Anti-Rave Bill Passes

Joe Biden's anti-rave legislation, now known as the Illicit Drug Anti-Proliferation Act, passed the House and Senate late last night. The legislation, which holds venue owners liable for drug use on their property, generated considerable controversy last year. This time around Biden avoided debate by attaching the bill in conference to legislation establishing a national network to track abducted children. Drug policy reformers worry that the law could have wide application, discouraging people from hosting events that might attract drug users.

Comments

[Anonymous]

God hates drug users and the people who are in the vicinity of them.

[Ben]

"God hates drug users and the people who are in the vicinity of them."

Sounds like an uptight guy, maybe he should use some drugs.

[ron]

god fucking dammit. fucking motherfucking shit fuck hell ass.

cock.

[weimdog]

Thank the Democrats again for intrusive government meddling in our personal lives.

Slow Joe Biden can kiss my American ass!

[Russ]

When did Orrin Hatch, Tom Feeney, and Charles Grassley switch parties?

[Dave & Renee]

As a couple of conservative non-drug users, we feel this is an incredibly offensive and oppressive piece of legislation. Just like the anti-smoking ban in New York, this will force the owners to become de facto Stazi for the DEA.

What a damn shame. But there's nothing in the Constitution saying that Congress has to pass "good" laws, or even moral ones.

Say goodbye to concerts, bars, and movie theaters. Say goodbye to protest marches. Say goodbye to skateboard parks. Say goodbye to any gathering of people, because "someone might do drugs and we can't take that risk." Just be sure to remember this outrage when election season comes.

[John]

Someone should pass legislation holding congressman and senators responsible every time someone does drugs in their state.

[JDM]

You should all take comfort in the fact that this law is too absurd not to be repealed as soon as the damage starts.

Too many people will lose too much money.

Still, too bad for the sacrificial lambs...

[geophile]

If any real damage starts. The biggest problem with these laws is that they can lay dormant for years before they you bite you in the ass years down the road, while no one is looking, in a way never intended by the original legistlation.

[Bob]

Such irony - in the same week in which we're freeing people halfway around the world from a brutal tyranny, we take the inititative in finding ways to tyrannize ourselves.

[Marcus Tullius Cicero]

Excellent move! Congrats to Senator Biden and his colleagues!

[Anonymous]

I wonder what would happen if we could sneak a joint in the capital and light up during a session of congress...

[Jim-sama]

Why waste money on these incompetent humans doing drugs? A bullet is much cheaper and removes stupidity from the gene pool. Oh wait, i forgot, it's ppl's right to be stupid and waste other's tax dollars on rehab... ah well. it's better than nothing i guess.

[Sean]

Does this mean, with just a couple smuggled joints into the DNC and RNC conventions next year, we can get the whole lot of them locked up?

98-0 in the Senate. Who abstained?

[Smoker]

Where the hell am I supposed to get good drugs now? I can't go down to the street corner in the bad part of town, I might get arrested. The only really safe venue for getting good quality drugs was at raves. Now what will I do?

[Greg]

We'll have to see what the courts say about this. There are definatly some 4th amendment issues at work here.

[Greg]

Smoker just ask a teenager.

[joe]

Let's all go over to Biden's house and snort some toot, but make sure the cops are watching. That guy just needs to be behind bars himself. The loathing plagirizer.

[Michael]

Somebody bring a baggie and let's head over to Senator Joe's place to toke up. If we get caught, we can always say Senator Joe let us do it.

[Anonymous]

first they came for the ravers... good riddance!

well they're only ravers 😀

[David Isecke]

I used to think that Republicans were pro-interference in our personal lives, but against interference in our buisnesses, and that the Democrats were the other way around.

However, maybe I was too hasty in giving the Demos a pass on our personal lives.

Obviously, no unobtrusive/reasonable measures that club management could take could prevent all drug use inside the club. But even if it could, why should club owners be in the position of having to enforce the drug laws?

Frankly, as a Non-Drug User and a Non-Raver, I am still sick unto death of this stupid tendency of our government to try to regulate our lives. Could anyone rationally suggest that our government makes a good moral role-model?

[berto]

So, any chance a court might clean up this mess? Congress is always passing laws they know to be unconstitutional. Sometimes. . . sometimes. . . courts fix it.

They pull down statutes in Iraq and take another dump on freedom here. Asshats.

Smoker - if you want drugs, go to any high school or college. I guess this means all schools will have to be closed?

[McClain]

Biden...ugh. I used to vote Democrat. Now the Republicans are light-years better on foreign policy and no worse than the Dems on drug policy. What the hell...guess I'll vote Republican for a while. Big picture: prohibition will have to get worse before it gets better. Let's pass so many insanely draconian anti-drug laws that even people who've never smoked a joint start to get outraged.

[will]

I have idea- Lets start mandatory drug testing for congress- make these assholes piss in a cup once a month.

[dave-id]

Since when does our freedom depend on a cost-benefit analysis of our productivity. The problem with the republican party is that they have lost "freedom" as a value. To them freedom is good only if it leads to something like "productivity."

What about my right to the pursuit of happiness?

What if I chose to pursue happiness by smoking pot?

And for those of you idiots who know all about the dangers of drugs because you've NEVER tried them- you must face the truth that most people make a rational decision to use drugs because it provides them a positive experience, and it does not harm their lives.

[Croesus]

Greg,

The 4th amendment is largely defunct these days.

[Jacob Burkey]

geophile wrote: "they you bite you in the ass years down the road, while no one is looking, in a way never intended by the original legistlation."

if Bush gets faith-based education passed, the liberals will use this years down the road to shut down private schools that don't go along with the leftist agenda, like Catholic schools. everyone knows there's drugs at school - but public schools will be protected by sovereign immunity.

[Evan McElravy]

David, I wouldn't give the GOP too much credit for being anti-interference in business, either. On free trade, Bill Clinton was light years ahead of the Bush crowd.

[Andy]

"Also, on a pure cost-benefit basis, I'm not convinced the drug war is a net loss" --PNC

Have you considered all the productivity losses from imprisoning so many people? I don't know the exact numbers, but aren't there something like 500,000 people currently in jail in the US for drug offeneses? Supporting 500,000 people is no small cost, especially when they could be working if they weren't in prison.

But I am biased... I'm a pro-drug libertarian type. To be otherwise would be highly irrational:)

Andy

[David]

Gotta disagree with the whole Reason/LP crowd on this issue, and I will reiterate my chief complaint and what I believe to be the primary source of the LP/Reason crowd failing to gain a serious foothold in American society: the perception (borne out by this thread) that the majority of LP/Reason-ers are not just "anti-anti-drug," but actively PRO-drugs.

This single issue is, I believe, going to keep LPs out of office for many, many, many years. Drop this as a platform, and the prospects for LPs would improve dramatically.

My two cents.

[PLC]

David-id:

You asked "Since when does our freedom depend on a cost-benefit analysis of our productivity" - this was one of the points I was trying to make. Laws should not be made on a cost-benefit basis; cost-benefit ought to be considered in some forms of regulation, but legality and morality are not utilitarian constructs.

Andy - no, I haven't considered the productivity loss nor the cost of imprisoning drug offenders, since I haven't really considered the question at all. My point was that we should not take it on faith that the drug war is a net loss. I have not read nor seen anything to convince me either way. Which probably implies (but certainly does not prove) that it is close to a wash...

Also, david-id: I've never stuck a fork in my eye either, but I'm pretty sure it's not pleasant, nor very smart.

[R.Crusoe]

DAVE & RENEE: "Say goodbye to concerts, bars, and movie theaters. (Movie theaters!?) Say goodbye to protest marches. Say goodbye to skateboard parks. Say goodbye to any gathering of people"

I went to see "Phone Booth" at the Big-8 Megaplex last night, but I didn't smell anything funny. Movie theaters!? Which theater do YOU go to, fella?

As far as mob-gatherings becoming a thing of the past -- isn't that a good thing?

SEAN: "Does this mean, with just a couple smuggled joints into the DNC and RNC conventions next year, we can get the whole lot of them locked up?"

Outstanding! I LOVE IT! (I like the way you think, Sean!)

ROSS STRIKER: "The Rave Act can too easily be used by Corrupt Government officials and their agents to intimidate and/or target for arrest any political/association the U.S. Government or police deem undesirable."

Isn't THAT the whole idea? Duh!

[Matt]

Wow! You guys are really starting to pass some odd laws over there, isn't it starting to feel a little hmmn, sinister? I can't help thinking you're losing a lot of your freedoms without much more than a whimper.

Aside from the obvious historical lessons of prohibition (it doesn't work but makes bad guys rich and makes criminal out of the otherwise law abiding) the way this bill has passed seems cynical and undemocratic.

Maybe you should attempt to do something about this 'attaching' one piece of legislation to another crap? To this British outsider it seems that the majority of your bad laws and 'pork barrel?' daft govt spending etc are attached on to something else, often something halfway sensible as well. Remove this horse trading element from the legislative process, make every bill stand on its own merits and you might acheive a more honest debate on items such as this one.

[Frenk]

This is another waste of taxpayer money. Rather than concede defeat, the federal government enacts another inanane law. If there was a chance that this law would really affect drug use, it would be different.

For the record, I am staunchly anti-drugs. But then, I am also staunchly anti alot of things--and I don't suggest making them illegal. Thus, I am in favor of legal drugs.

Bottom line: the costs of the drug war outweigh the likely benefits--and certainly the actual benefits received. Any rational person could see this... and more do every day.

[JD Weiner]

Sean (and everyone else who's suggested similar ideas): I'd love to see that happen, but I know it won't. Laws like that are only enforced against the "little people", or somebody the police really want to get. It was suggested a while ago, after the Tina Bennis case, that if a janitor were found with a joint in the basemen of the Supreme Court, they could impound the entire Supreme Court building...but you know it's not going to happen that way. Re-reading 101 Things' section about the Bennis decision, I don't have much faith that the Supreme Court will overturn this law; the Bennis decision was pretty absurd too, with the Court literally displaying a complete ignorance of the Fourth Amendment, but there it is. Still, every politician who voted for this is just begging to have drugs planted on his property.

[David F]

hey all!

hey david -- as a reason subscriber and LP member, i am against drugs, don't do 'em, etc., but these types of intrusive law making is an anathama to the libertarian soul. it does not mean that libertarians are necessarily "pro drug" or libertine. there's a difference between the opportunity to do something and choosing not to do it and having something outlawed.

(that garden of eden thing and that apple bit -- since it has to do with "morality" and acquitision of knowledge, if it were around now, neocons would make eating the apple punishable by death... while democrats would tax it to prohibitive levels due to misunderstood environmental concerns)

and, dems and reps want to control both business and personal lives -- just in each their own special ways.

Matt -- we're just trying to catch up with europe and its lack of freedoms... 🙂
(european arrest warrants, written constitutions, etc).

cheers all,
drf

[PLC]

David F - perhaps you are not "pro-drugs" but there is certainly a vocal minority of LP members who are viscously pro-drug (many whom I've spoken appear to have joined the party simply because they love the reefer). Just take a look at the title of Mr. Sullum's new book.

This irrational pro-drug stance of the LP, along with the lunatic fringe (conspiracy theorists, anarchists, etc.) will keep the party irrelevant now and forever more. Libertarian ideals and philosophies will continue to have an impact on government, but primarily through think-thanks and the Republican party. If anything, the LP hurts the libertarian movement but turning off the majority of Americans...

Also, on a pure cost-benefit basis, I'm not convinced the drug war is a net loss (drug use decreases productivity and average productive years while increasing health care costs) to society. But this really shouldn't be the cornerstone of the argument. Seat belt laws are clearly net positive on a cost-benefit basis, but they are still wrong and immoral.

[Madog]

If people use drugs on public property, does that mean the public gets arrested too? We better start building more jails. Wait! There are drugs in jail too! We better just execute everyone, that will win the drug war!

[Ross STriker]

by, Ross Striker
"RAVE ACT" threatens our Right to Public Assembly, Free Association and Free Speech

Imagine a political rally without people or music: That nightmare is just around the corner
if Senator Biden can get Congress to pass the "RAVE Act." Many citizens will be afraid to attend and/or organize public and political meetings out of concern they can be charged and imprisoned because "one person or COINTELPRO government agent" may bring illegal drugs to a public event. The Rave Act can too easily be used by Corrupt Government officials and their agents to intimidate and/or target for arrest any political/association the U.S. Government or police deem undesirable. The RAVE ACT will give the U.S. Government the power to charge and imprison organization leaders and members for crimes they did not commit.

It appears these "Constitutional concerns" have taken a back seat with several "drug legalization supporters and organizations" that continue to focus on the "illegal drug aspects" of the "RAVE Act as the main reason to stop the ACT from being passed." Consequently, a majority of Americans may come to believe the "RAVE ACT" is being opposed by organizations/persons who support illegal drug-use. So much public attention on the Act's "illegal drug provisions" obscures the Rave Act's true Constitutional threat to all Americans and may help Senator Biden get the ACT passed.

[Anonymous]

I don't like drugs nor zoot suts and I wouldn't support banning either.

[Brian]

PLC-

Is that you, Mr. Ashcroft?

Fork in the eye--what an appropriate analogy. That would explain why THOUSANDS of people try soft drugs, enjoy them, and use them again, with little or no adverse effects on their health or quality of life. Just like all those people that stab themselves in the eye with a fork repeatedly.

Your sanctimonious anti-drug stance is no less irrational than the pro-drug stance you ascribe to certain members of the LP.

David-

With the possible exception of the income tax, I dare you to come up with an example of the government intruding on the lives, liberty, and property of its citizens that is more widespread and egregious than the drug war. THAT is why this is such a big issue to us, both drug users and non-drug users alike. To "drop it from the platform" would be a monumental retreat from principles...and if I was willing to do that, I'd just be a Republican.

[JDM]

Brian,

"With the possible exception of the income tax, I dare you to come up with an example of the government intruding on the lives, liberty, and property of its citizens that is more widespread and egregious than the drug war."

Since the Drug War is largely financed by income tax, you could define it as part of the evil of income taxes too.

Your challenge becomes "Aside from 75% of the evil the federal government does, find an example of evil worse than the drug war."

Anyway, even playing by tour rules, here's one - Social Security. Here's another - Medicare.

[Anonymous]

Last time I checked, it was legal to poke yourself in the eye.

[http://www.meki.8m.com/]

a wtat a good website
i see it
it is a beatiful website

[N.Ostradami]

BRIAN, you asked: "I dare you to come up with an example of the government intruding on the lives, liberty, and property of its citizens"

Can you spell P.A.T.R.I.O.T ?

(The last four letters of which, by the way, will manifest itself not as an acronym, but as an ironic twist of events before the decade is out -- and as a fitting nemesis to this idiocy.)

[Loveboat]

Will they now arrest the entire crew and management, (and perhaps shut down the entire Holland-America Corporation) if they find one joint on an Alaskan cruise ship? Or will they just sink the thing?

[Brian]

Good points on SS and Medicare, though one could argue (i'm not one of them, BTW) that some people derive _some_ benefits from those programs...I'm not sure what benefits are actually being realized through the drug war. Besides, if the point is to give the LP broader appeal, I can't imagine that attacking those sacred cows would help us any more than a focus on drug laws.

I think PATRIOT will be just as bad in the near future, though I don't know that its effects have been felt on quite as large a scale...YET.

Good points all around, though.

[JDM]

Brian,

I forgot to mention the most important one - public education.

Vouchers and SS reform both polled well for Bush, in spite of the political conventional wisdom. Vouchers were shot down by the teachers' unions this time around but at least they were tried in Congress. There's bound to be some reform of Medicare in the next couple of years, and Bush's plan for SS reform is supposed to be put to the Congress this year. Hopefully it will be a step in the right direction. If partial privatization works, it will open the door for more later.

All of this is pretty important stuff for libertarian ideas, and it owes nothing to the LP.

[Hank]

PLC - Are you sure you don't work for the ONDCP?

I think its safe to say that the drug war is a net loss when you consider the human costs. Calculate the no-knock warrants, the sovereign immunity of the DEA, the infringement on states rights and the trampling of the constitution. Calculate the innocents gunned down by DEA agents in black masks and unmarked body armor because they kicked down the wrong door. Calculate the, otherwise healthy families scattered to the winds because mommy or daddy like to smoke a little reefer to unwind. Calculate the lives destroyed everyday in the unneccessarily violent drug trade. Calculate the money made by terrorist organizations, profits made possibly SOLELY because of prohibition.

Or stop calculating and just admit to yourself that prohibition is wrong. And as for sticking a fork in your eye, yes that would be dumb and painful, but what the fuck does that have to do with drugs?

You assume too much.

[fyodor]

Anyone have a link that shows who voted for this abomination? Best email me directly. Thanks!

[Brian]

Fyodor--

I'm posting it, in case anyone else wants to know. Every Senator voted for it except for Kerry and Lieberman, who were presumably out campaigning.

You can see for yourself at http://www.senate.gov, click on roll call votes, and the most recent ones are at the top. This one is vote 00132.

[Jim]

A couple of points about the drug war...

The loses of freedoms that are furthered in the PATRIOT act had their way paved for them by years of drug war rights abuses. We've been living with them for years, but since it doesn't directly effect most of us (how many people do you know who have actually had their property confiscated because their teenage kid was smoking pot?) and/or mostly effects marginalized folks (like drug users and minorities in poor gang-ravaged neighborhoods that we'd never enter) it is a hell of a lot more palatable than it once was to the general public. Not that I believe it will stay that way, esp. since the war on terror is potentially far more reaching than the simple use of politically incorrect chemicals. As such I think the drug war is still the biggest evil but may be supplanted in years to come by anti-Terror zealotry.

Most of the studies of 'lost productivity' are questionable at best, many studies finding no significant impact from testing positive to drugs and work performance. The most highly publicized study was based on individuals already enrolled in some kind of alcohol or substance abuse program, not necessarily representative of the average drug user. Lost productivity from drug use may also be a consequence of the drug war. Because of the prevalence of drug testing (encouraged by the government) many drug users are deprived of the opportunity to work the best job they are suited for. And of course being in jail really messes up your ability to earn a paycheck. In any case, society loses productivity to a lot of things that are generally regarded as good things, like marriage, children (think of all the women who quit working to stay home with the kids), shorter work weeks, retirement and more vacation time. The 'loss of productivity' argument is often specious because it does not consider other benefits derived in exchange.

The pragmatist in me agrees that the pro-drug legalization side of libertarianism is an impediment to the philosophy's advance, but the cost to freedoms in the name of drug war are so huge that no libertarian can ignore it and maintain their principles. Otherwise, one might as well be a Republican (or a conservative).

[fyodor]

Brian,

thanks. 98 zip, shee-it. Guess that's one area where libertarian arguments have made much headway, huh? Either that or tying it to the child abduction bill was pretty friggin' clever. Kinda leaves us with no one to blame but Biden. Was the House just as bad??

Jim,

thanks for the example of "losing productivity" for ostensibly good things. Don't you just get sick when people claim all sorts of indirect harm to justify victimless crimes? Glad your antipathy towards the drug issue doesn't turn you away from the libertarian position, but I wonder, if the drug issue is what's holding libertarianism back, what libertarian positions would do any better?

[DJ]

>> The Rave Act can too easily be used by Corrupt Government officials and their agents to intimidate and/or target for arrest any political/association the U.S. Government or police deem undesirable.>>

(But that's the whole idea. isn't it?)

[M.Sheen]

>> Say goodbye to concerts, bars. Say goodbye to protest marches. Say goodbye to any gathering of people.

[Jim]

Fyodor,

For whatever reason people seem ameniable to liberty-based arguments until for them it goes 'too far'. I find most people I talk to would not support an out-and-out ban on smoking, but many like the idea of complete bans on smoking in 'public places', high cigarette taxes to discourage smoking and pay for the (fictious) health expenses. Unfortunately I don't meet many people who can articulate or believe in a philosophy based on freedom. We've become so used to government regulation of things that the 'man in the street' thinks it's necessary. Or they may agree with the principle but think that it's not practical in practice. That is unfortunate.

Libertarian arguments based on pragmatism, stressing the 'law of unintended consequences' may have a chance, however. We may not be able to win people over on principle, but if it can be demonstrated that a particular policy actually has consequences opposite of or worse than the problem it intends to address, maybe some less liberty-damaging laws will get passed. A good example of that would be welfare reform. They didn't get rid of it completely but it did reduce government dependancy and improve the finacial condition of America's poor.

[Matthew Cromer]

I find it fascinating how horrible some people find the "self-service" psychoactive drugs. These same folks then go home and crack open a beer or three and watch the ballgame, put their kids on Ritalin, and take Prozac. Now I know how it was at the time of the Salem witch trials.

[Jim Walsh]

Between Teddy Joe Biden and the recent statewide smoking ban, I'm soooooo embarassed to live in Delaware I've got half a mind to move (seriously!).

[Todd]

No, seriously, you shouldn't do drugs. They'll make you go crazy and kill and eat your friends. I saw it on CSI last night. TV doesn't lie.

[Anonymous]

It's getting to be that the only place you can get good drugs and good poontang is at a public school.

[wtf]

there's still ravers? i thought that shit died ten years ago. maybe they should pass an anti-breakdancing law if they're trying to piss off youngsters.

[Victor]

The scarry thing is that this bill is just not aimed at raver's but, if you read the bill it applies to any gathering. Hey, how about we send little Mary sunshine with a few joints to the next church meeting or getting your friends back at their next house party. Or, maybe will get lucky and one of our Senators will forget to remove his stash before entering congress. How much more beating can our Constitution take?

[DJDevon3 from SouthFloridaRave]

SouthFloridaRaves.com Owner -

How about a year from the date it passed we organize a protest of enormous proportions. I can help with Global promotion if someone in DC wants to organize and mobilize the local political ravers. I have major connections and can bring the people. We here at SFR are extremely pissed off that some of our freedom's might be obstructed. We go to Iraq to "Free" them yet why would they want to be part of a "Democracy" that is contradictory. We ourselves only have the freedom to protest. All decisions are up to rich politicians that protect their own agenda's, quasi-capitol hill alliances, and lobby interests. I say a real democracy, a real "Free" country, is one where everyone in the public votes on every issue. Congress is meant to represent the people not opress them. How can a bill like this be included in the same bill as the Amber Alert.

There is something fundamentally wrong with the way politics are organized. If Congress wants to improve the quality of life they should revamp the government! I love my country not because of so-called "Democracy" but because I live here. The U.S. government is too ambitious in world domination, control, and opression. They are doing it in slick little political moves and soft terminology. The Government is trying to use terrorism as a tool to frighten us and keep us under control. We used to not let it even bother us. Yes, 9/11 was a shame but we've lost by changing our way of life and attitude in America. There is potential for a domino effect and we will end up like the U.S.S.R.

My entire life is rave culture and rave music. I am a proud American, I am more proud to be a Raver. Ravers are everything positive about the world. I whole-heartedly believe that if all americans were ravers the world would be a better place. Because I am a raver does not diminish my professionalism at my place of work, work ethic, or potential to excel. I do not do drugs, I am a Life-Boyscout, an American, and a proud Raver. True ravers are about the music. All this talk about drugs is just a cover for trying to take away my sovereignty, pride, lifestyle, and love of electronic music.

[Ian]

I believe that this world my be ready to be a complete totalitarianism because of the act. The ignorant man who claims that any assembly with music and people spells trouble and drug abuse well this in itself is nonsense. Yes, now rock concerts, marches, festivals, raves, bars, dance clubs, circus's, and conventions may be all removed from society and mindset. Doublethink is the key if it isn't happening now then it never happened "Down with Big Brother" was Orwell's little quote but I thought it relevant. Anyway together we must raise or voice, stomp our feet and brandish our glow sticks of red, white, and blue and march to the capital. Let us hold raves in DC,Chicago, New York, Kansas City, Sacremento, and all the great cities. Let us be proud ravers and bring the P.L.U.R vibe to the rallies the raves the street the workplace, and of course with you in your letters to congress. To rave isn't to nonconform and cast moral to the side no to rave is to be free from hate and violence and it is to drown thy self in the music.

[Anonymous]

It's a damn shame when the "man" has to put tabs on us in the music Industry.
I think to myself back in the 60's it was ok to do all the drugs you could do, because it was all about "self-exploration"........
Ummmmmmm Hello!!!!!!!

You same asses that did all that back in the day are making the laws of today.....
How can that be any good.

This all just pisses me off, I am a promoter and a dj for the last 6 years, "Angstie-e" is the name and it seems the people I talk to regarding anything that has to do with "RAVES" or even the Electronic music scene in general has a nasty "STIGMA" to it all.
Damn that Media................

I say you'll get yours one day Mister.
No one doggs you for your twisted,pot smoking," Oh I NEVER Inhailed",scandelridden, "It's ok to get a BJ in the White House",Lets cover our tracks as best we can then make some stupid ass Rave Act Laws so we look better, Pathetic, Overpaid, Did I mention Scandelous.....LIVES
So stay the Fuck outta ours.

[Blair]

What the fuck ever happened to our damn FREEDOM?People are always bragging how FREE the U.S. is, but take shit like this......doesnt sound very "freelike" to me. I'm sorry to blow up like this but these anti rave fucks are really pissing me off.We dont bitch about gothics,punk rockers, or rockers, they do drugs, hell, even rich and popular people do drugs! Now, we have all the other countries laughing at us, where the hell is the love, and most of all PLUR!

[Layton Zach]

EMAIL: [e-mail]
IP: 62.213.67.122
URL: http://www.pills-penis-enlargement.net/
DATE: 12/09/2003 10:41:46
Unusual ideas can make enemies.

[Covington Barrie Tragash]

EMAIL: [e-mail]
IP: 62.213.67.122
URL: http://penis.nonstopsex.org
DATE: 12/20/2003 05:05:15
Ideas on Earth are badges of friendship or enmity.

[Samuels Michele]

EMAIL: [e-mail]
IP: 62.213.67.122
URL: http://hardcore.sexmuch.com
DATE: 01/09/2004 03:44:51
Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped.