NationStates Jolt Archive

IN THE LAND OF THE FREE WHERE FASCISM FLOWER.... HAHAHAHA

Im glad i'm not living in that crappy country.
Well, this is the case. The military closed down a legal rave: And as i'm aware no media has written about it.

http://cutup.org/dir/fascism.mov

Glad I don't live in Utah or other parts of the military dictatorship called the USA. :headbang:

Kjell

Fascism because they arrested people for having more drugs then a 70's rock band?

FASCISM indeed :rolleyes:

Canada City']Fascism because they arrested people for having more drugs then a 70's rock band?

FASCISM indeed :rolleyes:

Yeahhhhhhhh man! down with the fascist-pig cops! *passes the doob to Canada City*

Will somebody please explain to me why raves are so popular? What's the fascination with standing among scores or hundreds of stinky, sweaty people who are so high on ecstacy that they are fascinated by twirling light sticks around to super loud crappy music?

Will somebody please explain to me why raves are so popular? What's the fascination with standing among scores or hundreds of stinky, sweaty people who are so high on ecstacy that they are fascinated by twirling light sticks around to super loud crappy music?

The sex.

Will somebody please explain to me why raves are so popular? What's the fascination with standing among scores or hundreds of stinky, sweaty people who are so high on ecstacy that they are fascinated by twirling light sticks around to super loud crappy music?

It's the Ecstacy, Acid, speed and so on and so forth ..............

Canada City']Fascism because they arrested people for having more drugs then a 70's rock band?

FASCISM indeed :rolleyes:

At 9 pm the Rave party began and by 10 pm Major Crimes observed numerous illegal activities. Which included illegal use of drugs, distribution of drugs, and underage consumption of alcohol.

Yes, indead.... Call in the cavalry. These are just kidds. And there is probably more dope beeing done in the whitehouse on an every day basis. And they don't get this treatment..;) Do they?? Nope

Will somebody please explain to me why raves are so popular? What's the fascination with standing among scores or hundreds of stinky, sweaty people who are so high on ecstacy that they are fascinated by twirling light sticks around to super loud crappy music?

It's not like I have anything better to do.

Will somebody please explain to me why raves are so popular? What's the fascination with standing among scores or hundreds of stinky, sweaty people who are so high on ecstacy that they are fascinated by twirling light sticks around to super loud crappy music?

I can't, because I feel the same way as you.

IN THE LAND OF THE FREE WHERE FASCISM FLOWER.... HAHAHAHA

Im glad i'm not living in that crappy country.
Well, this is the case. The military closed down a legal rave: And as i'm aware no media has written about it.

http://cutup.org/dir/fascism.mov

Glad I don't live in Utah or other parts of the military dictatorship called the USA. :headbang:

Kjell

We're pretty happy not to have you here as well.

And there is probably more dope beeing done in the whitehouse on an every day basis. And they don't get this treatment..;) Do they?? Nope


Brilliant !!

The only difference between a good DJ and a bad DJ is how much drugs your audience is taking.


To prove any shit sounds good on drugs, I took some ecstacy, and put on a bogan pub rock band. And I fuckin loved it!

Brilliant !!

More like "idiotic"? If you don't live in the US you get your news from some biased news source. It *may* have been a legal rave at some point, but when they started doing drugs and whatever else they were doing, the police had every single right to shut them down.

Will somebody please explain to me why raves are so popular? What's the fascination with standing among scores or hundreds of stinky, sweaty people who are so high on ecstacy that they are fascinated by twirling light sticks around to super loud crappy music?
sounds pretty good to me ;)

and there was a thread on this yesterday... once again i say that sending in swat teams with automatic rifles and dogs is a little excessive if they were just going after drugs.
the dude yesterday said most of the drugs were in the hands of the bouncers/security anyway, having been confiscated quite successfully... without the help of over zealous fuckin state trooper assholes :rolleyes:

Although I'm not into raving, ecstacy or drum n' bass, this is a sad, sad way for our police to waste our money.

You mean to tell me that this was the worst menace they could drum up to "defend" America from? Terrorist threats abound my ass! Theft and murder are secondary concerns, when victimless crimes are taking place, of course.

(Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, Dorothy!)

It doesn't sound like the 101st Airborne shut it down, either.

Quit whining. Drugs are still illegal.

sounds pretty good to me ;)

and there was a thread on this yesterday... once again i say that sending in swat teams with automatic rifles and dogs is a little excessive if they were just going after drugs.
the dude yesterday said most of the drugs were in the hands of the bouncers/security anyway, having been confiscated quite successfully... without the help of over zealous fuckin state trooper assholes :rolleyes:

Maybe the troopers wanted a little fun? The lab might need to make sure they got ALL the drugs back from the troopers... :)

More like "idiotic"? If you don't live in the US you get your news from some biased news source. It *may* have been a legal rave at some point, but when they started doing drugs and whatever else they were doing, the police had every single right to shut them down.


I was being extremely sarcastic to the original poster, who reeks of a phony.

Or reeks of another America-bashing idiot

in that case, ignore the first part of that post :)

It doesn't sound like the 101st Airborne shut it down, either.

Quit whining. Drugs are still illegal.
In other words, accept the loss of your civil liberties without complaint.

Are you Soviet or American, comrade?

To prove any shit sounds good on drugs, I took some ecstacy, and put on a bogan pub rock band. And I fuckin loved it!

Haha, I didn't know New Zealanders said bogan too. :D

What civil liberties? Like he said, they're illegal..

Now, if they were taking hits of Orange Juice, that would have been perfectly OK.

Quit whining. Drugs are still illegal.
and that makes it ok to scare the shit out of these people (though if most of them were on e i'm suprised they didn't start hugging the troops lol), shut down a legal music event, and waste shitloads of public money on sending in helicopters?
i mean... helicopters for fucks sake :eek:

and just cos drugs are illegal doesn't mean they should be...


edit: if, of course, this actually happened (still not in any news i know of)

Haha, I didn't know New Zealanders said bogan too. :D

Also known as 'West Aucklanders' :)

To prove any shit sounds good on drugs, I took some ecstacy, and put on a bogan pub rock band. And I fuckin loved it!
great, isn't it? ;)

Glad I don't live in Utah or other parts of the military dictatorship called the USA.

I agree totally. Did you know originally the order they said the countries colors in was "red blue and white" to suggests they were going to beat the redskins black and blue so they would never forget the supremecy the whites have over them? And did you also know that ever public area requires a full-cavity search by military personal? And don't get me started on the random forced ID checks... I saw a poor fellow gunned down by the cops just yesterday because he couldn't find his. He said it was at home, but rules are rules. Tomorrow they're going to auction his house, children, and wife to the highest bidder.
Oh shit... the cops are gathering the neighborhood for another russian roulette... this is how they control the population. I have to go hide in the attic!


There, is that what you wanted to hear? Happy now that someone finally said it so you can get it out of your system and stop thinking that the US is some horrible wasteland? Have you ever even been to the US? We may not quite be as liberal as whatever country you're from, but this is by no means an oppressive country.
By the same logic I can say the UK is a devil-worshipping satan-state quite literally hellbent on bringing the prince of darkness to rule the earth. I have absolutely no proof to support it any by all means pulled it straight out of my ass, but it is by no means less rediculous than saying that the US is a military dictatorship.
And Utah and every state has it's flaws. I'm sure your country does, nowhere is without them. It just doesn't happen.

http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_2964938

Ravers say cops were too rough making bust
Utah County: Sheriff defends the actions, denies wrongdoing

By Michael N. Westley
The Salt Lake Tribune

Partygoers at a rave in Spanish Fork Canyon that was busted by police Saturday night say officers used brutal and excessive force to clear the crowd.
As many as 90 police officers from several agencies, including SWAT members and major crimes investigators, stormed the DJ-driven dance party around 11:30 p.m. dressed in full SWAT gear and holding automatic weapons.
A helicopter announced the police presence as it crested a nearby hill and began shining a spotlight on the outdoor dance area, said 19-year-old Scott Benton of Logan.
"The cops just came in wearing full Army [camouflage]. It was basically brute force," Benton said. "I had a gun put in my face and was told to get out of there."
Standing in a crowd of people near the main stage, Alisha Matagi says she was just in the wrong place at the
Related Articles
Police raid rave party in Spanish Fork Canyon
wrong time when she was thrown to the ground, punched, kicked and handcuffed by police.
"I did absolutely nothing wrong," she said. Matagi was arrested with about 60 other partyers. She was booked into the Utah County Jail on the suspicion of resisting arrest and failing to obey an officer, according to police records.
About 1,000 people were cleared in less than a half-hour from the private ranch owned by the Childs family in the Diamond Fork area of Spanish Fork Canyon, rave promoters said. Several party attendees told The Salt Lake Tribune that officers barked orders fraught with profanity, beat people to the ground and used their weapons to intimidate the crowd.
A video of the opening moments of the bust, taken by Jeffrey Coombs and snatched from the ground by another partier as Coombs was tackled, shows the officers using force on individuals as they took over the crowd.
Utah County Sheriff James Tracy said Monday that he had seen the video and called it an accurate representation of the bust.
"I stand by everything that was done there that night. We did use some force. It was appropriate and necessary to take those who were fighting us into custody," Tracy said.
He also said that no officers used profanity as they conversed with partiers, nor did they punch, kick, Mace or use tear gas on any of the attendees.
"It's all a lie and we refute every word of that," said Tracy.
But the video clearly shows an officer using profanity as he demands the music be turned off.
"Turn that off. Turn that music off or I'll take your ass to jail," the officer can be heard saying to the DJ. In the video, the area where people had been dancing transforms into what looks like a battlefield with groups of officers surrounding ravers on the ground, guns drawn and assault dogs in tow.
"I saw a girl tackled to the ground for no reason because she told them not to touch her. It was vicious," Benton said.
Police said the party Saturday night was the third event held in Utah County during the past month. The all-night parties attract a host of illegal activities including drug use, theft, sexual assault and underage drinking, according to Utah County Sheriff's Sgt. Darren Gilbert.
Saturday's party, named Versus II, had been tracked by police for several weeks, Gilbert said. Police planned the bust when they discovered that the rave's promoters had not filed for a mass gathering permit through the County Commission office.

To have more than 250 at an event without that permit is a violation of the law, Gilbert said.
Party promotor Brandon Fullmer said he purchased a mass gathering permit through the Utah County Health Department about three weeks ago. The purchase of that permit, which ensures water, sanitation and medical services, was confirmed by County Health employee Jay Stone.
Fullmer did not know that a similar permit, which requires a security plan and event details, needed to be acquired.
The sheriff had little sympathy for the promoters or those at the rave. "They did nothing more than ensure this was a venue for illegal drug use and consumption," Tracy said. Officers confiscated ecstasy, marijuana, alcohol, cocaine and mushrooms, he said.
Among those arrested for drug possession were several security guards hired by Fullmer to patrol the event. Guards at security check points confiscated alcohol and drugs as ravers filed into the party, Fullmer said.
"[Security guards] have no legal statutory authority to take and hold controlled substances. It's against the law for them to have them," Tracy said.

IN THE LAND OF THE FREE WHERE FASCISM FLOWER.... HAHAHAHA

Im glad i'm not living in that crappy country.
Well, this is the case. The military closed down a legal rave: And as i'm aware no media has written about it.

http://cutup.org/dir/fascism.mov

Glad I don't live in Utah or other parts of the military dictatorship called the USA. :headbang:

Kjell
You have serious comprehension issues. Guess the education system in your Country really sucks, huh?

and that makes it ok to scare the shit out of these people (though if most of them were on e i'm suprised they didn't start hugging the troops lol), shut down a legal music event,

Yes.

and waste shitloads of public money on sending in helicopters?
i mean... helicopters for fucks sake :eek:

Yes.

The helicopters probably weren't as expensive to send as you're making them out to be. It's not like they bought them for the express purpose of busting up raids, they just decided to use them because they had them at their disposal, and, with helicopters, it would be easier to spot people trying to run.

and just cos drugs are illegal doesn't mean they should be...

Okay, Mom. :rolleyes:

OMG o_o

Sorry, the link didn't work so I just assumed it was another anti-US rant... but damn, that is freaking messed up o_O
*adds Utah next to Texas, Michigan, and Nebraska on list of states I'm glad I don't live in*

I mean.... omg how fucking stupid do you get? Arrest the security guards who confiscated illegal drugs for having illegal drugs and then saying the party was being used to spread illegal drugs when it's quite obvious steps to prevent that were being taken? Great message to be sending to kids now - it's okay if you do drugs. Not like anyone will notices, and if your parents take them away we'll just arrest your parents for illegal drug possession and you'll just get a slap on the wrist.

lmao... and I just looked at the website for Utah's government and the first thing that comes up is they tell the state's citizens how fat they are XD

But seriously.... not all states are like that. Utah, Texas, and a few others are the special messed-up ones.

Yes.



Yes.

The helicopters probably weren't as expensive to send as you're making them out to be. It's not like they bought them for the express purpose of busting up raids, they just decided to use them because they had them at their disposal, and, with helicopters, it would be easier to spot people trying to run.



Okay, Mom. :rolleyes:
:rolleyes:

and its still going to be cheaper not to send helicopters than it is to send them


i can see you support the war on drugs. good luck with that :rolleyes:

Isn't it going overboard to be sending SWAT teams just to arrest some drugged-out partygoers? It's not like they're all have beards and carry AK-47s.

Err.... Aren't military involvment in law enforcement tasks prohibited by the Posse Comitatus, with the exception of the National Guard? The military still has more important tasks to do - leave the drug busting to the police.

(This is in response to the original post)

It's not like they're all have beards and carry AK-47s.

Yeah, I think that's just me.

Err.... Aren't military involvment in law enforcement tasks prohibited by the Posse Comitatus, with the exception of the National Guard? The military still has more important tasks to do - leave the drug busting to the police.

(This is in response to the original post)
It's my understanding that those in camouflague uniform were from a special operations SWAT unit. So far as I can tell, either from news reports or from that one short video, no US or National Guard military were present.

:rolleyes:

and its still going to be cheaper not to send helicopters than it is to send them

Not if a kid on phencyclidine goes out and kills a guy.

i can see you support the war on drugs. good luck with that :rolleyes:

I can see you support getting blazed out of your gourd and then trying to argue with straight people despite the fact that you will almost automatically lose due to one of the following:

Lack of brain cells.
Lack of extended attention span.
Passing out in a drug-induced haze.
All of the above.

I can see you support getting blazed out of your gourd and then trying to argue with straight people despite the fact that you will almost automatically lose due to one of the following:

Lack of brain cells.
Lack of extended attention span.
Passing out in a drug-induced haze.
All of the above.

:rolleyes:

Ooops, I dignified that by quoting it.

On a serious note - how many people drink alcohol and go and injure someone, eh? The only difference is the legality.

Yeah, I think that's just me.

Do you're DJ-AK47? :)

Legal Rave = oxymoron. Hello!!! Rave=Drugs any police department would drool to make a big high profile drug bust. The easist way to get a big drug bust find a rave! Little work to big return it's a no brainer. Next rave serve doughnuts, because the cops will there too!

:rolleyes:

Ooops, I dignified that by quoting it.

On a serious note - how many people drink alcohol and go and injure someone, eh? The only difference is the legality.

Me, and 'someone' is usually myself. I've hurt myself while drunk, but never while stoned.

Not if a kid on phencyclidine goes out and kills a guy.
hmmm... first off most people on most drugs don't go super violent - with the exception of many on alcohol and a few with cocaine.
second off this was a rave, meaning the majority of drugs there will be ecstacy or speed, maybe some acid or shrooms - not the hardest of drugs, lets be honest

i don't know much about PCP cos we don't have it much over here in the UK, but i do know only a few people get agressive on it.


but "suppose something bad happens" is a shit reason for coming in with guns and all that :rolleyes:

besides, how many parties/raves/whatver are held each year where these drugs are present? a fair few. and how many "drug-crazed psychopaths" go out and kill people? :rolleyes:

I can see you support getting blazed out of your gourd and then trying to argue with straight people despite the fact that you will almost automatically lose due to one of the following:

Lack of brain cells.
Lack of extended attention span.
Passing out in a drug-induced haze.
All of the above.
lmao :p
oh my sides... oh it hurts lol :p


i don't think you know anything about me, so you can shut your face... or keyboard for that matter...

:rolleyes:

Ooops, I dignified that by quoting it.

On a serious note - how many people drink alcohol and go and injure someone, eh? The only difference is the legality.

Tons. I'm pretty sure that being publicly inebriate is illegal as well, and those that were trying to leave pissed could have also been stopped. So there's really not a lot of difference in legality as far as permission is concerned. The only difference is in how long the person will spend in jail.

Do you're DJ-AK47? :)

DJ-AK, brutha! Sendin' tha message down tha mean streets of Gaza! Spreadin' the intifada all the way to Nevada! Yo...this audio-terrorism goin' down...I'm the new talk of the town! DJ-AK, OK? Peaaaaaaaaaaaaace...

*shoots AK-47 in the air*

Uh, yeah.

...
On a serious note - how many people drink alcohol and go and injure someone, eh? The only difference is the legality.

Lots and lots. Don't get me wrong I love marguritas, but the fact of the matter is that jails and hospital emergency rooms fill to capacity after a good Friday's or Saturday's night drinking. Alcohol is a factor in a lot of violent acts - simple assaults, sexual assaults, car "accidents," other accidents, etc.

*is inspired to listen to some drum n bass :P *

Will somebody please explain to me why raves are so popular? What's the fascination with standing among scores or hundreds of stinky, sweaty people who are so high on ecstacy that they are fascinated by twirling light sticks around to super loud crappy music?
I have no idea and I know people who've gone and have done all that crap and despite their recounts, I still don't get it...

IN THE LAND OF THE FREE WHERE FASCISM FLOWER.... HAHAHAHA

Im glad i'm not living in that crappy country.
Well, this is the case. The military closed down a legal rave: And as i'm aware no media has written about it.

http://cutup.org/dir/fascism.mov

Glad I don't live in Utah or other parts of the military dictatorship called the USA. :headbang:

Kjell
It could be that since the party was outside, it was disturbing the peace through noise violations or it was violating curfews. Don't be too sure of anything you see on video without a proper explanation.

hmmm... first off most people on most drugs don't go super violent - with the exception of many on alcohol and a few with cocaine.
second off this was a rave, meaning the majority of drugs there will be ecstacy or speed, maybe some acid or shrooms - not the hardest of drugs, lets be honest

Yeah, but the fact remains that some can make the user "super violent," and it's not worth the cops' risk to have some kids get away and wreak havoc for which the cops will be blamed in the morning news. Besides, to imply that one can't find cocaine at many big raves is just wrong.

i don't know much about PCP cos we don't have it much over here in the UK, but i do know only a few people get agressive on it.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but angel dust is one of the scariest drugs cops have to deal with because the users freak out so often and can become strong enough to take on many more people than they normally could. Very dangerous shit.

lmao :p
oh my sides... oh it hurts lol :p

i don't think you know anything about me, so you can shut your face... or keyboard for that matter...

Hah, I may not know you personally, but I know many people like you, e.g. my mom - hence, I called you, "Mom," earlier; my uncle, who had to go into rehab for crack cocaine; and my Grandpa, who got high with my Dad (his son) all the time in the 70's, and remains a bigtime alcoholic to this day. My mom still smoked pot when I went to college, and still does to my knowledge. Her favorite phrase is, "Just because pot is illegal doesn't mean it should be." My parents have done drugs you've probably never even heard of, so I'm not exactly uneducated on the matter.

What civil liberties? Like he said, they're illegal..
And when the Nanny-Statists want to take our guns (what civil liberties?), will you be so compliant?

The war on drugs is bullshit, plain and simple. You should have the right to pursue happiness, in whatever form that might take, so long as you are not infringing on anyone else's right to do the same (through force or fraud).

It's the Ecstacy, Acid, speed and so on and so forth ..............
I've never tried any drugs (except Cannabis). Those who do use them are in minority (well, around here they are). If you've never danced 6 hours straight you don't have a clue why most people go to raves.

To all who think that this was ok because there where some drugs:

Why they attacked hundreds of people if they assumed that few of them may have drugs? Is it ok to raid a whole block if one or two druggies live there? If they were so concerned they could have had 2 drug dogs at the gates. That's how it's done around here.

To all who think that this was ok because there where some drugs:

Why they attacked hundreds of people if they assumed that few of them may have drugs? Is it ok to raid a whole block if one or two druggies live there? If they were so concerned they could have had 2 drug dogs at the gates. That's how it's done around here.

We don't exactly know everything about the situation. There could have been multiple complaints called in, the cops could have been watching the rave from the start or had narcs on duty that confirmed widespread drug use before they broke up the rave, or any number of other things could have and probably did happen that fully justified crashing it.

No, but it's okay to raid a block if all but four of the people on it are using or distributing illegal drugs, which is a more likely analogy.

Yeah, but the fact remains that some can make the user "super violent," and it's not worth the cops' risk to have some kids get away and wreak havoc for which the cops will be blamed in the morning news. Besides, to imply that one can't find cocaine at many big raves is just wrong..
well frankly i think you're blowing it all out of proportion - the kids don't and won't 'wreak havok' - they are there for a good time and for them the drugs are just part of that.
and you're right i shouldn't have forgotten to put coke on the list :P


Correct me if I'm wrong, but angel dust is one of the scariest drugs cops have to deal with because the users freak out so often and can become strong enough to take on many more people than they normally could. Very dangerous shit.
i'll have to take your word for it - we really don't have it much in the UK (not that i've ever seen) and all i've heard is that its pretty cool but makes some people aggressive


but lets also look at the practicalities of drug use. if you've tried PCP before you're going to know if it makes you agressive or not, and hence take it in moderation or not at all (there are plenty of others to take). so unless this rave was soley attended by drugs noobs, the chances of things getting out of hand or somebody going psychotic are far lower than you might think


Hah, I may not know you personally, but I know many people like you, e.g. my mom - hence, I called you, "Mom," earlier; my uncle, who had to go into rehab for crack cocaine; and my Grandpa, who got high with my Dad (his son) all the time in the 70's, and remains a bigtime alcoholic to this day. My mom still smoked pot when I went to college, and still does to my knowledge. Her favorite phrase is, "Just because pot is illegal doesn't mean it should be." My parents have done drugs you've probably never even heard of, so I'm not exactly uneducated on the matter.
well if you've had bad experiences from drugs, or as a result of others' use of drugs then you have my sympathy, but not the right to tell others what to do based on conjecture ("the kids might 'wreak havok'")
now if you were saying that these drugs deserved to be legal on medical or health grounds, then i would be more inclined to listen - but that is a whole other debate...

To all who think that this was ok because there where some drugs:

Why they attacked hundreds of people if they assumed that few of them may have drugs? Is it ok to raid a whole block if one or two druggies live there? If they were so concerned they could have had 2 drug dogs at the gates. That's how it's done around here.
indeed... the next step?

this is why this is so scary - this is, whatever the justification or reason, a move away from liberal, free society, and a move toward more state control... etc etc

We don't exactly know everything about the situation. There could have been multiple complaints called in, the cops could have been watching the rave from the start or had narcs on duty that confirmed widespread drug use before they broke up the rave, or any number of other things could have and probably did happen that fully justified crashing it.

No, but it's okay to raid a block if all but four of the people on it are using or distributing illegal drugs, which is a more likely analogy.
OK, I admit that we don't know everything (they didn't have all the permits they needed -in case you haven't read the other thread) but I still think that the right way is to check everyone before they went in. Again if they really were concerned about drugs, why let people take drugs before intervention? They put them on danger which could have been avoided.

Will somebody please explain to me why raves are so popular? What's the fascination with standing among scores or hundreds of stinky, sweaty people who are so high on ecstacy that they are fascinated by twirling light sticks around to super loud crappy music?
you explained student life in one post

but lets also look at the practicalities of drug use. if you've tried PCP before you're going to know if it makes you agressive or not, and hence take it in moderation or not at all (there are plenty of others to take). so unless this rave was soley attended by drugs noobs, the chances of things getting out of hand or somebody going psychotic are far lower than you might think

Because most druggies are quite capable of using in moderation. :rolleyes:

well if you've had bad experiences from drugs, or as a result of others' use of drugs then you have my sympathy, but not the right to tell others what to do based on conjecture ("the kids might 'wreak havok'")
now if you were saying that these drugs deserved to be legal on medical or health grounds, then i would be more inclined to listen - but that is a whole other debate...

Oh, I don't care, I'm just making a point, and explaining why my listing petty stereotypes without knowing you isn't completely baseless. My mom could use in moderation, probably because she was too poor to get more, and my uncle lives far enough away that I didn't have to deal with him when he was cracked out. Personally I think there needs to be a sort of compromise, like, some drugs can be used on enclosed private property but if taken into public the penalties should be extremely harsh. And yes, if there is no better way to deal with a health problem I have nothing against prescribed drug use. But, as long as they're illegal, I don't give a shit that the rave was crashed, and until a better way to keep drug use on private property is discovered I have no problem with them remaining illegal.

OK, I admit that we don't know everything (they didn't have all the permits they needed -in case you haven't read the other thread) but I still think that the right way is to check everyone before they went in. Again if they really were concerned about drugs, why let people take drugs before intervention? They put them on danger which could have been avoided.

Because I'm not sure you can do anything about someone planning on using drugs, so if you don't wait and bust them they'll just get off and go use the next day when you aren't there to stop them.

Because I'm not sure you can do anything about someone planning on using drugs, so if you don't wait and bust them they'll just get off and go use the next day when you aren't there to stop them.
I don't think possession is legal in US either

I don't think possession is legal in US either

That's only if you are in possession, however. If your friend has it and five more people are going to be using his shit, they can't touch the five other people without proof of intent.

That's only if you are in possession, however. If your friend has it and five more people are going to be using his shit, they can't touch the five other people without proof of intent.
I don't think that's a problem. Prevention is more important than busting some teenagers. But that's just an opinion.

My family has many members of law enforcement in it. I've seen crime scene photos of a guy who while under the influece of PCP broke out of hand cuffs and attacked a cop. He took 6 shots from a .38 (it was the '80's) and was finally brought down by a shot gun blast.




Yeah, but the fact remains that some can make the user "super violent," and it's not worth the cops' risk to have some kids get away and wreak havoc for which the cops will be blamed in the morning news. Besides, to imply that one can't find cocaine at many big raves is just wrong.



Correct me if I'm wrong, but angel dust is one of the scariest drugs cops have to deal with because the users freak out so often and can become strong enough to take on many more people than they normally could. Very dangerous shit.



Hah, I may not know you personally, but I know many people like you, e.g. my mom - hence, I called you, "Mom," earlier; my uncle, who had to go into rehab for crack cocaine; and my Grandpa, who got high with my Dad (his son) all the time in the 70's, and remains a bigtime alcoholic to this day. My mom still smoked pot when I went to college, and still does to my knowledge. Her favorite phrase is, "Just because pot is illegal doesn't mean it should be." My parents have done drugs you've probably never even heard of, so I'm not exactly uneducated on the matter.

I don't think that's a problem. Prevention is more important than busting some teenagers. But that's just an opinion.

I agree. But which serves as a better means of prevention: busting them once they do it, thereby scaring them so bad that they don't want to do it again for awhile; or stopping them before they do it, letting them off scot free to do it the next day, and teaching them that as long as they don't get caught in the act they're okay?

My family has many members of law enforcement in it. I've seen crime scene photos of a guy who while under the influece of PCP broke out of hand cuffs and attacked a cop. He took 6 shots from a .38 (it was the '80's) and was finally brought down by a shot gun blast.

That's the kind of thing I was thinking happened but I didn't want to paint PCP as too extreme without finding proof first, and, as I'm lazy, I didn't feel like looking up "the effects of PCP" on the internet.

I agree. But which serves as a better means of prevention: busting them once they do it, thereby scaring them so bad that they don't want to do it again for awhile; or stopping them before they do it, letting them off scot free to do it the next day, and teaching them that as long as they don't get caught in the act they're okay.
Good one. But I don't buy it. Because I can't believe that all of them were doing anything legal. They had bought tickets etc. Now the punishment was same for everyone and to me that's just not right.

Good one. But I don't buy it. Because I can't believe that all of them were doing anything illegal[?]. They had bought tickets etc. Now the punishment was same for everyone and to me that's just not right.

I doubt anyone that wasn't using got busted for using, because they could have just asked to be tested and the cops would have had to comply. If they didn't, then the cops did something wrong. Otherwise, fuck them.

I doubt anyone that wasn't using got busted for using, because they could have just asked to be tested and the cops would have had to comply. If they didn't, then the cops did something wrong. Otherwise, fuck them.
anything legal... lol. I changed some other words but forgot to change that one :)

Yes, the cops did something wrong. It's not just that they arrested some people. (btw, if so many were taking drugs, why they arrested so few of them?) They throw tear gas in the growd. They pointed people who were leaving the area peacefully with guns etc. That's not something anyone should have to experience just because they went to a party they thought was legal.

Because most druggies are quite capable of using in moderation. :rolleyes:


well it depends on the drug. xtc is possible to use in moderation, as is weed. others like smack or coke aren't so easy...

Yes, the cops did something wrong. It's not just that they arrested some people. (btw, if so many were taking drugs, why they arrested so few of them?)

They could only prove so many were taking them, or perhaps didn't have enough room in jail and thus let some people slide.

They throw tear gas in the growd.

For a crowd full of crazy, blazed people I would hope that this is standard procedure.

They pointed people who were leaving the area peacefully with guns etc.

Peacefully leaving the area why? Because they were trying to slip out under the radar after snorting ten lines of coke? Because they'd been dropping acid periodically?

That's not something anyone should have to experience just because they went to a party they thought was legal.

If you're innocent, don't leave. Just be calm and explain shit to the cops and most of the time shit will work itself out.

If you're innocent, don't leave. Just be calm and explain shit to the cops and most of the time shit will work itself out.

Hahahaha!

They could only prove so many were taking them, or perhaps didn't have enough room in jail and thus let some people slide.
Perhaps most of them weren't taking anything and didn't even plan to take anything. They could organize such a show with helicopters and all but they didn't have enough room to arrest everyone who possessed or had taken drugs? They seemed pretty eager to me.

For a crowd full of crazy, blazed people I would hope that this is standard procedure.
And why, may I ask, were they crazy and blazed? Not because of the sudden attack? Men in combat suits (many thought they were military), guns, helicopter, tear gas...


Peacefully leaving the area why? Because they were trying to slip out under the radar after snorting ten lines of coke? Because they'd been dropping acid periodically?
Again, maybe some of them. Not all of them.

If you're innocent, don't leave. Just be calm and explain shit to the cops and most of the time shit will work itself out.
After they told you to leave?

:upyours:

Well the military did exactly what it was told to do but infact it should have gone a step farther, but then again we are dealing with civilians, but in my humble opinion they just should have opend fire on the croud slapped a media ban coverage on a radius of about 5,000 spuare kilometeres and obviously interupt cell phone frequencys, hell why stop there and open fire on the crowd, they should have called in an airstrike and napalm the whole district that would have brouhgt quicker results but then again why stop there just nuke the whole state that would have just been, hmm i guess to out-of-control but then again think of the arms weapons industry and its potential buyers wich would have been screaming at purchasing such low cost mini nukes for crowd control purposes, but then again i guess this too would have been inapropriate, well i guess we should just nuke the our whole milky way star system begining with the sun so we can assure its supernova status and verify our milky way destruction.....

P.S.

Have a nice day :-)

:fluffle:

:upyours:

....

P.S.

Have a nice day :-)

:fluffle:
You should take some drugs...

In other words, accept the loss of your civil liberties without complaint.

Are you Soviet or American, comrade?

I didn't realize your civil liberties included the illegal use of drugs. Can you please which civil liberty that falls under? I can't seem to find it. Oh, wait, I just realized you made that up. They had undercover officers in attendence and witnessed excessive drug use so they shut it down. Done and done.

You should take some drugs...

Preferably Lithium, Ritalin or Prozac.

And when the Nanny-Statists want to take our guns (what civil liberties?), will you be so compliant?

The war on drugs is bullshit, plain and simple. You should have the right to pursue happiness, in whatever form that might take, so long as you are not infringing on anyone else's right to do the same (through force or fraud).

Then change the laws. The police don't make the law; they enforce it. It's their job. The law says drugs are illegal and they enforced it. You're mad at the legislature, not the cops.

Will somebody please explain to me why raves are so popular? What's the fascination with standing among scores or hundreds of stinky, sweaty people who are so high on ecstacy that they are fascinated by twirling light sticks around to super loud crappy music?


It is with much releif that I read your comment and know I'll never find you anywhere near a "Rave". Thank God.

I'd explain it to you, but then you might actually check it out, which is the last damn thing we need., beacause you'd try to fit in by becoming a goddamn rave monkey that needs huge amounts of E to do anything besides stand around like a bloody retard.



FYI: There is no such thing as a Rave anymore. I've said it before , I'll say it again: Raves were a TIME and a PLACE(s). 2005 in Utah is neither the time nor the place. It was a Party, call it a Dance Party if you want to. Judging by the line-up it had the potential to be a damn good one too.

I didn't realize your civil liberties included the illegal use of drugs. Can you please which civil liberty that falls under? I can't seem to find it. Oh, wait, I just realized you made that up. They had undercover officers in attendence and witnessed excessive drug use so they shut it down. Done and done.
Which civil liberty? Sounds like you don't understand the term. A civil liberty is, put simply, a degree of freedom that a civilian posesses. They cannot be created, they can just be maintained or denied.

And despite your ignorance on the subject, there most certainly is a great deal of controversy surrounding the "war" on drugs, and its consequences concerning our civil liberties, by conservatives, liberals, and libertarians alike.

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia denounced compulsory urinalysis of Customs Service employees "in the front line" of the War on Drugs as an "invasion of their privacy and an affront to their dignity." In another case, Justice John Paul Stevens lamented that "this Court has become a loyal foot soldier" in the War on Drugs. For his part, Justice Thurgood Marshall was moved to remind the Court that there is "no drug exception" to the Constitution.

In a rare majority opinion, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit declared that

[t]he drug crisis does not license the aggrandizement of governmental power in lieu of civil liberties. Despite the devastation wrought by drug trafficking in communities nationwide, we cannot suspend the precious rights guaranteed by the Constitution in an effort to fight the "War on Drugs."

In that observation, the court echoed a ringing dissent of the chief justice of the Florida Supreme Court:

If the zeal to eliminate drugs leads this state and nation to forsake its ancient heritage of constitutional liberty, then we will have suffered a far greater injury than drugs ever inflict upon us. Drugs injure some of us. The loss of liberty injures us all.

The "war" on drugs is a war against the American people, fought on our own soil, by authoritarian scumbags. The same scumbags who'd gladly spit on the other issues you hold so dear to have earned a -3+ on your political compass test. Just because you don't take advantage of a liberty you're denied, doesn't give you the moral authority to deny someone else of the right to choose for themselves.

Then change the laws. The police don't make the law; they enforce it. It's their job. The law says drugs are illegal and they enforced it. You're mad at the legislature, not the cops.
Ummmmm, are you mistaking me for another poster? I don't blame the police for enforcing the laws. I blame politicians and the douchebags who elect those authoritarian assholes.

Which civil liberty? Sounds like you don't understand the term. A civil liberty is, put simply, a degree of freedom that a civilian posesses. They cannot be created, they can just be maintained or denied.

General use -
: freedom from arbitrary interference in one's pursuits (as in expressing thoughts, practicing a religion, or pursuing a living) by individuals or esp. by the government and [/B] esp. as constitutionally guaranteed[/B] —usually used in pl. —see also CIVIL RIGHT

The more common use as bolded above refers to constitutionally protected rights. But then, maybe I'm just ignorant on the subject when I read your statement in the most common use of the word.

And despite your ignorance on the subject, there most certainly is a great deal of controversy surrounding the "war" on drugs, and its consequences concerning our civil liberties, by conservatives, liberals, and libertarians alike.

Despite my ignorance on the subject I used it exactly as the justices used it in your quotes.

Yes, of course there is. I totally disagree with the war on drugs. Unfortunately, the police have nothing to say on the matter. They don't make law.

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia denounced compulsory urinalysis of Customs Service employees "in the front line" of the War on Drugs as an "invasion of their privacy and an affront to their dignity." In another case, Justice John Paul Stevens lamented that "this Court has become a loyal foot soldier" in the War on Drugs. For his part, Justice Thurgood Marshall was moved to remind the Court that there is "no drug exception" to the Constitution.

Yes, however, no protected rights were violated in this case. The police witnessed the violation of the law prior to there breaking up the party. They had every reason to break up a party where an abundance of illegal activities are occurring.

In a rare majority opinion, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit declared that

[t]he drug crisis does not license the aggrandizement of governmental power in lieu of civil liberties. Despite the devastation wrought by drug trafficking in communities nationwide, we cannot suspend the precious rights guaranteed by the Constitution in an effort to fight the "War on Drugs."

Ah, see, they used the term the same way I suspected you were using it. They are talking about liberties guaranteed by the US Constitution. What civil liberties, as used above, were violated on that day? Same question I asked the first time.

In that observation, the court echoed a ringing dissent of the chief justice of the Florida Supreme Court:

If the zeal to eliminate drugs leads this state and nation to forsake its ancient heritage of constitutional liberty, then we will have suffered a far greater injury than drugs ever inflict upon us. Drugs injure some of us. The loss of liberty injures us all.

Same question.

The "war" on drugs is a war against the American people, fought on our own soil, by authoritarian scumbags. The same scumbags who'd gladly spit on the other issues you hold so dear to have earned a -3+ on your political compass test. Just because you don't take advantage of a liberty you're denied, doesn't give you the moral authority to deny someone else of the right to choose for themselves.

You make assumptions. Again, I despise the war on drugs. I think it's a waste of money and time and I think people should be allowed to do anything to themselves they want. I believe in legalized drugs, euthanasia, suicide, stabbing yourself in the eyes with pencils. If you're doing it to you, it's your business. It's not the point. The cops followed the law. This thread is about their actions.

Ummmmm, are you mistaking me for another poster? I don't blame the police for enforcing the laws. I blame politicians and the douchebags who elect those authoritarian assholes.

Fine do that. Did you just learn about the war on drugs? Then why is this event an issue? You want to start a thread about the war on drugs. Feel free to do so. In that thread, we will agree. This is a thread about police officers following the law as they are required to do.

Ok one thing that wasn't the military. It was SWAT for all you people screaming it was the military.
Two a thread already exists for this topic and it atleast has far more logical arguments than this one (and far less n00bish comments).
Link to the orignal thread: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=439546&

What civil rights and mumbo jumbo...just Naplm everything that doesnt comply with the natural order of life this involeves gays lesbians and everthying and anything

I didn't realize your civil liberties included the illegal use of drugs.

they do. if merely making something illegal was enough to make something not count as a civil liberty, we would have no liberty at all.

they do. if merely making something illegal was enough to make something not count as a civil liberty, we would have no liberty at all.

General use of the term civil liberties refers to those rights protected by the constitution. Using drugs is not one of them. I do, however, agree that people should be allowed to decide what they want to put into their bodies whether it damages them or not.