This has nothing to do with drugs, and everything to do with the government having the power to shut down the free peaceful gatherings of groups they don't agree with. Look at who they targeted for their first use of the RAVE act, NORML and SSDP!! :|
Damn, maybe that is my problem. I haven't taken any marijuana consciously, but perhaps someone has been slipping it in my food or something. I just can't seem to get motivated to get anything done, other than sitting on my ass and posting here all day.
LOOK AT THE LAW. A peaceful gathering of people advocating political reform was preemptively SHUT DOWN because of the RAVE act. That's acceptable for you!?
dahunan
Lifer
- Jan 10, 2002
- 18,191
- 3
- 0
Advocating more liberal DRUG use laws is what they were advocating. I highly doubt those people are only interested in medical marijuana use.
Would have been nice if someone stopped many of today's children from becoming heroin addicts at the age of 13. <<and then they hate their parents-- run away from home--and become prostitutes.
Tell me ONE good thing that drug abuse does for society?
So now the first amendment doesn't apply to people you don't agree with?
Oh yeah, a good thing drug use does for society.....Two words: Pink Floyd
Incredible. I knew this orwellian act was defeated last year but hadn't realized that it was backdoored onto a completely unrelated bill. This act is outrageous. It gives the federal government the ability to threaten any event, demonstration or rally organizer with 20 years in prison and up to 2 million in fines. If the government doesn't want to see a particular rally or demonstration, just threaten the event organizers with the RAVE Act. Suppression of free speech at it worst, and it appears that its first use is exactly what opponents feared and lawmakers guaranteed wouldn't happen. I cannot express enough disgust about this.
Good God, doesnt anyone give a rat's ass about freedom?
This isnt about drugs its about censorship. Freedom of Speech applies to everything, (well it used to). The KKK can have rallies, but talking about drugs is not protected by the constitution?!
What will you fight for if not your rights?
And it's not even restricted to that. Want to hold an event protesting or organizing (insert cause)? What kind of people you think will show up? Sure there will be all kinds of people that show up but you can bet there will be some element of drug users. In comes the jackbooted DEA saying that if even one user is caught you will be indicted under the RAVE Act as the organizer of the event. Sure, you may get off, maybe not. Who knows, and who wants to take that chance when faced with heavy fines and up to 20 years in jail?
The law is incredibly broad and allows for indiscriminate application.
alzan
Diamond Member
- May 21, 2003
- 3,860
- 2
- 0
Originally posted by: Insane3D
Originally posted by: Dudd
Originally posted by: Insane3D
I was almost KILLED in one of those munchie attacks!
When you stick your head in the bag of Doritos, be sure to pull it out before you pass out. If I were Evadman, that would be my tip of the day.
Nah, I was minding my own business...visiting my local 7-11 late one night. I got out of my car and started for the door. No sooner had I moved towards the door, I was run down by 4 or 5, maybe 50, crazed potheads looking for nachos and ice cream. It was dark, so I couldn't identify them, but all I saw were several sets of bloodshot eyes, and they were moving very slowly. I barely escaped with my life! :Q:Q
Wasn't that a movie on the Late Late Late Show?
alzan
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
You are quite possibly the biggest idiot who posts here. In political commentary, what you described here is called "the freedom to pace inside a cage." My advice to you is to respect your betters and keep your mouth shut when you have no idea what you are talking about. Having read many of your posts, you are a textbook example of why many political experts throughout history believed that democracy can never succeed.
Sorry about your ADD. This isn't about drugs. This is about the improper use of a new drug law to shut down a political rally and hence kill political free speech.
edit:
The only thing that most people will fight for is the ability to ruin other people's lives and goals. The agendas of both the liberals and conservatives in this country are obsessed mostly with just attacking the other side. Their own rights are meaningless compared to their needs for hate and vengeance. Acting like a busybody with the power to sit in judgement in everyone else's lives gives them a profound feeling of power - their own personal drug. People create their own hell, then try to put everyone else in it.
This is the one of the most retarded responses I have seen yet. This is not about drugs; it's about freedom of speech and freedom of assembly.
Just suppose you wanted to organize a protest of the harmful ingredients of baby milk that was being used by a certain manufacturer, or suppose you want to sponsor a political rally of your presidential nominee. Just suppose that the goverment, for whatever reason, was opposed to this. Now you can expect all kinds of people to show up, especially for the protest or if the political rally is for a fringe candidate. In walks the DEA waving around the RAVE ACT and threatening to use it if even one person is caught getting high at your event. Rather than risk the possibility of prosecution, and the inherent expenses, you are forced to shut down the event. The government has just effectively quashed freedom of speech and freedom of assembly.
The nature of this Act is so broad that it has taken away these rights at the whim of the government. And don't say it wouldn't happen that way; it already has happened that way.
That's fine, and I would want people to remain not-stoned as well; but what if you organized an event and tried to check to make sure nobody snuck any drugs in, but somebody got some in anyway. Would you be responsible?
Nitemare
This------thread-------is----------about-----------freedom-----------of-----------speech----------and-----------freedom---------of----------assembly. I--------can-----------speak----------more----------slowly----------if---------will--------help---------you-----------understand.
This------thread-------is----------about-----------freedom-----------of-----------speech----------and-----------freedom---------of----------assembly. I--------can-----------speak----------more----------slowly----------if---------will--------help---------you-----------understand.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
Can I lend you enough money to buy a clue?
Your lack of comprehension is truly incomprehensible. This is not about whether or not you have drugs on your person. It's about the fact that if anyone has drugs on their person at an event you are sponsoring or organizing, you are held responsible.
How can you propose to control the type of people that show up at an open public event? You cannot. The most innocuous of public events may attract persons that do drugs. The government has now been given wide latitude to threaten the exercise of free speech and assembly, and they can do it selectively at their own whim. It doesn't matter if they prosecute or not, the threat is enough to close an event down.
For the last time, this is not about the rights and wrongs of somone getting high. It's about a person, as the organizer of any kind of event being responsible for drug use at the event and subject to this draconian law. It's about the government's new ability to smother any assembly that they see fit to smother.
Nitemare
Lifer
- Feb 8, 2001
- 35,461
- 4
- 81
I would imagine that it would be alot harder to find illegal drugs at a rally to legalize marijuana than it would be to find them in a less conspicuous public event. They are advocating the legalization of an illegal substance. How is this an innocuous rally?
If they were holding a rally for legalizing the the smoking age to 10 and there were 12 y/o at this rally. wouldn't common sense tell you to leave it at home? I see getting busted at a pro-marijuana rally for possession of a controlled substance Murphy's law at it's finest.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter