|
American Court believes glowsticks are drug paraphernalia (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| bluE_Neon |
| quote: | | So far no blackouts..but I am sure they'll come when we least expect it. |
hehe dood how will u survive a day without TA? :D |
|
|
| Eugene |
Hey trANCe ConTRoL!
First of all I want to tell you that you missed a good opportunity to win a good fortune, if I were you I would have pursued it.
That school principal who said you couldn't have glowsticks, he could be sued on the grounds of violating your FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, that's exactly the category this falls under. Having or not having a glowstick is self-expression.
You could have dragged him to court -- and even to the higher institutions if it had come to that -- and you would have WON, no question about it.
This is one of the core, oldest American idea(l)s ever... and every court decision is based on the Bill of Rights.
No one can violate your freedom of speech, expression, and beliefs here, period. I don't know about you, but that's why I moved here. |
|
|
| StereoPrincess |
| quote: | Originally posted by Eugene
This is one of the core, oldest American idea(l)s ever... and every court decision is based on the Bill of Rights.
No one can violate your freedom of speech, expression, and beliefs here, period. I don't know about you, but that's why I moved here. |
that's the whole arrguement. the freedom of expression is being violated because glowsticks are being banned in local areas in the states. that's what the article is saying. |
|
|
| Eugene |
Let me quote myself...
| quote: | Originally posted by Eugene
I don't know about you, but that's why I moved here. |
Hell, that's why Aaanold moved here! LOL |
|
|
| TrAnCe CoNtRoL |
| next time we have a dance (which will be in september when school starts back up), and he says "no glowsticks" ill bring it up. :) |
|
|
| beroshima |
| quote: | Originally posted by totalcarnage
Yup, you are absolutley right...just remember we are a democracy with checks and balances...he doesn't make all the decisions 'round here. :) |
Well, he sorta does. We live in a two party, bi-partisan system, meaning two parties exist, believe in what they believe, and everyone elected under their umbrella sticks to that. Zero independent thought.
In this scenario / our reality, Bush gets elected, heads up 'tougher drug enforcement laws', adds a new drug czar, which also bleeds to the republican-dominated supreme court delegitimizing pot growers in Cali, tougher penaties going into state senates, and anti-rave laws in my local city. Checks and balances? Its totally corrupted. As part of the party unity, they all stick together and support each other, regardless of their own beliefs...
What the dominating party believes, goes. They all vote the same. Sounds more like a dictatorship to me...
Now, i'm not saying Bush is the source of the problem - its the whole party + the political system its present in. Its like a monster with no head, with no connection to the people at all. At least the press is finally admitting to 'losing the war on drugs', and the waste of money it is.
Repression/Denial/Prohibition is the worst thing there is: whether it is drug usage, sexual orientation, even eating disorders. It just increases the usage, makes it out of control. To minimize, at least control social diseases it needs to be out in the open. Psychologists have proof of this.
This country is so backwards... |
|
|
| TrAnCe CoNtRoL |
| wait if i sued my school on grounds of freedom of expression because they wouldnt let us use glowsticks why isnt anyone pressing freedom of expression and take this to court. even though you would probably lose because you are fighting the government. |
|
|
| u4ea:[soulstar] |
| quote: | Originally posted by twilochik
ummm...just wanted to point out that this took place in new orleans in a local court. so all you peeps bashing gw bush better learn something about our government....gw has nothing to do with law making like this...and this was done in the local state court not a national court...such as the supreme court so he has nothing to do with this. and even if this went to the supreme court to become a national thing he still would have nothing to do with it....it would then fall into the hands of the supreme court justices. all this article is saying is that this is a trend among local courts and could become a national thing. don't blame gw...he has nothing to do with it. blame the judges and who hand down these laws! And remember to vote...yeah your thinking what does it matter....but if you don't vote then you got no right to complain....and what about writing to your representatives in congress....all states have 2 senators and numerous reps. send them a line and tell them what you think instead of bitching on the board. |
Bush is the problem, though nothing related to the rights being violated in some states. Its evidence is in his foreign, economic, and national defence policies. In short, I don't think he knows what he's doing, the american public is not liking it the way he handles international affairs. not to menion the senate is a mess, split down the middle, hoping for bipartisan cooperation is going to be hard. |
|
|
| Juricimo |
| quote: | Originally posted by goldenarmZ
Somebody needs to assassinate George Dubbya Bush before he s america up for good. (I'm not american.. can I still get the death penalty for saying that?.. I don't care) |
i think you're OK...not a direct threat :D, just stating your opinion and here we got this thing called "freedom of speech" which is kinda bad when annoying ppl open their mouth....:D
>JM< |
|
|
| bug_bite |
I didn't realize this topic had already been posted so I am going to copy and paste my own response to this issue into this thread. But first, you guys are really missing the most important part of this. Yes loosing your rights to self-expression suck but more importantly if you read the article and all the restrictions being placed on promoters you will see that SAFETY is the biggest issue here.
The article says that some promoters are getting rid of chill rooms because the gov says people do drugs in them, not having medics because that's admitting you know there are drugs going on, not allowing groups like dancesafe to set up booths because that is promoting "safe" drug use, not even pumping in extra air conditioning because they say that means kids are on drugs, banning ecstacy tests so that a kid doesn't accidently take PMA which could kill them because *apparently* this will stop kids from doing drugs (more like more kids will die from taking something that isn't e)...yah, now there are some safe ideas.
Well on the positive side of things one small thing will come out of this for the New Orleans party scene at least, a really decent underground movement will spring up with less young kids, and less uneducated people who abuse their drugs not use them...so maybe in a way things will be safer at "raves". But then again what about the kids who start doing their drugs at house parties with no medics. The only "rave-drug" related death they've had in Winnipeg (where rave culture has been strong for 7 years) was a girl who took e, 6 morphine pills, and tylenol 3's at a house party and her friends were too scared to take her to the hospital. As a parent what's better? Having your kid overdose at a rave and live because there were medics there or die at a house party because his/her friends are too afraid to do anything about it and figure the kid will just "sleep it off"? Yah, way to go New Orleans...this is really going to save lives.
They're right on one hand tho, kids will stop doing drugs, but not for the reasons they say. They will stop doing drugs because legislation like this is going to mean a lot more kids are going to die over the next couple years and unfortunately it's going to take a lot of deaths before kids become scared of using drugs again. I mean, if they want to slow drug use by putting kids in danger and using scare tactics and leaving more parents childless then they're taking the right route. Whatever happened to protecting our children and ensuring they're safe? I guess the new logic is "you get what's coming to you". Good thing the American government is really on their toes with this one. Next thing you know they'll be banning images of tattoos because they promote reckless behavior...or lightbulbs.
The article is long but I urge you to read through it if you're concerned at all with the implications of this. If we loose our rave culture that means we loose our potential of seeing amazing artists, the young kids - our little brothers and sisters - are going to start overdosing at house parties because there's noone to keep them safe or informed, a promoter who wants to bring in talent could be sent to jail for 25 years even if the event was 100% drug-free. We need to fight for our right to dance, it's too bad our culture isn't large enough to take to the streets like what happened in the UK. But we can still make a difference. Promoters, harm-reduction groups, djs, producers, and lawyers all over North America are urging informed, researched, and well written rebuttals be sent to the local governments of the communities that are facing problems at this time. While the US is by far facing more serious issues, cities in Canada are fast catching up, with some cities not allowing dancesafe groups already. I've been lucky enough to not loose any friends to drugs but I know people who have and not one of them died at a rave or a club, these are safe havens and we need to ensure they don't disappear.
Thanks for your time, if you feel this is as important as I do please pass the URL of the article on and urge people to speak up. If you have parents or business owners who are willing to support this issue please ask them to speak up as well.
-Abegael Drake
[email protected] |
|
|
| twilochik |
| Well said Bug Bite!! Kudos! :) You've got the best approach...presenting your ideas in well thought out, conscise paragraphs. It's writing like yours that will make governments take notice that the people who listen to electronica are not just dumb kids gobbling drugs. The more we present ourselves as a united front who hava ideas and solutions that are backed by sound reasoning the more likely our cause will be heard and won. |
|
|
| Romp |
twilochick, just because it happened in a local court doesnt mean that GW Bush has nothing to do with it. Do you think this stuff would be happening if not for his views and his policies? It may not be a direct result of laws that his administration has made, but it is certainly an indirect result.
What is done at a national level has permutations at a state and local level, ESPECIALLY when the Republican Party has power at that level, since they are most likely going to agree with Bush's policies.
I bet that if Al Gore had been elected this wouldnt be happening (at least not to the same extent) and thats not to say Gore is great or anything, its just a fact. |
|
|
|
|
