...

        I guess there is nothing I can do preventing this strange RAVE-like proposal, because I live in the Netherlands. I can see valid reasons why local authorities might need ways to prohibit events from happening. Imagine a huge danceparty or metalfestival in a small village (of eg. 500 people and 1 law officer) or a sport event which attracts a lot of agressive hooligans. In the Netherlands the state has to ensure the safety of its citizens, which in such cases would be impossible. But is this the real purpose of the Illicit Drug Anti-Proliferation Act and if it is can anyone ensure it will not be abused? If the act (or any law) can be abused it seems useless me.

        Drugs.. If I would use drugs - in fact I do, I smoke, I drink wine and I drink coffee - do I harm anyone except myself? I don't think so. Then if I would sell drugs do I harm people? Yes, since they are addicted they don't really have a choice... That's why tobacco-adverts are prohibited. That's why use of softdrugs - in the Netherlands - is not completely legal but tolerated. Freedom...

        Ah, i've got it; the Illicit Drug Anti-Proliferation Act, it's useless anyway. If music or whatever kind of party is associated with drugs, the media is to blame, those are the ones who advocate/advert Sex and Drugs and Rock and Roll to the naive and innocent masses, because it sells. Freedom of speech... Freedom...

  • (Renegade Hardware jungle track)

    Yep, when they outlaw live music venues then only outlaws will have live music.

    Fire up that generator! Outlaw parties, here we come!

The party adjourned to a hot tub, yes. Fully clothed, I might add. -- IBM employee, testifying in California State Supreme Court