JOE BIDEN WILL TAKE YOUR RIGHTS AWAY!!

If he can do this then wht is next Wake up the change that is come are the loss of the peoples rights, just read below and you will find that Joe Biden is not the CHANGE THAT WE WANT!

We're at war. The people in charge of running the war say that we have to trust them: trust their integrity, and trust their judgment.
But how can we trust our government to spot terrorists when it thinks that glow sticks are items of "drug paraphernalia?"

This sounds like a joke, but it isn't. Last year, the Department of Justice and the DEA tried to prosecute concert promoters in New Orleans under the federal "crackhouse law." That law makes it a felony to maintain a building or facility for the purpose of drug consumption. Traditionally, the law has been applied to places that are, well, crack houses. But — calling glow sticks and bottled water "drug paraphernalia" — then-U.S. Attorney Eddie Jordan attempted to jail three New Orleans concert promoters by reasoning that (1) people come to raves; (2) people who come to raves sometimes use drugs; (3) concert promoters must know this (especially in light of the presence of "drug paraphernalia"); and so, (4) a rave must be an event that takes place "for the purpose of drug consumption" under the law.
The federal district court made short work of this claim, dismissing the charges and calling them a violation of the First Amendment. But that hasn't stopped our drug warriors.

Now Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., has introduced a bill (the "Reducing Americans' Vulnerability to Ecstasy Act of 2002," cutely called "the RAVE Act"), also sponsored by Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Richard Durbin, D-Ill. The bill would essentially write into the crackhouse statute the same approach already rejected by the district court in New Orleans. According to The Washington Post:
When he introduced the bill in June, Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., said "most raves are havens for illicit drugs," and congressional findings submitted with the bill label as drug paraphernalia such rave mainstays as bottled water, "chill rooms" and glow sticks.
My three-year-old nephew is fond of bottled water and glow sticks, and usually needs a "chill room." Presumably Biden regards him as a dangerous criminal.

The RAVE Act should, all by itself, serve to explode Democratic claims that it's only the Republicans who pose a danger to civil liberties: nothing in the Bush administration's anti-terror plans would criminalize bottled water. Unfortunately, the RAVE Act (what is it with these cutesy acronyms, anyway?) also suggests that there's a lot of raving going on in Washington — raving lunacy.

The real story is that federal law enforcement efforts against ecstasy have proved impotent. Frustrated by this failure, they've targeted electronic music concerts ("raves") not because they're especially important targets (they're not) but because they're easy, and public, targets.
Unable to endure the continuing evidence of drug-war failure, the drug warriors are lashing out, hoping that the ignorant will be convinced that they're earning their pay. Congress is playing along because, basically, Congress isn't up to the job of riding herd on the massive drug-war bureaucracy.

The drug war has been a massive failure: a waste of money, of lives and of time. It's also been accompanied by extensive inroads on traditional American freedoms: property forfeitures, "no-knock" searches, expanded wiretap authority, and the destruction of financial privacy, to name just a few.

These are inroads that have served the agendas of bureaucrats but that haven't done anything to solve the problem that was claimed as their justification. And the drug war's combination of intrusiveness, corruption and ineptitude calls into question the government's ability to carry out the war on terrorism.

Will the drug war serve as a model for the war on terrorism? Some within the federal bureaucracy seem to think it should, and it's easy to understand why: The drug war may have been a disaster for America, but it has been a three-decade gravy train for bureaucrats. And if Congress can't ride herd on the drug war bureaucracy, it probably won't be able to oversee the terror-war bureaucracy either.

Not being a bureaucrat, I think the drug war is a terrible model. In fact, I think it's an argument against creating a Homeland Security bureaucracy at all. If we can't trust the government to tell a glow stick from a hypodermic needle, then I don't think we can trust it to tell the difference between an American and a terrorist.

I'm willing to support an invasion of Iraq and of other enemy nations like Saudi Arabia or Syria. I'm not willing to support an approach that will turn the United States itself into an occupied country — something the drug war crowd has come a long way toward doing on its own.

THANK YOU JOE BIDEN FOR TAKING OUR RIGHTS AWAY!

The War on Drugs has often been used to suppress music and lifestyles disliked by the political establishment. Local, state, and federal drug laws give the government enormous power and this power has been used to exert control over emerging subcultures. Jazz in the 1940s. Rock and roll in the 1960s. Heavy metal and rap in the 1980s. Electronic music and Hip Hop today.
The RAVE Act which threatens to squash live music and free speech was passed in 2003 when it was tacked onto an unrelated child protection bill. In 2004 there were two additional pieces of legislation considered - the CLEAN-UP Act and the Ecstasy Awareness Act - that threatened to widen the laws to prosecute anyone who holds an event and fails to prevent illicit drug use.
Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) forced the controversial legislation commonly known as the "RAVE" Act through both houses of Congress as an attachment to an unrelated child abduction bill. The "RAVE" Act, also referred to as the Illicit Drug Anti-Proliferation Act of 2003, was introduced as an addition to the Child Abduction Protect Act of 2003, widely recognized as the AMBER Alert bill (S151). The "RAVE" Act had not passed a single committee before being attached to the AMBER Alert bill. In addition, it was so controversial when it was introduced during the 107th Congress that two Senators withdrew their sponsorship.

The "RAVE" Act makes it easier for the federal government to prosecute innocent business owners for the drug offenses of their customers - even if they take steps to stop such activity. This is a threat to free speech and musical expression while placing at risk any hotel/motel owner, concert promoter, event organizer, nightclub owner or arena/stadium owner for the drug violations of third parties - real or alleged - regardless of whether or not the promoter and/or property owner made a good-faith effort to keep their event drug-free. It applies not only to electronic music parties, but any type of public gathering: theatrical productions, rock concerts, DJ nights at your local club or tavern, and political rallies. Moreover, it gives heightened powers and discretion to prosecutors who may use it to target events they personally don’t like, such as Hip-Hop events and gay and lesbian fundraisers.

The "RAVE" Act was passed despite the fact it did not have a public hearing, debate or vote in Congress. It is important to note that because of overwhelming opposition to the "RAVE" Act, legislators were forced to remove some of the most egregious language before it passed.

For example, the word "rave" was removed from the version of the bill attached to the AMBER Alert. Eliminating such blatant discrimination is a victory for our continued freedom of speech. Also, the original bill suggested that prosecutors should view the sale of water and the presence of glowsticks or massage oil as evidence of drug use. These ludicrous "findings" were completely removed due in large part to activists who sent nearly 30,000 faxes in 2003 alone to their Senators urging them not to support the dangerous legislation.

When it was first introduced there was widespread belief that the "RAVE" Act would move through the legislative channels quickly with no revision. Instead, it took 10 months, a change of power in the United States Senate, backroom policymaking, and substantial changes to the bill before it was passed - and even then it did not pass via "normal" legislative procedures.
The "RAVE" Act gives the government even more power to harass and arrest innocent musicians, promoters, venue owners, and fans - all in the name of the War on Drugs.

Law enforcement agencies already target certain types of musical and cultural events and the nightclubs that host them. The Drug Enforcement Administration is prosecuting nightclub owners and promoters that organize electronic dance music events and the military is using drugs as a pretext to close down gay nightclubs. In Michigan in March 2005, a nightclub was raided with some attendees reportedly being strip-searched and over 100 people being ticketed and slapped with a misdemeanor charge, just for being in proximity to people using drugs.

A similar incident happened in 2002 in Wisconsin. In addition, drug laws are often enforced unevenly against African Americans and Latinos. Hip-Hop could easily become a target.
Opposition to the "RAVE" Act remains strong - over 3,000 of you spoke out after the arrests in Michigan. In July 2005 the Alliance submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the Department of Justice for information on how the RAVE Act is being used, in order to determine whether it is being abused by prosecutors. The Drug Policy Alliance and its coalition of partners will continue to work to protect property owners, prevent further criminalization of dance and music events, mobilize opposition, and advocate amending this dangerous law.

Donate to Drug Policy Alliance's fight to help overturn this bad legislation.
Learn more about what you can do to help fight the RAVE Act