Ah, I always love the "I know my rights!" types.

This idiot is whining over at Kos?

The party organizer did get a permit from the health department but not from the health department but not from the county commissioner, which is required for a gathering of more than 250 people.

Don't leftists love government regulation and meddling? What's the complaint? Get 'yer permit leftie. You're the ones responsible for all the big government red tape to begin with.

It kills me how they never see the connection between the big government policies they advocate and the resulting hassles they bitch about.

UTAH RAVERS TREATED LIKE TERRORISTS! EVOL INTENT'S ACCOUNT OF THE INCIDENT!

Yikes. Someone get that moron a paper bag to breathe into for a few minutes.

Here is what happens when two girls go looking for a rave and drugs.

I think I'll be skipping this one...

Laura asked: "Hey, where'd my panties go?"

[innocent look]

Um... what? What'd I do now?

Megan, you look about as innocent as our puppy does when he gets busted chewing on my shoes.

Isn't the mayor of Salt Lake City that big anti-war democrat? Wonder what he has to say about taking away FREEDOM!

Googling around, I am struck by how many progressives are denouncing the cops.

These gatherings are not just about the music, or the dancing. If that were so, the promoters would hire actual cops as security agents, and underage girls wouldn't be getting hopped up on X and letting guys take turns.

And do the cops get any credit for finding and helping kids that OD? No.

I can only conclude that exploitation and criminal behavior is a progressive cause.

Hey, where'd my panties go?

I keep reading this as ace asking, "where'd my panties go? it makes me chuckle. Always figured him for a tightie whitie man -- boxers on special occasions. :)

I guess I have to side with those who are denouncing the police. This whole episode could have been forestalled by a simple phone call to the promoter telling him that he needed an additional permit (though it's not clear that he did). Why did the police allow this to escalate to the point where SWAT and the National Guard were used? Not a very efficient use of taxpayers' dollars.

The whole point was to immediately DE-escalate the situation to zero. Which they have every obligation to do, since the undercover cops witnessed many criminal acts.

Where cops do not attend in sufficient numbers, they are frequently challenged by the crowd.

Just ask anybody who lives near the UCONN campus. One year, out of control partygoers figure they can take on the cops, and a riot ensues. People get hurt, property gets destroyed.
The cops get blamed for it...for not being in control of the situation.

The next year, the cops show up in overwhelming numbers, and they get branded as stormtroopers.

I think they'd rather err on one side than on the other.

Just want to reiterate; anything bad that happens at the party after police witness criminal activity would be on their heads.
They are REQUIRED to intervene.

They went in with overwhelming force and shut the party down very early in the evening. Which they were obligated to do.

They can't just watch all this shit go down, and say, 'Hey, let's just call the promoter and that should relieve us of having to do anything.'

Not to mention the crowd was in excess of 500 people. You gonna send 20 cops in there?

- and I don't think the parents of the kid who OD'd while other people blithely danced around her think it was such a waste of money.

Geoff, don't make a maniac outta me.

This whole episode could have been forestalled by a simple phone call to the promoter telling him that he needed an additional permit (though it's not clear that he did).

What makes you think they would have granted a permit even if he asked? The reason for permits is to make sure the promoter provides what is necessary to handle such a crowd. This includes water, bathrooms, possibly medical aid, insurance, security, etc.

The person who sponsored this rave knew more than 250 people were going to show up. He didn't want to spend the extra money that the necessary permit would have required him to do.

The police can't stop the party until the law is broken, i.e., more than 250 people. They also have to have sufficient numbers to go in there and break it up. The police did nothing wrong.

LauraW
1)Please realize that I'm talking about the 4 week period prior to the concert, when the police were aware of the permit problem but chose to intervene after it started rather than heading it off before it happened.

And to the anonymous poster above, the promoter obtained the health permit and appeared by all accounts to have adequate facilities to host the concert. The lack of the second permit seems to have been an oversight.

2) The rave was shut down due to the permit problem, not because of any witnessed drug or other problems.

3) The girl who "OD'd" was released to her parents within 30 minutes. Not a very impressive OD.

But my basic point was that if the police knew about the issue, why didn't they simply inform the promoter so that he could file the proper paperwork? Or cancel the concert?

I'm with Glenn Reynolds on this one - it sounds like the police wanted to send a message to the rave community.

Geoff, I understand where you're comig from, but a few observations:
1) Up until 250 people showed up, there was no breach of the law. So even if the police knew about the situation 4 weeks prior, there's nothing they could do about it. They are not here to make sure we comply with regulations prior to the fact..that's a promoters job. Police aren't babysitters.
2)My biggest beef with our "justice" system is that the burden of irrefutable proof is on our police. You know there were drugs there, I know it and the cops sure knew it. They have to go in to prove it though and since the only recourse they would hadis a paperwork screweup, why should they not exploit it? For all the cretins that walk because of police paperwork screwups, it's refreshing to see the tables turned.
3) There are people who have died from single doses of contaminated X, so whether she was released after 30 minutes or 30 seconds, there was a justifiable reason to be concerned for her life.
Finally, just to go along with point 2, if the police are hamstrung by the burdens I laid out before, messages may be one of the few tools they have left. It sucks for the innocent, but life's not fair.

Oh, most definitely. If you read the first article I link, the police had a bunch of reports of sexual assaults from a previous rave. I would want police in my area to view that as an incentive to intervene.

The permit issue was an excuse; they wanted to make sure this would be costly for the promoters, to deter them in the future. Totally legal and proper.

Neither the police nor public officials are responsible for getting the proper permits straightened out aforehand for the permittee. That is what the rave organizers are supposed to do. You could say its their job.

If the organizers hand the police an excuse to exercise their public responsibility, that's not the fault of the police.

I'm sorry the OD does not impress you much. Would your attitude be different if she had been seriously injured?

whoops,

looks like we're piling on geoff.
sorry, I didn't see the post above mine before I sent.

lauraw, looks like we posted at the same time. I didn't mean to butt in to your conversation.

Lauraw: You're going to need a Utah correspondent to patrol that canyon. Same general area as the 'splodey semi truck. Maybe next month will be another square state's turn for weird headlines.

Salt Lake's mayor is a piece of work. He should be meeting with the put-upon ravers in a spirit of peace and understanding any moment now.

I have no idea where your panties went. Just glad to know you wear them.

After looking at the latest info, I find that the statute requires a license from the County Commissioner if more than 250 people are expected to be at the event for more than 12 hours. The event was scheduled for 9 1/2 hours. The sheriff has stated that he didn't think it was plausible for people who had partied all night to disperse before the 12 hour limit, so he intervened. His decision, made 10 hours in advance of proof of an actual violation of the law, will be at the crux of the legal arguments in the lawsuits now being prepared.

My point with the OD comment was that there have been exaggerations on both sides: the police have grossly exaggerated the iniquities of the ravers, while the ravers have exaggerated the brutality of the police. For example, the "weapons" seized at the concert resulted in a single charge - against the owner of the property. And most of the drugs seized were taken from the security staff, who had confiscated them as people entered the concert area.

When they came for the ravers I said nothing, for I didn't like to bob up and down all night. When they came for the Phish fans I said nothing, 'cuz I didn't like wearing 60's clothes anyway. When they came for the Buffet fans i said nothing, 'cuz he's basically been singing the same song for 30 years. And when they came for me at a Pat Metheny concert, I said "at least they're not going to put me in the Buffet fans."

I interviewed Pat Metheny and Lyle Mays in 1980.

They were cool.

Geoff, you can't use the 12 hr limit in the promoters case. Because, in the words of Jim Carey: "It's very damaging to my case"(or something close) If true, that blows a good deal of my support for the police.

I see what your saying about the drugs, too. Obviously people do drugs at all major concerts, too, but I wouldn't want them busting all concerts in the states. That being said, if they needed a permit-like excuse to take one down that they had grounds to think was going to be particularly bad...well I probably wouldn't be too preturbed.
Remember, the world is shades of grey..or gray..or some other non-color...whatever.

lauraw wrote:
I can only conclude that exploitation and criminal behavior is a progressive cause.

You got it.

Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, a classic study of modern totalitarianism, contains a line that epitomizes the concept that Gramsci tried to convey to his party comrades: "A really efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude." ...

The older America of unregulated lives, honest government, clean cities, crime-free streets, morally edifying entertainment, and a family-oriented way of life is no longer vivid in the minds of many Americans. Once it is gone completely, nothing will stand in the way of the new Marxist civilization [...]

Catherine Legge of Coalville, the mother of a 23-year-old son whom she fears will someday be sent off to war, told the mayor, "You're a national hero."

Thanks skinbad. I got to see my lunch twice today.

After looking at the latest info, I find that the statute requires a license from the County Commissioner if more than 250 people are expected to be at the event for more than 12 hours.

So, 10,000 people at an event for 11 1/2 hours would only require the same permit as one for 250?

Sorry, I'm not buying it.

Lets assume the party organizers are in compliance with valid permits.

As a practical matter, are police allowed to raid a party if the only thing they see is widespread drug use and underage kids drinking?

I know they can in a bar.

You don't have the right to be so drunk in public that you can not care for yourself. Passed out is not being able to care for youself.

And under the influence of a controlled substance is also illegal.

Lauraw:

I'm 100% in favor of enforcing drug laws and preventing underage drinking. I just think that the ravers got handed a raw deal. Some ravers don't rape or get raped at concerts - a couple don't even do drugs.

I also think the use of SWAT teams in cases like this is excessive, and I'm pleased at the magnitude of the backlash.

The rave was open to the public which means a cop can go in and make observations. Once they observe illegal activity, they can shut it down.

The SWAT team is comprised of police officers. They can perform mulitiple functions. It was not unusual to call them in to help.

Well, the police had to make a judgment call there. In their judgement, a larger presence was better than a smaller one. Maybe if you were head cop, you would have chosen differently.

Its not like larger numbers of cops = brutality. In fact, the reverse is true, because the crowd doesn't challenge.

There WAS underage drinking, there WERE drugs- and not just the stuff off the security guys; recall that the EMT's and undercover police were offered drugs multiple times.

What precisely bugs you? Just the sheer number of cops? If you think the ravers got handed a raw deal, don't blame the cops, blame the dopers who caused the problem.

Is it a monkey SWAT team?

Crap, let's try that again.

Monkey SWAT Team

Screwing up makes me so mad I could throw feces. But Monkey Mary Todd really hates that.

I think the equipping of the cops is what "precisely bugs" me. You may recall when SWAT teams were first formed, there was a large amount of public concern about the use of paramilitary forces against American citizenry. We were assured that they would only be used in extreme cases, and the SWAT teams proved their worth in that capacity. Now, however, we see them used in conventional law enforcement roles, such as crowd dispersal. That's a line that shouldn't have been crossed.

The other item that "precisely bugs" me is that it is not the function of the police to set citizens up for failure. They sandbagged the promoter rather than working with him to create a legal, safe event. If they felt that there was a strong risk that the function would have gone over 12 hours, they should have cautioned the promoter prior to the event. Or they could have asked the promoter to turn people away after a capacity crowd was reached.

As to the drug and alcohol problems, I think conventional law enforcement practice would have sufficed.

They sandbagged the promoter rather than working with him to create a legal, safe event.

Who says the promoter was even interested in working with the police? Do you think these guys are babes in the woods, and don't know what goes on at their own events?
The drug use is part of the allure, and they know it and encourage it because it makes them money.

Otherwise it would just be another concert, instead of a 'rave.'

And everytime a cop works undercover, there is a set-up involved. They are not causing the criminal activity, just observing it.

You take the last word.

Lauraw:

No need to go on - you see the drug use at rave concerts as the overwhelming factor, and I see questionable police conduct as the overwhelming factor. You are absolutely correct in saying that ravers need to clean up their act, but I don't believe that that is the message they'll take home from this incident. And if they succeed in the courts they'll probably even interpret it as an affirmation of the rave lifestyle.

The amusing thing is that it appears that that county does not allow dancing past 1 am - dancing between 1am and 6 am is a misdemeanor. That certainly would have put a crimp in the ravers' itinerary.

The amusing thing is that it appears that that county does not allow dancing past 1 am - dancing between 1am and 6 am is a misdemeanor.

Hmm. Well, we'll just SEE about that.

Little known fact - I have 2 degrees of separation from Kevin Bacon. I was an extra in The Flintstones (you can actually see my face in the restaurant scene) with Elizabeth Perkins, who starred with Bacon in He Said, She Said.

Now, however, we see them used in conventional law enforcement roles, such as crowd dispersal. That's a line that shouldn't have been crossed.

This is nuts and so was the part preceeding it that I didn't bother to quote. SWAT is just an assignment within a law enforcement department and consists entirely of law enforcement officers. They can and will be deployed in any manner those in charge see fit, including a non-SWAT capacity when needed. This is done in every law enforcement department everywhere. That some lefty is offended by the practise is irrelevant.

They sandbagged the promoter rather than working with him to create a legal, safe event.

You want the police to assume the job of the promoter. This is absurd.

If they felt that there was a strong risk that the function would have gone over 12 hours, they should have cautioned the promoter prior to the event.

It's not their job. Plus, you are hung up on the permit violation when frankly it is irrelevant. This was a public event. The police had the absolute right to attend. When doing so, they observed wide spread and flagrant violations of the law and they closed down the party.

Or they could have asked the promoter to turn people away after a capacity crowd was reached.

Again, that is the promoter's job, not the police.

As to the drug and alcohol problems, I think conventional law enforcement practice would have sufficed.

This was the use of conventional law enforcement practices. You may not agree, but it's not exactly something you have any expertise in, is it?

I think geoff wanted the police to learn the root causes of raves before they went in and busted it up. lol!

Anonymous:

Your comments completely miss the point. According to the police chief, the event was closed down due to the lack of permit. Period. There were arrests for drugs and weapons which were incidental to the closure, but this was not, per se, a drug raid.

As to your ignorance of the issues of the use of paramilitary forces against American citizens, I direct you to a Cato report which can be found here.

Finally, I am not a lefty. I am normally an ardent supporter of law enforcement and the military. But in this particular instance I feel that the law did not best serve the public interest.

I'm with Geoff here. SWAT at a party? Are you kidding me?

Now laura's going to cut me off in my dream tonight, but damnit, woman, just because you haunt my dreams doesn't mean you own my mind!

Am I crazy, or wasn't the issue that some guy claimed the cops used excessive physical force, you know, beat up girls and stuff? Police dog attacks... tear gas, rifles pointed at heads. "Ravers treated like terrorists (well, not like Deuce-Four treats terrorists). None of which has been corroborated?

Wasn't that it?

Your comments completely miss the point. According to the police chief, the event was closed down due to the lack of permit. Period. There were arrests for drugs and weapons which were incidental to the closure, but this was not, per se, a drug raid. >/i>

No, you are missing the point. It doesn't matter what reason the chief of police gave so long as a valid reason to shut it down existed. It did. Undercover police were on the premises and observed numerous laws being broken which gave them the right to shut it down and make arrests. While doing so, any other crimes they observed, and subsequent arrests they made as a result, are legal.

As to your ignorance of the issues of the use of paramilitary forces against American citizens, I direct you to a Cato report which can be found here.

No paramilitary force was used. No raver was taken out by a sniper. I couldn't care less about any cato report. I want my police to be in the best physical condition and use the most up to date tactics. They protect ME. They are not the enemy unless you are a member of the black helicopter crowd.

You want something to be afraid of? Be afraid of when there is a tactical alert and they need bodies and they make the detectives, who are not in the best shape and a bit on the old side, get back into uniform. That, not SWAT, should scare people. lol!

Finally, I am not a lefty. I am normally an ardent supporter of law enforcement and the military. But in this particular instance I feel that the law did not best serve the public interest.

One, didn't sound like it and two, you are wrong.

geoff,
"the rave community"??
You're kidding right?
That's like saying "the pedophile community", or "the welfare community", when what you mean to say is "the mob of shitbums".
Let's not go giving this pack of morons more credit than they have coming.
And hey, 20 years ago I was one of them, and I know what kind of idiots my friends and I were.

I'm with Geoff here. SWAT at a party? Are you kidding me?

Nope. Once again SWAT are police officers. When they need additional police officers they call in SWAT. They perform many functions, not just the ones you think they should perform.

One thing about SWAT is that they tend to be the cream of the crop, squeaky clean, and train train train. It's a difficult unit to get into. They just don't take anybody. You people watch too many crappy movies.

As a lifelong lefty, I'm pleased to see posters here questioning the practice of paramilitary-garbed super-police raiding parties and busting heads. I think people who take E and jump around in a daze are idiotic, but police have better things to do than beating up druggies, like preventing rapes, robberies and murders.

Oh, and to the first poster: the "I know my rights" group would, of course, include Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, Payne and Washington, would it not?

I'm pleased to see posters here questioning the practice of paramilitary-garbed super-police raiding parties and busting heads

I hear they work "commando".

Bill, I'm surprised you'd lower yourself to mention those slave-owning Christers.

Enough of this jawboning about political theory. Let's get back to talking about panties.

Am I crazy, or wasn't the issue that some guy claimed the cops used excessive physical force

I've been waiting for the pics of smashed and lumped up raver faces and heads...

Surely if someone can shoot vid during the raid, getting some mug shots and pics of people after shouldn't be too hard. SmokingGun manages to get this stuff all the time.

WHERE'S THE BEEF?

Oh, and to the first poster: the "I know my rights" group would, of course, include Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, Payne and Washington, would it not?

No, it's the drugged out rich boy asshats and leftys who think they know the constitution but have never bothered to read it. hth

"Enough of this jawboning about political theory. Let's get back to talking about panties."

Agreed. At least one post per day should be about Laura's panties.