UTAH rave Busted by SWAT team...video included

[Jordan 10-E]

[quote="DallasPlaya
I think most of us are trying to explain to you that you are choosing the wrong battle. An illegal, overcrowded rave with security people on drugs is not the right battle. If you don't like the law, change it instead of bitching when you get busted. It's good that you care. I'd guess most of us here do. Don't spin your wheels over nothing because a greedy and/or stupid promoter fucked up.[/quote]

This has nothing to do with a "greedy promoter". The rave was permited. It wasn't "overcrowed". There was tons of open space and room for parking. The security guards were not high. Your assumptions are incorrect.

I have been involved with the Utah rave/club scene for almost 10 years now. You talk about how easy it is to change the laws, of which we have a couple that are always used to close down all night parties. Not so easy. There is quite a history to all of this. Those of you not in Utah might not know the whole story, but many of you have had similar problems in your areas. What happened last weekend was only the latest struggle we have had to enjoy music and dancing.

I am not spinning wheels over nothing and I am not merely bitching. I have put more thought into these subjects over the years than I can even relate. I have long meant to write a book called Raves and the Law. Anyway, I believe we need to find a way forward where LEGAL steps can be taken by promoters to secure their events. This is not really possible here right now. We have been driven to an fro, from city to city, county to county, to practice what we do. And what we do is set up sound systems and lights and play music all night and hopefully some art. Are those acts illegal? Is dancing illegal? Part of the reason we go out to the mountains or desert is because we have been virtually driven out of the cities. We have to keep looking for places to be further and further away so we can dance. Isn't that stupid?

Basically if their were more LEGAL avenues for us to use we would, but the law will not recognize us as a legitimate subculture/community that is spread out world wide. Millions of people are affected by electronic music culture. In SLC for example there are NO legal ways to dance after 2AM. No permits to get. Nothing. If they would recognize us we would have security, toliets, EMT personnel, water, air, etc... We care about the safety of people that attend. We care more about public safety than the cops do.

Drugs are NOT encouraged, though some people choose to do them, whether they eat them before they come in or shove them down their pants or in their bra. We are willing to search and do all that we can to prevent such things, but there is a limit. We are not going to conduct strip or cavity searches. No promoter of any type of event can guarantee that someone doesn't sneak drugs in. None. But laws like the RAVE act supposedly hold promoters responsible for the individual choices of each and every person. That is an impossible standard. Even in a place like prison the government cannot stop drugs and contraband from coming in. But a electronic music event promoter must be responsible for every person? Seems a little bit targeted and purposeful to me.

The government, through these bogus laws and fear tactics, seek to quell a whole movement/culture/industry by CHILLING our freedoms of expression. What chilling really means is that they SCARE US into not attempting to host events in the first place because of fear of prosecution. We are a targeted group where coutless other groups in our society could just as easily fit the bill. This is unfair and I am going to fight it till I die.

[Kinetic IV]

Run a Google search on alcohol and the 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympics. Talk about hassles...that was a mess.

Utah is a beautiful place but I try to get in and out of there. There's something about the place that I don't like, especially the closer one gets to SLC itself. It kinda reminds me of the LOTR...the closer you get to Mordor the darker it gets? Substitute SLC for Mordor.

[Jordan 10-E]

Run a Google search on alcohol and the 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympics. Talk about hassles...that was a mess.

Utah is a beautiful place but I try to get in and out of there. There's something about the place that I don't like, especially the closer one gets to SLC itself. It kinda reminds me of the LOTR...the closer you get to Mordor the darker it gets? Substitute SLC for Mordor.

That's a great example. During the Olympics the city set up venues for concerts, etc. For two weeks straight we had a host of big name bands and (and some djs) play every single night. It was like we were the entertainment capital of the world. The city was doing everything it could make us look like we support entertainment events, but it really isn't true. We do have a really progressive Mayor though that has done a lot to change attitudes around here. Hopefully there will come a time when the laws loosen up a little. In fact, I am going to get on the task once I get back from Burning Man.

[b00m3rang]

Here's what a friend on Socal-Raves wrote, thought some of you might enjoy it:

It's not just Utah. It's Los Angeles. And Europe. And NYC. And Portland. And Brazil. And Goa. And London. And Sydney. And Christchurch. Toronto, Beijing, Des Moines, Miami, Detroit. This kind of crap happens all over the world - in varying degrees.

I've gone to a lot of things like this. My number one fear? It has always been fear of the police that they'll show up and over-react and bust my head open. That's my foremost fear.

I've never been worried about getting bad dope, or overdosing, or being kidnapped or shot or jumped by random thugs or any of the things these Law Enforcement Officers are claiming to protect me from. I don't worry about human stampedes or panics. These things just don't happen with a great enough frequency in my experience to worry about, at all.

Remarkably, I do worry about thuggish behavior, trampling or rioting at mainstream concerts or sporting events. And cops. And overzealous security.

But not at a rave, dance party, outdoor or other gathering of my family and families.

Yeah, there are much larger and easily more news-worthy and terrible problems in the world, all over the place. AIDS. Hunger. Cancer. And more.

But how are we supposed to help them when our own supposedly free lands are sliding into what appears to be fascism, piece by piece by piece?

How are we supposed to become whole, active, creatively minded citizens when we can't even express ourselves as we see fit?

Yeah, it's just Utah. Just some 'kids' in Utah. But it's looking like this Utah thing might just be a simple little straw atop a pile of many, many pieces of straw, growing heavier by the moment.

Viewed as a single incident, perhaps it can easily be dismissed as a bad party, in the wrong place, at the wrong time. But it's not a single incident - it didn't happen in a vacuum.

People I know in my extended family all over the world are outraged about this. And their families, and their families, and so on, from tribe to tribe all over the globe.

We're pissed, we're mad as hell, we're sick and tired of it, and it looks and feels like we're looking around at each other, wide-eyed and pondering how much longer we'll sit still for this kind of abuse to any of our extended family anywhere. And it's not just a raver thing.

And I am not just some kid. I am not in Utah. I grew up in Los Angeles, supposedly a freedom-loving wacky melting pot of weirdness and creativity.

Why would I identify with these kids from Utah? Because I've seen the same things, but no one was there to document them. I've seen tear gas, rubber bullets and nightstick beatdowns by LAPDs finest.

I've seen epithets and hatred and fear of the unknown hiding behind armor and helmet, face shields and arm shields and nightsticks and guns. I've seen a complete lack of any attempt at understanding or empathy.

And I'm weary of it. Yeah, I'm emotionally invested. This is music and people and culture and art that I love with all my heart and soul, without which I wouldn't be who I am today, without which I'm not even sure if I would be alive today.

Last night a DJ saved my life - and that DJ was me!

Why does this have to happen almost every generation? Why is it that the next new wave of culture is almost immediately accused of attempting to destroy society as we know it, of being evil, unnatural, and worse? We are culture. Not sub-culture. We are culture. We are society, and you better get used to it unless you want to end up bitter, alone and waiting to die in a rest home.

The happiest, most complete moments of my life revolve around art and music and people sharing it with me. My happiest moments have been freely dancing myself into blissful inward-outward moments of zen-like oblivion, of moments effortless effort suspended against time and space itself. Once and for all able to see my own strength, my own truth, my own beauty in the face of the Creator or Cosmos that birthed and nurtured me.

And I'm tired of having to apologize for that.

And I'm sick and tired of being afraid. And I'm tired of being told I need to be ashamed. I'm tired of being told to feel guilty for feeling good.

I'm sick and fucking tired of being told that my attempts to make myself feel whole and complete and happy are wrong.

I'm sick and fucking tired of being told that my attempts to minister to my own body, mind and spirit as I see fit and that I find true and correct are wrong.

I'm no longer ashamed. I will no longer feel guilty.

Because I'm not guilty of anything at all.

http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/44493#1019198

love, slide / chaosbit
(chaosbit.com, [email protected])
(This essay is protected by ANTICOPYRIGHT and is released into the public domain.) (Please feel free to copy, transmit, share, print, sample, loop, fondle, chew, or lick) (Author requests that this sig with url and email is left intact in all posts. Thanks.)
[/i]

[joel the ornery]

The government, through these bogus laws and fear tactics, seek to quell a whole movement/culture/industry by CHILLING our freedoms of expression. What chilling really means is that they SCARE US into not attempting to host events in the first place because of fear of prosecution. We are a targeted group where coutless other groups in our society could just as easily fit the bill. This is unfair and I am going to fight it till I die.

i am curious about the methods you intend to use in this "fight" against the man.

please tell us more.

[joel the ornery]

actually, upon second thought. please don't tell us more.

[JediDale]

The Bush Imperial Gestapo need to be reported to the ACLU. Clearly and undeniably there was extremely excessive force being used!!! Expect no less behavior in the future!! Know what a ballot is?? FUCKING VOTE!!


Genuinely,

Jedi Dale Of Reno

(P.S.) there is an online petition group where you can start petitions. I would suggest getting one going and sending it to every one possible!!)

[MrGAJ5001]

First things first, Stuart. Let me see if I can find my way through your response.

"They were under the policy age, without parent or guardian."

Your response: "Show me a .pdf of the policy for a private party on private land."

No. I'm not the one who needs verification, as I'm not the one who called in the police. Now, hang on, this is going to come up, again, later.

Continuing on, you quoted:

"You would get busted for carrying Leatherman? Then don't."

Well, what a catch 22 you face, eh, Stuart? You need your leatherman, but as I have correctly assessed, it can get you busted. Whether or not charges stand doesn't matter. It's still a hassle, and still gets one thrown from the event, correct? So, it's still problematic, right? Does that sound like a joke to you?

Criminal for carrying tools? What a strange, not to mention projected, response. But I agree, fuck that. You're not a criminal for having a leather man, and by my opinion, you're not a criminal for having a leatherman at this particular event. But, clearly, you needn't respond to me.

You continued on, by quoting:
"If SOMEBODY CAN think it's a weapon, it's a weapon"

Again, it doesn't matter if this holds up in court. You're still ejected from the event, potentially brutalized, maybe charged, etc. It still causes HUGE activism from those who were involved, even if they weren't charged, or convicted. Nobody said this was a court issue. This is an event issue, and, so far, we agree on that (as was mentioned, above).

Further, you quote:
"Security personnel on drugs? It would shock me to hear that you're willing to stand up for EVERY security guy on site, and say he hadn't smoked pot, or been drunk, etc."

Now, I wouldn't find it surprising if, right here, you tried to belittle MY experiences, with your own. Truly, and ethnocentric mentality, but, at least you fit in, here in America. Let's see if you do...

"at the events I have worked the hired security were stone cold sober and had no sense of humor about drugs. So, please feel free to remain shocked."

Wow! Amazing! But it goes on:

"But you feel free to continue to make assumptions based on your vast experience and then create straw man scenarios."

This, more than anything you said in you response, discredited you.

But, your snide remarks will seal the deal, as you quote:
"Should I even need to explain my dismay at this"
And respond:
"certainly not, your iron clad conjecture will continue to satisfy me. "

If you're satisfied, then what's with the trite response?

And, finally, my point is solidified, as you quote:
"What did they do?"
And respond:
"specifically? I did not bear witness to that. But you feel free to continue to make assumptions based on your vast experience and then create straw man scenarios."

And THIS is the hook, line, and sinker of all of this. You admit that you did not bear witness to said offense (or lack thereof). I wonder, then, how on earth you can have such definitive arguments. Please see my comments, above, regarding ethnocentricity.

And, no doubt for fun, you threw this quote in:
"If it seems irrational to hold a promoter to the event, then it's irrational to hold the president to the war. Invariably, the guy in charge IS the guy in charge, and he needs to respond. "

What was it, again, we were holding him for? For the event going sour, that's what. Man, oh man, the fickle mind of the activist. Did you forget that? IF there is ANY discussion regarding whether or not he had the appropriate permits or not, then the discussion MUST fall to him.

To be clear; however, I must state: I'm not suggesting anybody was guilty, or innocent. Perhaps, it is I who plays devil's advocate. I continue to believe that this was not a 100% legal event, and I continue to believe that the cops, generally, don't attack non-offenders.

Forgive the analogy, if you must, but, Jesus, did you need to get so bothered by it? Becoming bothered or angered by discussion is one of the very fastest ways to discredit yourself, but seemingly, you'd understand that.

I would love to hear why you have such distaste for analogous commentary. I have my own theories...

I think I must have hit a nerve. I'll keep searching until I'm sure...(there's an analogy that, surely, isn't lost on you).

[ZaphodBurner]

What you need to do is allow yourself to give up the party for a bit and do some surveillance work.

You say this happens everywhere? Fine. That's like seeing people are abducted by aliens everywhere. What we want is proof, not black helicopter stories. You wanna beat big brother, you gotta be big brother. Start watching.

The enviromentalists in the Pacific Northwest, during the timber salvage rider, were infiltrated by timber industry operatives and hired goons (turns out I used to play paintball with one of 'em), undercover police, etc. My participation in protecting the environment was helping identify these people, secretly, so they could be spotted at future events, and having the equipment ready in case something went down.

I'll spare you dozens of stories, but ultimately it took Republican-looking shorthairs like me sitting around with scanners, radios, video and still cameras, etc. You get -enough- evidence and learn to avoid using words like "nazi" and "warzone" and you'll get people's attention through hard proof.

Get yourself an X-10 wireless camera(s), a remote recorder well away from the potential raid-zone, and some microphones. If the police show up, start recording.

It may take hours of recording and lots of raids to get what you want, but it only took one guy's camera to blow the Rodney King story wide open.

At Warner Creek the environmentalists had a secret tree stand with a video camera and a zipline running down into a valley. When the police showed up, the camera started, the tape was put in a bag and shot down teh zipline over everybody's heads, and retrieved later. The police arrested a local news photographer, opened his camera and exposed the film and that action turned the scrutiny back on the police. Too bad somebody didn't have video of what went down though, huh?

...'cause the folks who should have been up in the tree stand were hanging out at the anarchist warehouse in Eugene or smoking cigarettes with their friends down on the road. As a result, the longest-running blockade of a federal road since the Civil War went down in a matter of minutes, 'cause the folks who were hanging out there consuming the donated food failed to get good video. (Mostly. There's some very dramatic video out there.)

Good luck.
-c

[stuart]

An illegal, overcrowded rave with security people on drugs is not the right battle.

you are correct Dallas. But that has not been shown to be the case in the instance. the statement

stinks of disinformation and propaganda

[joel the ornery]

well, i am convinced everything you say is true.
with all those exclamation marks, what you say has to be true.

breathlessly speaking of course,

joel

[theCryptofishist]

(P.S.) there is an online petition group where you can start petitions. I would suggest getting one going and sending it to every one possible!!)

Not me please. I have long thought that signing petitions is the perfect little non action to make people feel good and it's basically useless. (Plus there's always the danger that yet another poorly written law will end up on California's ballot.) On-line petitions are a push button attempt at dang I don't even know. Maybe I should go start a petition in favor of fuzzy ducklings. Everyone likes fuzzy duckings.

[AntiM]

Utah is a beautiful place but I try to get in and out of there. There's something about the place that I don't like, especially the closer one gets to SLC itself. It kinda reminds me of the LOTR...the closer you get to Mordor the darker it gets? Substitute SLC for Mordor.

Nah, the dark center of the Zion Mothership is Provo in Happy Valley. SLC is a hotbed of liberalism in comparision. Me? I live in Ogden, the old railroad town with the tarnished reputation.

[theCryptofishist]

haha. when you're from berkeley these gradiations of utah are so odd!


Actually, I had a friend who used to say that utah was god's country and then god had f8ct it up by giving it to the mormon's. Or something like that. Honest to dog berkeley hate speech there, I suppose.

[stuart]

ethnocentric

characterized by or based on the attitude that one's own group is superior.

I am not really certain this ad hominem attack applies in this case

but anyway

No. I'm not the one who needs verification

as a matter of fact, you are. In logic, science, and in the courts the proponent of a thesis bears the burden of proof. You have made allegations regarding the legality of this event, the attendees, and the promoter and as such need to back them up. Or, you can just continue with the stylistic attacks, arguments by analogy, and other tools of distraction.

You need your leatherman, but as I have correctly assessed, it can get you busted. Whether or not charges stand doesn't matter.

I'm sorry, what was your point here? Was your point that everything is right in the world if someone gets harasses, tossed, arrested because they are carrying tools? If that is your stance then we can quit right now.

And THIS is the hook, line, and sinker of all of this. You admit that you did not bear witness to said offense (or lack thereof). I wonder, then, how on earth you can have such definitive arguments.

yeah man, I'm feeling like a blue fin tuna. I bore witness via a video. My comments are based on what I saw in that video as well as general comments about my own experiences at such events. Then there are the comments that attack directly your reasoning that I have witnessed. As I pointed out earlier, I am making no allegations regarding the event and as such bear no burden of proof.

To be clear; however, I must state: I'm not suggesting anybody was guilty, or innocent.[\quote]

then what is it you are saying?

I would love to hear why you have such distaste for analogous commentary.[\quote]
it is a weak argumentative tactic. More often than not is is the precursor to a straw man argument.

and as far as 'activists' go, not that I really consider myself one at this point, if it were not for that distasteful group of folks we would not have the freedom to have this discussion. We would not have a 1st amendment, which is ultimately what this is about (though there is a bit of 2nd amendment peppering the scenario as well), providing the context for this chat.


and BTW

I think I must have hit a nerve. I'll keep searching until I'm sure...(there's an analogy that, surely, isn't lost on you).

is not an analogy. It's a metaphor. But yeah, sweeping generalizations based on false assumptions generally piss me off.

[Rob the Wop]

How? Because people traded their freedom to overcome their fears. They sat and watched, joined in even, to alliviate their fears.

Hilter's rise to power was through fear tactics?

You need to read more history.

Saddam gained power through fear tactics and overthrowing a government. Hitler's party was elected in through the promise of increased prosperity- mainly through lower middle class, farmers, and industrial workers. He then succoured his power by eliminating rivals in governement.

The mass of people brought him in of their own violation.

So to help you with your further studies, books are the paper thingies held toghether on one side by glue.

[joel the ornery]

[quote="Rob the WopThe mass of people brought him in of their own volition. [/quote]

Noun: volition vow'lishun
The capability of conscious choice and decision and intention
"the exercise of their volition we construe as revolt"
- will

The act of making a choice
"followed my father of my own volition"
- willing

[theCryptofishist]

Hilter's rise to power was through fear tactics?

You need to read more history.

Saddam gained power through fear tactics and overthrowing a government. Hitler's party was elected in through the promise of increased prosperity- mainly through lower middle class, farmers, and industrial workers. He then succoured his power by eliminating rivals in governement.

The mass of people brought him in of their own violation.

Meh. The elected chancellor got sick (was that Hindenburg?) and they burned down the Reichschancelery and had a commie witch hunt. Hitler never won the popular vote in a democratic election.

[Rob the Wop]

[quote="Rob the WopThe mass of people brought him in of their own volition. [/quote]

Noun: volition vow'lishun
The capability of conscious choice and decision and intention
"the exercise of their volition we construe as revolt"
- will

The act of making a choice
"followed my father of my own volition"
- willing

Oop, my bad. Right word in my head, wrong word on paper.

[jennifer6]

Comparing this incident to Hussein, Hitler and others is like comparing watermelons to corn on the cob. Obviously the police had probable cause, the event was deemed illegal by the higher powers, and was busted. Private property or not. Just because an event is on private property doesn't mean the police don't have the authority to act and enter private property if they have sufficient probable cause, which they did. Those that resisted arrest, which by itself is illegal, were probably taken down by force, which is applicable. Those with drugs, were arrested, another illegal act. The battle should be in the courts, with good attorneys. Even Utah courts are fair and those responsible for any wrong doing on either side will have to pay. A pissing match here solves nothing. For shit sake it's Utah.

[Driveway]

Yes, Utah. As stated in the other thread on this topic, no one in Utah is cool.

[can we get these twin threads combined into one great big pissing contest? I been drinkin' cola all day here just to get ready for this]

[Rob the Wop]

You need to read more history.

Saddam gained power through fear tactics and overthrowing a government. Hitler's party was elected in through the promise of increased prosperity- mainly through lower middle class, farmers, and industrial workers. He then succoured his power by eliminating rivals in governement.

The mass of people brought him in of their own violation.

Meh. The elected chancellor got sick (was that Hindenburg?) and they burned down the Reichschancelery and had a commie witch hunt. Hitler never won the popular vote in a democratic election.

It was Hindenburg. Hitler had 42% of the vote but lost to Hindenburg in the 1932 elections. It was a run-off election and a close deal. Once Hindenburg died, Hilter was the consensus successor. So you are right, he himself was not elected. He did, however have the popular support and the Nazi party itself won 288 of the 647 seats of the Reichstag. Coupled with the support of their conservative nationalist allies, who held 52 seats- they controlled a majority of votes.

From then on it was just consolidation of power.

My point was that 'the people' did not 'trade freedoms through fear' to give Hitler the head seat. Hitler tried overt violence to try and overthrow the Bavarian government in 1923, but failed miserabley. After this he wooed the people with his oratory skills and then used political manuverings.

[theCryptofishist]

Fair enough. (I didn't think I'd actually caught you out or anything. In fact it seemed a little off for you. But I do get big picture rather than detail thinking.)

[Rob the Wop]

Fair enough. (I didn't think I'd actually caught you out or anything. In fact it seemed a little off for you. But I do get big picture rather than detail thinking.)

No prob. I wasn't clear on Hitler's rise to power, so I was kind of figuring someone might point it out factually.

I prefer this kind of dialog by far over a simplistic "No you're a poopy-head and WRONG." without any factual basis whatsoever.

[theCryptofishist]

but Rob, you are a poopyhead. Although you're seldom wrong.

[dragonfly Jafe]

Run a Google search on alcohol and the 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympics. Talk about hassles...that was a mess.

Utah is a beautiful place but I try to get in and out of there. There's something about the place that I don't like, especially the closer one gets to SLC itself. It kinda reminds me of the LOTR...the closer you get to Mordor the darker it gets? Substitute SLC for Mordor.

Hah! I never thought of it that way, but it fits! I sneek over the mountain pass, spend a minimum of time there, then sneek back. I am always so glad to be out of Utah. Especially SLC - southern Utah is pretty enough to compensate, but not norther Utah (unless your deep in the mountains)

[MrGAJ5001]

Ad hominem? Hardly. I don't feel threatened. Certainly my response was not a defense. Merely a response. If I used the incorrect colloquialism, I'm sure you'll forgive that, right? Jesus.

The way I see, so far, Stuart....Sour Grapes.

No, again. I'm NOT the one who needs verification. It would seem that Utah State needed verification, which, they apparently did not get. My allegations stand. This event was not 100% legal. You can't prove that it was, and I can't prove that it wasn't. But, to play your game, I can back them up. The event went South. There. My allegations are proven. The event was not 100% legal, and as such, the event was busted up. Done.

I don't see any distractions. I am very to the point.

Very interesting, and again, projected response to the leatherman. What are you talking about? Do I need to, again, agree with you that carrying tools is not a crime? Then I shall. I agree. Stop beating this dead horse. The facts are the facts. Someone may have assessed that a leatherman was a weapon (I don't, but someone might), someone may have been busted for it (there are, likely people at this very event who lost lighters, leathermen, etc. to the cops as "weapons"), and someone may have had Sour Grapes over the deal (clearly). So, what I said was true.

I wonder where that part came from. Would you really suggest that I feel that way? You would really argue that my stance is that it's okay to mob and beat tool carriers? That's what you're saying?

Okay...bore witness via a video. All right...that's fine. But you see a video, combine your standpoint with your experiences at such events, and ignore (in totality) what my standpoint and experiences may suggest. So, ethnocentric wasn't the right word (or maybe it was, but it was unfair to group you with the ravers)...arrogant, perhaps. Allow me to define that, in order to clear this up, ahead of time:
"exaggerating or disposed to exaggerate one's own worth or importance in an overbearing manner"

As I said, perhaps I'm merely playing devil's advocate. What's wrong with that? What you're perceiving as "allegations" I've made are merely my beliefs. I believe, again, that this was not 100% legal, and I also believe that much of what happened was hyped.

I shall allow you, from now on, the opportunity to choose your argument as you see fit, and I'll reserve that chance.

Activism in the face of unfair taxation, representation, and the like are not lost on me. Activism in the face of being busted at a rave (doesn't the term "being busted at a rave" just seem to roll off the tongue) is. Who, on earth, has ever gone to a rave without knowing that the cops might show up?

I like your points about the Bill of Rights, but reminding each other that "that's what makes this country beautiful" is useless. We're talking about a RAVE BEING BROKEN UP. We're not talking about being taxed by people 5,000 miles away. We're not talking about basic freedoms (unless, that is, your arguements are an attempt at legalization of raves and all things ravish, which, I'm not necessarily against).

And, finally...
Metaphor
1 : a figure of speech in which a word or phrase literally denoting one kind of object or idea is used in place of another to suggest a likeness or analogy between them (as in drowning in money);

So...my metaphor, and my correct title thereof, are fine.

[b00m3rang]

Those that resisted arrest, which by itself is illegal, were probably taken down by force, which is applicable.

I wasn't there, so I can't personally vouch, but several of the witness accounts are along the lines of the police/military bust in, a partygoer asks, "what's going on?", and that person is jumped by 3 or 4 officers/soldiers. Other scenarios include people being taken down for trying to photograph the happenings. I don't believe either one of those actions constitute resisting arrest, nor are they intrinsically illegal.

I've been to my share of "raves" that were broken up by LEOs. Usually two or three will walk in and say, "Party's over, everybody leave.", and I've never seen anyone resist. Worst case scenario that I've seen was when the Rangers said, "Everybody sit on the ground with your hands on your knees.", of course everyone complied. They let the partygoers leave, and ticketed the promoter, myself, and another sound guy.

Regardless of whether or not they can get away with it, the force was unduly excessive. I've seen (on TV) police dealing with an armed suspect, camly talk the weapon out of their hand, and then take them into custody without hitting and kicking. You'll be hardpressed to convince me that teenage Jungle fans pose more of a threat than that individual.

If they're so in the right, why were they demanding everyone stop filming? They should be proud of their exemplary service to the community, right?

[stuart]

I'm NOT the one who needs verification. It would seem that Utah State needed verification, which, they apparently did not get.

this is an allegation. You allege that the state did not get a permit. Some folks are alleging that they did.

My allegations stand. This event was not 100% legal. You can't prove that it was, and I can't prove that it wasn't.

first you say your thesis stands. You then repeat your thesis. You then say that I can't disprove your thesis (which is true, though it is not my burden). Then you finish stating that you don't have a legitimate basis for your thesis. I am confused.

But, to play your game, I can back them up.

I have not seen any proof of your thesis. I am reading conflicting statements from you about the validity of your thesis.

The event went South. There. My allegations are proven

if all you have been saying, all this time, is that things went horribly wrong at the event then I certainly agree. My apologies.

The event was not 100% legal

you keep saying that but we really don't know the truth of it.

and as such, the event was busted up

history tells us that the former is not a prerequisit for the latter. That's called begging the question. Post hoc ergo procter hoc. Or some such.

Sour Grapes

is a form of rationalization. When a subject is denied something they find desirable they rationalize the denial by converting the desired thing into an undesirable thing. I am not sure how this applies.

ignore (in totality) what my standpoint and experiences may suggest.

I am unclear on what either of those is.

We're talking about a RAVE BEING BROKEN UP
We're not talking about basic freedoms

well, I assume that the bill of rights outlines basic freedoms

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

and with that I am off to the playa. Hopefully there will be some more information on this by the time I get back.

[ZaphodBurner]

If they're so in the right, why were they demanding everyone stop filming? They should be proud of their exemplary service to the community, right?

There may not be a relationship between right-ness and requiring people to stop filming. Issues like that are rarely what they seem, BUT, riot/SERT/SWAT cops do not like to be filmed anywhere, ever, because the presence of their face in potentially (emphasis there) enemy hands makes it personal.

Having said that, I'll say again that the best thing to do if this sort of thing is a common occurence is to use the power of wireless cameras. A webcam, wireless X-10 type, or a plain ol' set of hidden or unhidden security cameras will work great wonders toward getting video out of range of hostile hands.

They're much less likely to pop you for filming them--or even know that you are--if you're not right there in the melee with a lens in their face. In fact, the really important video is generally captured when they DON'T know they're being filmed, a la Rodney King.

In Wisconsin they made a case out of a 911 call in which the woman told the operator that the police were torturing a guy right on the street. Then when the cop told her to put down the phone and the operator heard it, the whole thing ended up on tape. You might have seen it on network television. Some truly evil cops are being taken apart and facing jailtime because of one witness. (Man, that is a FUCKED UP story.)

-c