Joe Biden, the RAVE act, dubstepforum, and you

[dj cal cutta]

This is an open thread to all ninjas, all over the world.

Joe Biden is Barack Obama's running mate for Vice President of the United States. Now for such an admirable(or not-admirable, depending on how ya see it) position, he is *also* the man who co-sponsored the RAVE act(wiki page here: RAVE act ). The RAVE act is pretty contradictory to the direct interests of most Americans who frequent this board.

So the point of this thread is this...how averse are you to Joe Biden as VP? This is *not* a thread to bitch about how much worse Sarah Palin is, or another possible candidate who would be better. This is for those, who are voting Obama(or are supporting Obama from abroad), how do you feel about him supporting the man who co-sponsored such a toxic movement against the electronic music community in the United States.

Personally, I'm still voting Obama, but this is very much stuck in my craw.

[djshiva]

i do have to admit that biden's involvement with the rave act sticks in my craw as well. that said, one of my old old friends, who was one of the first promoters in indianapolis, had a lot of trouble because of it. but he was actually one of biden's first volunteers on his senatorial campaign in 1972, and he knows the guy. according to what he knows of biden, he really is a "family man" and whether or not i think the bill is completely the wrong way to deal with things, i at least think his motivation was protecting kids.

it's just that in this country, we would rather shelter kids, and if that doesn't work, arrest them for fucking up, rather than giving them the info they need to avoid making stupid decisions, and letting them crash and burn occasionally to learn the hard lessons they need.

this constant treating of children as if they are morons who can't do anything unless we keep them away from bad stuff really isn't working.

[relaks]

biden's a dick.

fuck him.

[dubsteptim]

the rave act sucks, but biden isnt perfect anyways

but seriously it doesnt piss me off enough to not vote obama/biden

mccain/palin would do things 10000000x worse in america besides the rave act if elected.

[gwa]

Are pills still as popular as they were in the 90s? (In america)

[misk]

gross. that kind of sucks, doesn't it? Makes me wonder if things will be getting worse for us with O as president.

[relaks]

I'd never even heard of this bill, though, I haven't lived in the US since 2000.

Has it actually affected the party scene stateside?

[relaks]

wonder if things will be getting worse for us with O as president.

if

[dj cal cutta]

Has it actually affected the party scene stateside?

To an extreme...pretty much any cooperation a local city or state govt. would *ever* have with rave promotors was thrown out the window with the RAVE act. Be it the RAVE act itself, or the state-based legislation that followed in most states shortly after the RAVE act(which, obviously, was a direct influence on any actions by state govt.).

Most actual raves that happen now are totally renegade, due to the RAVE act.

[hera]

as far as im concerned, thats a petty concern

Are pills still as popular as they were in the 90s? (In america)

no.

[djshiva]

as far as im concerned, thats a petty concern

obviously with the iraq war, the financial crisis, and other issues we are dealing with currently, it may SEEM like a smaller concern. but the time and money spent on the drug war in america (which this bill is unquestionably a part of), along with the unprecedented number of nonviolent "drug offenders" currently serving time in prison is a serious issue our country needs to face up to.

it is both a massive drain on our resources, AND it feeds into the erosion of our civil liberties that this administration has taken the the extreme. also, in many states, slapping someone with a drug felony is a nifty way to disenfranchise thousands of people.

without going into massive detail, i do not think it's a petty concern, but simply a piece of a much larger puzzle that frequently is glossed over to focus on the more obvious (but still connected) problems we are facing.

that said, i am still not voting for McLame. no matter what.

[dj cal cutta]

as far as im concerned, thats a petty concern

care to elaborate?

edit: and once again, I agree w/Shiva 100%. Esp. on the "civil liberties" aspect(if ya read the RAVE act specifically, it intrinsicly ties drugs to raves, assuming that noone who goes to raves would go without trying to score drugs, and this assumption and then policing to prevent raves on such an assumption, is most certainly an infringement on civil liberties)

[djelements]

The version of the rave act that I heard was actually helpful.
It was that you couldn't prosecute a rave organizer unless they were making the rave as an event to facilitate drug use and sales. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[dj cal cutta]

The RAVE act was designed to assign drug sale conspiracy charges automatically to a rave promotor. Huge fines and/or jail time could be faced by a promotor if a rave was busted, drugs were found and the event is w/o proper licencing and such(which, post-RAVE act, would be impossible to get as the act itself implies that raves are designed as a place to buy/sell drugs).

edit: ah, furthermore, there was a very subtle and secretive "child protection" measure to the RAVE act added,

http://www.drugpolicy.org/communities/raveact/

[hera]

as far as im concerned, thats a petty concern

care to elaborate?

sure. changing my vote based on the rave act is about as logical as supporting Palin because she's a woman. call me battered, but I would put up with alot more on his rap sheet if it meant keeping McPalin out. you & shiva are absolutely right, though. But the rave bill just isnt a deciding factor for me, and voting for the man who co-sponsored it doesnt keep me up at night. If it was up to the Republicans they'd have rave promoters hanged by the balls. so to speak.

[little boh peep]

changing my vote based on the rave act is about as logical as supporting Palin because she's a woman. call me battered, but I would put up with alot more on his rap sheet if it meant keeping McPalin out. you & shiva are absolutely right, though. But the rave bill just isnt a deciding factor for me, and voting for the man who co-sponsored it doesnt keep me up at night. If it was up to the Republicans they'd have rave promoters hanged by the balls. so to speak.

My thoughts exactly. What Palin stands for takes away many more of people's personal freedoms than the rave act.

[djshiva]

changing my vote based on the rave act is about as logical as supporting Palin because she's a woman. call me battered, but I would put up with alot more on his rap sheet if it meant keeping McPalin out. you & shiva are absolutely right, though. But the rave bill just isnt a deciding factor for me, and voting for the man who co-sponsored it doesnt keep me up at night. If it was up to the Republicans they'd have rave promoters hanged by the balls. so to speak.

My thoughts exactly. What Palin stands for takes away many more of people's personal freedoms than the rave act.

oh i don't think any of us disagree on this point, trust me.

but it does bear some analysis nonetheless, because even if obama/biden wins, we have to remain vigilant because the dems have done plenty of damage in enacting insane draconian laws themselves.

[bellybelle]

changing my vote based on the rave act is about as logical as supporting Palin because she's a woman. call me battered, but I would put up with alot more on his rap sheet if it meant keeping McPalin out. you & shiva are absolutely right, though. But the rave bill just isnt a deciding factor for me, and voting for the man who co-sponsored it doesnt keep me up at night. If it was up to the Republicans they'd have rave promoters hanged by the balls. so to speak.

My thoughts exactly. What Palin stands for takes away many more of people's personal freedoms than the rave act.

oh i don't think any of us disagree on this point, trust me.

but it does bear some analysis nonetheless, because even if obama/biden wins, we have to remain vigilant because the dems have done plenty of damage in enacting insane draconian laws themselves.

yeah thats how i feel about it. as much as people might be voting for Obama/Biden for various reasons, there are still consequences to be paid for our choices, none of which will be made manifest until said president takes office. Though voters might be thinking they are making the right choice in voting for their respective favorite, people still should be equipped to really handle what it means for that person to win. As many people feel that Obama is the right choice, if he were elected, do our lives end after that point? Are there still issues that have to be practically assessed and decisions implemented? The voting process is merely the closing of a chapter. We as conscientious citizens must be prepared for the rest of the book, no matter who it is written about.

[Whistla]

well that seals it
niether are worth voting for, if mandem cant get his head around the reality of drug use then he should have no position of power imo. (in that its a sign of things to come with regard to other difficult issues)
end of

(its the same with the Criminal Justic Bill here in UK, anyone who supported it I wudn't vote for on principle)

[kidlogic]

The RAVE act was never passed. It was voted against twice. Yes a version of the RAVE act, called the Illicit Drug Anti Proliferation ACT was tacked on to the Amber Alert bill, but its no where near as restrictive as the original RAVE act would have been. Both acts were to change the wording of the Controlled Substances Act of 1907 to basically enable the procecution of people who owned the property used for raves or similar gatherings. It was also meant for places such as crack houses, meth labs, and pot farms.

Also, both Biden and Hillary, among others, co-sponsored it the second time around. Would Hillary's support of it have changed your mind about voting for her? She was running for president.

The office of the Vice President is ususally not as important an office as it has been while Dick Cheney held it.

"As designated by the Constitution of the United States, the vice president also serves as the President of the Senate, and may break tie votes in that chamber.[2] He or she may be assigned additional duties by the president but, as the Constitution assigns no executive powers to the vice president, in performing such duties he or she acts only as an agent of the president."

My point in all of this is that promoters have bounced back. Yeah, its an infringement of our civil liberties, but its no Patriot Act.

If anything it has seemed to make promoters a bit more responsible with throwing parties. There are still at least 5 or 6 parties on any given weekend in LA, and hardly any busts that ive seen. The last few 'raves' Ive played at Ive even seen cops there, bouncing to the beat as they do their rounds. Fact is, money talks. Permits cost money. Parties make the city and county money with their permits, and they seem to realize it. So yeah, not as many illegal warehouse parties anymore, but parties actually last as long as they are sposed to now, dont get broken up, and are in a venue thats usually nicer and not dangerous to be in.

And yes, pills are still very popular, just not in the clubs. The past few raves Ive been to were nothing but gurning underagers in neon and fairy wings, sitting in cuddle puddles sippin water and sucking on pacifiers and flinging glowsticks around. Nothings changed really other than we're getting older.

So yeah, it sucked for a while, but its been 5 years since it passed. I know scenes in certain parts of the country took it harder than others (Chicago for instance) but scenes in other parts of the country didnt even notice it (California).

So, in short, as much as I dont like Biden, there is no fucking way thats gonna change my vote. If anything, him openly going against some of his running mates platform and spouting off anti gun control laws that worry me more, and thats still not gonna stop me from voting for Obama, because #1. he's not gonna have that much power and #2. McCain is a lying old bastard, and Palin is grossly underqualified, and we as a nation cant afford to hand them the keys to the White House.