Busted by the cops at the burn

Blackrock Lover · Post by **Blackrock Lover** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 1:16 am

djCharlieBrown - Believe what you will. I was there and was never told that was the prime directive (oops a little trecky).

Your statement concerning ubu's incident makes many assumptions. I have tried in my posts to offer some insight as to other factors that might have been present. As noted before I was not there so I will attempt to not make assumptions concerning this incident. I have offered possibilities that might have occured that would lead a reasonable officer to act in the manner that the officers in this case did. I will not be starting an online law class in this post as I am not qualified to do so. However, I would request that you not make blanket assumptions concerning this case, just like me you weren't there and did not witness the totality of the circumstances that lead (what we hope are) reasonable officers to draw the conclusions they did and act accordingly. You are correct that smelling sage and hearing the word marijuana is not going to cause an LE to enter your home and those were not the only indicators in this case per ubu's posts.

Temporary domiciles are protected as are your permanant domicile.

I cannot speak as to what your god given rights are. It would depend on your god. My God would frown on the excess of any substance, which one might measure as any distortion of the thought process. Your god might be different.

As to whether or not marijuana should be legal - I have stated my opinion which is just that an opinion (which like bellybuttons everyone has) and we can go back and forth for months supporting our opinions by any number of studies, morality cases, etc... I doubt either of us will change our opinions.

Socially acceptable is what society allows. Society is the whole not just the members that attend BM. So just because no one reported drug use does not mean it is socially acceptable. Currently society through its elected officials does not allow the legal use of marijuana. You don't have to agree with it but that's the case. Sort of like some members of society don't have to agree with certain wars...but our society engages in them through our elected officials non the less. Larger groups in our society live together (much like BRC) and in those communities break other laws which many find repugnant, should this be allowed? See polygamy below-

Marijuana use is not a harmless activity. Some would argue that if our citizens didn't use drugs then some of those third world countries wouldn't be impacted as they are by the drug trade/war. Others would argue that if it was legal those issues wouldn't exist. Also - see my prior post.

(For something completely different (but somewhat similiar) how responsible am I for our involvment in the middle east, and the death of fellow Americans because I drive a vehicle which only gets 25 mpg on the highway? One can argue we are there for the oil whether or not one agrees with the war and most of us drive autos that could get better mileage. If there was no demand....)

This is BM you are most welcome to come and set up decoy tents.

Abuse is the issue. How we define abuse might be different to each of us.

I appreciate the fact that you, as many here would, have a reservation about including pot as a problem substance.

Hope you found the music you were searching for....

keepthebeat - hmm...
marijuana use is not victimless - see previous post
I agree
I don't know that I agree I would have to think about that more
I believe that could be true - and my previous post would indicate my position
The right to disobey laws that are wrong - very careful here. Who gets to decide which laws are wrong. If it is the individual then rapists have a right to rape. If it is society that decides as a whole what laws are wrong then they will be changed. This is supposed to be a land governed by law that each is supposed to obey no matter their status.

Here's a interesting case which has been in the papers lately. Polygamy - a religous right or a culture that victimizes women and children. Do they have a right to disobey the law with the resultant documented abuse or does society trump their individual and group "rights" to protect individuals that might be victimized and who are powerless to protest.

Compulsive behaviour and addiction are big issues with drugs. But not all the issues. Does smoking pot increase your likely hood of lung cancer or a car accident? If so and I have to foot the bill for treatment then it affects me negatively (many other cases could be made but I'm trying not to go there).

I think I may have mentioned that war thing earlier, I hope it speaks for itself.

Hana Hou - good catch!

Ailchinn - I don't interact with the Sheriff's dept enough to know what all goes on there and what the thoughts and reasonings behind certain acts are. An example would be the "jiffy lube" incident. Did the sign violate a NV law? Someone (not me) should do some research because I don't know. I do know that many of the local LEs like working the event.

Hey it's America you can fund any campaign you wish!

The kid protection issue is one that ALL BRC residents need to pay attention to. It is a difficult issue that we do not want to surface.

Don't stay neutral GET ON MY SIDE I need the help!!

Just kidding. I try not to take sides on ubu's incident but provide thoughts on the matter that may or may not be relevant but hopefully provide food for thought. Of course it's not like I can be really totally impartial, I'm not that good.

As far as drugs and drug use we could save ourselves alot of typing by agreeing to disagree, for all the reasons stated and those not yet laboriously typed!

Hana Hou - could you proof this;)

Polar Weasel · Post by **Polar Weasel** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 6:07 pm

I have nothing substantive to add to the arguments on either side of the issues being raised in this discussion (e.g. should marijuana be legal), as I haven't done the research required for an informed opinion.

I just wanted to thank those who are participating in the discussion, especially Black Rock Lover. This is the most fascinating exchange I've seen here on eplaya; surprisingly, given the subject matter, it's also the most rational and gracious.

Even though some participants in the discussion may disagree with some of the laws currently in force in the U.S., does it strike anyone besides me as absolutely beautiful that (a) we're permitted to have discussions like this with (b) an LEO as evenhanded and enlightened as Black Rock Lover who (c) continually refuses to exhibit knee-jerk reactions to something as traditionally conter-culture as BM while (d) steadfastly sticking to his personal beliefs?

Keep up the thought-provoking posts, folks!

-Polar Weasel

keepthebeat · Post by **keepthebeat** » Tue Oct 14, 2003 3:56 pm

[[quote]If it is society that decides as a whole what laws are wrong then they will be changed. This is supposed to be a land governed by law that each is supposed to obey no matter their status. [/quote

Yes, I agree. This is the issue at hand. Much of society thinks that marijuana should be legalized. Let's not compare it to other issues where clearly most of society does not support legalization ie rape and polygamy.
I previously said that laws change in response to society fighting those laws and that is what I mean by challeging laws which are "wrong". Laws change as society becomes enlightened ie women's suffrage, abolition, free speach. Sometimes Civil Disobedience is necessary ie ignoring those laws which are "wrong".

Yes, I believe that marijuana should be made legal......eventually. What I have called for though is more research on the subject and in order to do this we need to stop moralizing about it. The opposition is not based on fact but on extrapolation from other drug issues. Marijuana is not heroin, cocaine, speed, LSD, alcohol or tobacco. It is a unique substance that likely has many medicinal attributes. The cloak should be taken away and part of that is in slowly making the transition to legalization.

In some ways this has already happened. In Marin where I live and in SF where I spend much time, not to mention Berkeley it is not uncommon to pass people walking down the street smoking a joint. This reflects the degree to which pot has been decriminalized. Personally, I support medical marijuana and at the same time wish people would enjoy/medicate more covertly (out of the view of children) but believe the laxity of law enforcement is progress.

I think that eventually, the rest of the country will follow suit. This is not necessarily a liberal issue. Many fiscal conservatives support the same for economic reasons. Cultivation may be California's greatest cash crop.

Marijuana is not evil.

Laws will change as people continue to call into questions whether we are enforcing the "wrong" ones.

blyslv · Post by **blyslv** » Tue Oct 14, 2003 4:25 pm

keepthebeat wrote:.

Many fiscal conservatives support the same for economic reasons. Cultivation may be California's greatest cash crop.

Yeah, let's do a cost/benefit analysis on the net benefit to society when you take a tax paying person and lock them up in prison for many years.

nick · Post by **nick** » Wed Oct 15, 2003 4:45 pm

Ok, not to pile on with a lot of gooey gook, but this is one of the best threads i've read on the e-playa...

BRlover seem, from his posts at least, to be a smart person who has the presence of mind to think things through from the other side -- this is to be applauded in my book whether it's the baker or the candle maker, but especially from the LE community.

One thing I want to point out to BRLover: Not all LEO's are this thoughtful or judicious -- unfortunately!

Blackrock Lover · Post by **Blackrock Lover** » Wed Oct 15, 2003 4:50 pm

Polar Weasel - I haven't done alot of research either. Just stating my opinion..... I enjoy discussing a variety of topics. However, it would be alot easier to do this face to face at BM instead of all this typing!

keepthebeat - I don't know what the current statistics are for our society as a whole believing that marj should be legalized (I suspect the majority would agree with the status quo, but I don't know). I use the other examples only for sharp contrast, and so that one might pause when saying that "bad" law should be disobeyed, it's a slippery slope.

I agree that laws that you don't agree with should be challenged. Civil disobedience in the form of protesting etc... has proven effective. Simply breaking the law, I don't know.

The issue of how medical marijuana is viewed is intetesting. I believe that if it were legalized for medical use it would be strictly controlled as are other conscious state altering drugs. This is no way implies that people would be allowed to simply smoke pot to get high. I don't believe that would be a medical goal. Doctor's don't usually prescribe alcohol to people so they can get drunk and I view this as basically the same thing.

That is to say that getting drunk or high is not a medical goal, and is in fact an abuse of a drug. Of course people abuse prescription drugs all the time. I don't believe that is an action that is a benefit to society, or the person.

I don't know what makes a substance evil. However, marj is illegal.

blyslv - I don't believe that you will find tax paying persons locked up in jail for many years for smoking pot. However, that is not the issue. It is always cheaper to not enforce the law, no matter what that law is. As I have mentioned before LE is a drain on society that is completely preventable.

Why has no one has commented on the oil issue or polygamy. I find them worthy of discussion.

Badger · Post by **Badger** » Wed Oct 15, 2003 5:49 pm

If we went Waco, the FBI psy-ops would have hard time trying to break us with noise and loud music.....

Even the most seasoned playa pern would crack under a 36 hour barrage of Nancy Sinatra's 'These Boots Are Mader for Walking' played on a continuous loop.

I personally can't imagine the agony.

Mistress of Mirth · Post by **Mistress of Mirth** » Wed Oct 15, 2003 6:08 pm

Again praise for all in this discussion and it not melting into a insult free for all.

I have a few questions for Blackrocklvr concerning interaction between the citizens and the LEO's.

I have been a citizen of Black Rock since 1998, so I have witnessed a lot of changes in the interaction of LEO's and it's citizens. Because I believe (maybe naively) that the best way to handle the us vs them attitude is to try and bridge the gap a bit I have tried numerous times to get the LEO's to stop at my theme camp or just to play with them a little as they go by my street. The reactions I have received have been very chilly. No they wont stop. If I walk up to their golf cart/atv/car I get the distinct feeling like they "think I am up to something", and just want me to go away. I am not scary, my theme camp does not include whips or chains (sadly) and I am closer to middle age than college age. My hands are where they can see them and I am almost alway smiling. Offers of food, water and shade have all been turned down. In fact I have never had a postive reactions to any overtures of kindness. This year I actually tried to give an officer a beaded necklace with the bman logo on it that I had made at home and was told no thanks. The questions are:

Are LEO's allowed to stop and play?
Can or will they have a sip of water from a camp or a wheat thin with cheese?
Should we keep trying or just realize that they must keep a distance from us?
Is a gift considered a bribe?

Thanks again for taking time to exchange with us on this thread and I do realize that you cant speak for all LEO's out there but at least let me know your take on this.

Polar Weasel · Post by **Polar Weasel** » Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:27 pm

I have tried numerous times to get the LEO's to stop at my theme camp or just to play with them a little as they go by my street. The reactions I have received have been very chilly.

[Mistress of Mirth]

I've actually had exactly the opposite encounter with LEOs at BM. In 2001, two officers drove slowly down the road in front of my camp with an alien head on the light bar of their marked SUV, and an irridescent fish streamer on one of their antennae. A neighbor ran out to squirt them with her neon-colored pump squirt rifle, and they laughed and said, obviously joking, "You might want to watch where you point that, ma'am." Folks, myself included, thought this was so cool that they took pictures.

While they were obviously on duty, they were relaxed, smiling, and participating. I'm sure that, had duty called, their attitude would have changed according to the situation, but I honestly believe they would have reacted fairly and honorably. This single interaction has influenced my feelings towards LEOs at BM since that day. Unless I personally observe some of the more negative behaviors mentioned by others in this thread, I'm going to go out of my way to give LEOs a break.

That being said, if I were in their position, I wouldn't feel comfortable accepting food or drink from a stranger -- I'm sure there are some people who view LEOs as the enemy, as targets, and would view slipping them a little extra something in a bottle of Gatorade as a "victory", sad as that is.

I wouldn't be surprised if regulations forbid them from accepting food or drink in any event, but BRL can probably field that one.

-Polar Weasel

Blackrock Lover · Post by **Blackrock Lover** » Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:36 pm

Mistress of Mirth -
I am sorry that has been your experience. I wish you had asked me. I always stop and visit.

Hmm.....middle age - never trust anyone over 30! (Except me)

Seriously, many in LE work in a paranoid mode. It is a result of the training in which you are always preparing for the worst. Because, if the worst happens it can have extreme consequenses. This also results in some less than friendly LE contacts outside of BM.

Now for BM one of the many issues facing LE is having their photo taken and plastered on the web in some compromising situation and therefore they want to avoid interaction. I take a little different view of this. With digital imaging what it is you could take my photo and put me in any situation, anywhere. ( A quick story on this was a protest in OR where the protesters were ordered to take signs off of a gate. A Ranger in the area assisted the protestors in taking the signs down. Someone snapped a photo and .... the headline was a pic of the Ranger holding a sign with a caption that read in essance "Ranger helps protestors put up signs". You just never know what will happen, even when the photos aren't doctored. Of course the poor Ranger caught hell over that one from mgt. New policy - do not touch the signs.)

All offers of food and water will be rejected. Simply because we can't be sure if the items might be tainted with drugs. No offense intended, but one of the cases I worked this year involved a participant who believed they were drugged from a drink given them by another camp. It is most unfortunate that we can't be more trusting as I'm sure you and most all residents intend no harm. I have been offered food and drink many times and always must turn the offer down and try not to look rude doing so.

Now, I'm surprised someone would turn down a necklace. I always like the gifts that are exchanged. This year I tried to have a few things to gift back as well. Most of the LEOs I work with like the gifts. I'm sorry you had a negative experience.

So the answers:
Stop and play - ummm.... stop and converse
food - no unfortunatly & I hate being offered really delicious BBQ and having to turn it down!
Distance - No I would advise you to interact with whom you please. Some will be receptive, some will not. Which is the same reaction I get when I try to interact with the BRC residents.
Bribes - No its not a bribe as long as it isn't offered in return for some official action.

Next year you can plan for whips and chains....

Polar Weasel - I would not suggest the water gun. Even I don't like that, not knowing what might be in the water. I try to be very restrained in that particular situation but I do let the folks know that they shouldn't squirt the LEOs, or the trucks. Once again, if I knew it was water that would be one thing but ya never know.....how sad.

Rob the Wop · Post by **Rob the Wop** » Wed Oct 15, 2003 10:15 pm

The one thing that seems obvious to me, yet may not be to others, is the difference of accidental drug usage on a LEO versus a burner. If there is something in the food, drink, or water- by accident (oops, wrong plate of brownies) or deliberate- a burner will simply have to be talked down or medivac'd. LEOs have guns and training.

Kind of a different ballpark, dontcha think? In project management, there's a concept called risk management. Risks are rated by their likelyhood and severity. If it's very likely, you take precautions. If it's not very likely, but the effect is severe enough, you take precautions. While it's not likely the LEOs will be dosed, the effect could be very dangerous- ergo they can't take any chance whatsoever.

blyslv · Post by **blyslv** » Thu Oct 16, 2003 11:07 am

Blackrock Lover wrote: blyslv - I don't believe that you will find tax paying persons locked up in jail for many years for smoking pot. However, that is not the issue. It is always cheaper to not enforce the law, no matter what that law is. As I have mentioned before LE is a drain on society that is completely preventable.

Why has no one has commented on the oil issue or polygamy. I find them worthy of discussion.

BRL -- why do I imagine you standing at a plate with 6 pitchers lobbing fastballs at you?

...

This is from the NORML website, might be a bit biased and does not address the issue of who is actually serving time. I quote at length here to show the ungodly expense of the war on drugs. I posit that FBI agents will provide better security trying to catch violent criminals then busting headshops and casual users. You mentioned that most people would accept the status quo with respect to marj. laws and sadly, I think you are probably right, see the latest referendum in NV about legalization.
__________________________________________
"Our country's war on drugs places great emphasis on arresting people for smoking marijuana. Since 1990, nearly 5.9 million Americans have been arrested on marijuana charges, a greater number than the entire populations of Alaska, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming combined. In 2000, state and local law enforcement arrested 734,498 people for marijuana violations. This is an increase of 800 percent since 1980, and is the highest ever recorded by the FBI.

As has been the case throughout the 1990s, the overwhelming majority of those charged with marijuana violations in 2000-- 646,042 Americans (88 %) -- were for simple possession. The remaining 12% (88,456 Americans) were for "sale/manufacture", an FBI category which includes marijuana grown for personal use or purely medical purposes. These new FBI statistics indicate that one marijuana smoker is arrested every 45 seconds in America. Taken together, the total number of marijuana arrests for 2000 far exceeded the combined number of arrests for violent crimes, including murder, manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery and aggravated assault. "

http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=3400

________________________________________________

However cost/benefit analyses are not very persuasive on this issue because people have turned it into a moral, semi-religious debate.

What is wrong with getting high? Humanity has done it for millenia, some posit that the argricultral age, along with the development of cities, began so people could produce alcohol. Why does this culture vilify it so much?

And I agree that oil and polygamy are interesting topics and I would love to discuss them, however hundreds of thousands of Americans are not being arrested for their invovlement in either of those things. So the topic of marj. has for me a lot more urgency.

Isotopia · Post by **Isotopia** » Thu Oct 16, 2003 11:15 am

A *bit* off-topic but.....

America owes talk host Rush Limbaugh
a debt of gratitude, Libertarians say

WASHINGTON, DC -- The entire nation owes radio broadcaster Rush
Limbaugh a debt of gratitude, Libertarians say, because his ordeal has
exposed every drug warrior in America as a rank hypocrite.

"One thing we don't hear from American politicians very often is
silence," said Joe Seehusen, Libertarian Party executive director. "By
refusing to criticize Rush Limbaugh, every drug warrior has just been
exposed as a shameless, despicable hypocrite. And that's good news,
because the next time they do speak up, there'll be no reason for
anyone to listen."

The revelation that Limbaugh had become addicted to painkillers --
drugs he is accused of procuring illegally from his housekeeper -- has
caused a media sensation ever since the megastar's shocking, on-air
confession last week.

As the Limbaugh saga continues, here's an important question for
Americans to ask, Libertarians say: Why are all the drug warriors
suddenly so silent?

"Republican and Democratic politicians have written laws that have
condemned more than 400,000 Americans to prison for committing the same
'crime' as Rush Limbaugh," Seehusen pointed out. "If this pill-popping
pontificator deserves a get-out-of-jail-free card, these drug warriors
had better explain why."

Given their longstanding support for the Drug War, it's fair to ask:

Why haven't President George Bush or his tough-on-crime attorney
general, John Ashcroft, uttered a word criticizing Limbaugh's law-
breaking?

Why aren't drug czar John P. Walters or his predecessor, Barry
McCaffrey, lambasting Limbaugh as a menace to society and a threat to
"our children?"

Why aren't federal DEA agents storming Limbaugh's $30 million Florida
mansion in a frantic search for criminal evidence?

Why haven't federal, state, and local police agencies seized the
celebrity's homes and luxury cars under asset-forfeiture laws?

Finally, why aren't bloviating blabbermouths like William Bennett
publicly explaining how America would be better off if Limbaugh were
prosecuted, locked in a steel cage and forced to abandon his wife, his
friends, and his career?

The answer is obvious, Seehusen said: "America's drug warriors are
shameless hypocrites who believe in one standard of justice for
ordinary Americans and another for themselves, their families and their
political allies.

"That alone should completely discredit them."

But there's an even more disturbing possibility, Seehusen said: that
the people who are prosecuting the Drug War don't even believe in its
central premise -- which is that public safety requires that drug users
be jailed.

"The Bushes and Ashcrofts and McCaffreys of the world may believe,
correctly, that individuals fighting a drug addiction deserve medical,
not criminal treatment," he said. "That would explain why they're not
demanding that Limbaugh be jailed.

"But if that's the case, these politicians have spent decades tearing
apart American families for their own political gain. And that's an
unforgivable crime."

keepthebeat · Post by **keepthebeat** » Thu Oct 16, 2003 11:50 am

Blackrock Lover

True, doctors do not prescribe alcohol for people to get drunk. The recommendation is for men to drink 1.5 oz or less of alcohol (pure) per day and women to consume .75 oz or less/day. ie two 12 oz lagers for men and one for women or one double martini for men and only 5-6 oz of wine for women etc. This is enough to give someone a buzz but not "drunk". In fact, red wine consumption may explain why the French have lower heard disease rates than Americans despite a diet high in saturated fat. The point is that alcohol can be healthy in moderation. Getting "drunk" is not healthy.

In terms of marijuana, once again, we don't know what is safe. And we will not know until laws are improved. It is difficult to get accurate info when the agent in question is illegal.

In terms of not wanting to prescribe mind altering substances this is untrue. Doctors do this all the time. Prozac alters the mind from a state of depression to a state of normality. Vicodin treats pain but can have the side effect of creating sedation and/or euphoria etc. Prednisone used for asthma can cause depression or sleeplessness and mania.

One must define mind altering assometimes reality is mind-altering ie the intense heat, dryness, darkness, bright lights, naked bodies etc at BM even when sober can certainly be mind altering. Stories abound on this web site of those who don't use drugs but still are able to have revelations, feel a higher power etc. These people are sober are not in the same state of mind as when back in the "real world". Is this not mind altering.

Yes, if marijuana is prescribed it should come with a warning similar to those found on bottles of vicodin, valium and other sedatives. Do not use in combination with alcohol and do not drive or operate heavy machinary etc.

So what if someone gets high. Getting high may be the answer to many medical disabilities and to some not so medical. Does it really matter as long as the stoner doesn't drive, shoot a gun or smoke before work? In the end, after good research, we may even find out that pot has no appreciable medical cost. We just don't know right now and that is because moral opponents continue to suppress medical and scientific investigation.

Isotopia · Post by **Isotopia** » Thu Oct 16, 2003 1:47 pm

In terms of marijuana, once again, we don't know what is safe. And we will not know until laws are improved. It is difficult to get accurate info when the agent in question is illegal.

Not really. In spite of the fact that there's a relatively small body of scientific studies that seek to objectively quantify positive/negative effects of marijuana use, the emperical evidence garnered over decades suggest that the deleterious effects are marginal - especially compared to other 'legal' prescribed drugs as well as alcohol.

I thinks that one of the main points of contention in the scientific and social debate that continues to rage around the issue. I don't know that marijuana has EVER been implicated in the death of ANY user as a result of ingestion. Such claims can't be made for alcohol, sedatives, anti-depressents, etc...

blyslv · Post by **blyslv** » Thu Oct 16, 2003 2:14 pm

keepthebeat wrote:
Prozac alters the mind from a state of depression to a state of normality.

This statement is very debatable!

___________________________________________________

Adding to Isotopia's point--

When's the last time you heard about someone smoking a bowl and beating their wife or killing a pedestrian. With alcohol, this is happening right now.

keepthebeat · Post by **keepthebeat** » Thu Oct 16, 2003 3:29 pm

isotopia,

true marijuana has not directly resulted in death as far as we know. As far as we know, as far as we know.

In terms of increased cancer of the lung. It takes 30 -50 years to gather enough epidemiological evidence for cause and effect. That is why the surgeon general waited so long for tobacco warnings.

Animal models do show premalignant changes to the respiratory epithelium of pot smoking rabbits and in some human bronchoscopy samples after smoking joints. Whether lung cancer increases in pot smokers is confounded by the high use of tobacco by pot smokers, often initially addicted as a way to cover up the smell of pot. Ironic isn't it.

Additionally, the psychologic literature claims repeatedly that amotivational syndrome in smokers is a true entity. For minors this can be a major detriment to economic/occupational/educational success.
I have 40 year old pot smoking friends still living with their parents(the cost of living in the City may have something to do with that as well)

Finally, in terms of Prozac returning one to normality I agree that is debatable. My point was that the normality of reality is debatable. Is depression a good reality to be in even though it may be one's "real" state of mind. What is mind altering, what is real etc and is pot any more mind altering than other things more accetable to society as a whole. Obviously Rush Limbaugh's reality is different than mine even prior to him becoming narcotic dependent.

Flux · Post by **Flux** » Fri Oct 17, 2003 6:49 pm

This has been a fascinating thread to follow. Unfortunately, I'm afraid it's getting a wee bit long in the tooth, with the debate about marijuana legalization and so on.

So, in the interest of adding a bit of zing to the proceedings...

Blackrock Lover, I've really enjoyed your posts. You are a credit to your profession, and a wonderful antidote to the (sometimes deserved, sometimes undeserved) stereotypes applied to LEOs.

You surely must have some amusing stories to tell about things you've seen and experienced in our fair city. What was the funniest situation you've encountered? Do you or any of your brethren go home, change (or just remove) clothes, and come back to dance the night away along with the rest of us? Do you ever start to bust someone, then decide to just let them go with a warning because they're just too stupid to deal with any more? Do y'all get propositioned, explicitly or implicitly, by participants? Ever succumb to temptation? Where do you go to the bathroom; do you have your own porta-potties in an HQ area somewhere, or do you have to stand in line and hope for the best, too?

You get the idea -- how about some fun tales? No names, of course, or anything like that; just for shits and giggles. Whaddaya say?

Kinetic II · Post by **Kinetic II** » Fri Oct 17, 2003 7:30 pm

Not to do a "me too" post but I'm very interested in hearing the same thing. There has to be some hilarious stories to tell, I mean they have to be saying something to get other LEO's to "volunteer" for the event...what's the "hook" that's used? Nudity? A crazy party? A sense of duty to protect the land? Yeah, if you have any stories you could post, a lot of us would love to hear them.

Blackrock Lover · Post by **Blackrock Lover** » Sat Oct 18, 2003 2:27 am

Well, it's a little late right now but, I will put on my thinking cap and try to remember some interesting tid bits.....

BlueBirdPoof · Post by **BlueBirdPoof** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 5:28 pm

keepthebeat wrote: In terms of increased cancer of the lung. It takes 30 -50 years to gather enough epidemiological evidence for cause and effect. That is why the surgeon general waited so long for tobacco warnings.

Animal models do show premalignant changes to the respiratory epithelium of pot smoking rabbits and in some human bronchoscopy samples after smoking joints. .

Any sort of smoke in the lungs is to be watched out for. Our lungs simply did not evolve to cope with particles of that size. Gasoline and diesal fumes, rice straw burning (especially with the silica content and pesticides!), art projects. It's all bad.

Of course we have at least some choice in the matter--in terms of what we expose ourselves to.

And no, I have no data on A.B.T. brownies vs. chaw.

Blackrock Lover · Post by **Blackrock Lover** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 10:56 pm

Let's start this off with a short somewhat humorous story...

One of the first BMs I worked I was patrolling the playa and stopped a couple of young adults on a scooter that was not in any way decorated. Of course there should be no non art cars out plying the playa.

So I first asked the kid if he had his "Mutant Vehicle Sticker" from BMs DMV. He of course did not. I expained that he could not operate a non art car at BM. He said it was his first time and he didn't know better.

I then asked didn't they tell you at the gate? He replied "but the guy(at the gate) had bunny ears" and "he was naked". Of course I advised him that just because a guy is naked and wearing bunny ears does not mean that he cannot be relied upon to dispense critical information concerning the event.

Of course you kind of had to be there. The tone of his voice when he stated the the guy had bunny ears and was naked was classic, it was like a 5 year old whining to mom "but I had to (or want one) ......" just before throwing a tantrum and crying. Of course when conducting a standard vehicle stop I normally do not ask to see a "mutant vehicle sticker". Nor do I normally advise you respect the instructions of naked bunny ear wearing men.....

So there's a short one. I have thought of a couple of others but it takes 15 min to relate the stories verbally (which I will do at BM if asked) I'm trying to figure which parts to edit out for a quick post.

Chai Guy · Post by **Chai Guy** » Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:19 pm

Great story Black Rock Lover, I have really enjoyed reading your posts. Please keep the stories coming! Thanks- Chai Guy

moxiE · Post by **moxiE** » Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:01 pm

Blackrock Lover, great story. At BM 1999, I was arrested for posession of ecstasy, (I had 15 pills... gawd bless Manchester and it's cheap drugs), and the official who turned me in was wearing nothing but a tophat with a silver feather on it. Granted, being arrested is no fun, but being arrested by a naked guy in a pimp hat is quite a funny anecdote in retrospect.

Blackrock Lover · Post by **Blackrock Lover** » Wed Oct 22, 2003 5:26 pm

Below you will find the Keystone Cop incident....

So I'm sitting in a truck with another LEO that is working the event. We are in her truck. I note that there is a naked guy running across the playa with BRR(Black Rock Rangers) following. I think to myself hummm.....not so unusual, around here.

Soon thereafter a call comes on the radio about BRR needing assistance with a nude male that has assaulted someone.

Well, we're right there and drive over and arrest and handcuff the guy. A none to pleasant experience as he's a little sweaty and ya gotta grab him cause there ain't no clothes. The guy is obviously on something as he can't respond to questions (he is eventually hauled offsite for medical evaluation).

We put him in the truck, which has a cage, and begin questioning the victims of the assault.

Well, I turn around and there goes the naked guy headed across the playa!

We quickly grab him again and put him back in the truck. I don't know how he got out as it's not my truck but I know he shouldn't be able to. So I make sure and lock the doors.

Back to questioning the victims....

I turn around again and there goes the naked dude across the playa AGAIN! (This is more than just a little embarrassing)

We get him again and put him back. This time I check and find that one of the rear door handles hadn't been disabled, doh! Well, that takes care of that.

The final funny is that, as mentioned in another post, I hear some onlooker explain to another that the guy is being arrested for being naked! Like I don't have better things to do than arrest naked guys. This is how great LEO rumors are started at BM.

Badger · Post by **Badger** » Wed Oct 22, 2003 5:57 pm

That guy didn't give his name as 'Special Agent #9' by chance did he?

Flux · Post by **Flux** » Wed Oct 22, 2003 6:38 pm

That is hilarious! It's the kind of thing that, if it happened in a Lethal Weapon movie, I would think was stupid because it was so unrealistic ... which just makes it all the funnier!

Thanks for a good laugh, Blackrock Lover!

Kinetic II · Post by **Kinetic II** » Wed Oct 22, 2003 10:05 pm

Flux, I'm glad you asked about the stories....and BlackRock Lover, these are good ones. Thanks for sharing them.

Blackrock Lover · Post by **Blackrock Lover** » Wed Oct 22, 2003 10:48 pm

Flux - I neglected to answer the questions in your post. So......

Yes like all groups that are stereotyped some members deserve it, some don't. I did learn in Sociology that stereotypes are based on fact.

I don't know the funniest situation. It's all fun, well most of it.

As for coming back after hours...unfortuneatly no. I wish we could but among the reasons we can't is BRC LLC does not want us to as we have not purchased a ticket. Also the long shifts do make things a little tiring.

Propositioned, no. This might shock you. Most of the residents are not real warm and cuddly when it comes to the LEOs. But it's always nice to talk the friendly folks. And before you mention it I know that not all the LEOs are real warm and cuddly either....

As to the porta-potties. Both. I was really pissed(couldn't pass that up) a couple of years ago at the condition of the potties for the residents and made sure others heard about my displeasure. They seem to have improved greatly.

Kinetic II - Most do sign up willingly for the event. Many would like to attend if they weren't working the event. There are off duty LEOs that make it to the event. I doubt the nudity would draw anyone, too much bad nudity. I think it's all the crazy stuff you get to see. I mean like where else are there fire breathing dragons and you can make traffic stops on trucks with flame throwers? I have been most impressed with the art and that's why I like coming back. Unfortuneatly that seems to be decreasing.

So there are the answers.....

keepthebeat · Post by **keepthebeat** » Thu Oct 23, 2003 5:16 pm

moxiE wrote:Blackrock Lover, great story. At BM 1999, I was arrested for posession of ecstasy, (I had 15 pills... gawd bless Manchester and it's cheap drugs), and the official who turned me in was wearing nothing but a tophat with a silver feather on it. Granted, being arrested is no fun, but being arrested by a naked guy in a pimp hat is quite a funny anecdote in retrospect.

Blackrock Lover,

Is this a common undercover (or lack thereof) tactic?

Busted by the cops at the burn

"Go ahead, hug a cop!"