Just or Unjust Liability: The RAVE Act
Drug policy has always been a controversial issue in the United States of America, and recently the government’s focus has been on “club drugs” such as ecstasy or MDMA. Club drugs are often associated with raves, electronic music festivals, and nightclubs. The government enacted an unusual form of drug policy in 2003. The federal government has decided that the owners and or promoters of the rave community are liable for the illegal actions of their customers. The DEA are now allowed impose a half of a million dollar fine, or twenty years of jail time, to the business owners who allegedly contain drug usage on their property. Though the RAVE Act of 2003 gained momentum in government and with supporters …show more content…
The public consistently criticizes this new form of drug policy because instead of prosecuting the individual drug use and distribution at electronic music events, the liability of drug usage has been expanded beyond direct drug involvement. The owners and promoters have become civilly and criminally liable for the drugs their customers, employees, or performers use or sell of their property. In order to fully understand the opinions of various stakeholder’s affected by the RAVE Act, the following foundation of the debates on owner and promoter liability in club drug initiatives organizes and explains various positions in the debate. As a tactic to hinder the rise of club drug usage and marketing, the United State’s Drug Enforcement Administration, members of Congress, Senator Biden, and various drug-awareness organizations support more expansive owner and promoter liability. The concern of the effects of growing popularity of club drugs, especially in the youth of the nation, and the frustration of past drug policy ineffectively ending the usage of club drugs, serves as reasons why these stakeholders are in favor of the RAVE Act. Supporters say that annually tens of thousands of young …show more content…
Supporters of this legislation seriously want to end the issue of club drugs, such as ecstasy or MDMA, the rights of the rave community’s first amendment right to engage in protected free speech, and assembly are being tampered. All in all, the larger issue of the RAVE Act of 2003 is whether or not the owners and promoters of the rave culture should be liable for the actions of their clients. The different viewpoints of the individuals effected by the legislation and drug policy enacted elaborates on the true controversy of the RAVE
Drug policy has always been a controversial issue in the United States of America, and recently the government’s focus has been on “club drugs” such as ecstasy or MDMA. Club drugs are often associated with raves, electronic music festivals, and nightclubs. The government enacted an unusual form of drug policy in 2003. The federal government has decided that the owners and or promoters of the rave community are liable for the illegal actions of their customers. The DEA are now allowed impose a half of a million dollar fine, or twenty years of jail time, to the business owners who allegedly contain drug usage on their property. Though the RAVE Act of 2003 gained momentum in government and with supporters …show more content…
The public consistently criticizes this new form of drug policy because instead of prosecuting the individual drug use and distribution at electronic music events, the liability of drug usage has been expanded beyond direct drug involvement. The owners and promoters have become civilly and criminally liable for the drugs their customers, employees, or performers use or sell of their property. In order to fully understand the opinions of various stakeholder’s affected by the RAVE Act, the following foundation of the debates on owner and promoter liability in club drug initiatives organizes and explains various positions in the debate. As a tactic to hinder the rise of club drug usage and marketing, the United State’s Drug Enforcement Administration, members of Congress, Senator Biden, and various drug-awareness organizations support more expansive owner and promoter liability. The concern of the effects of growing popularity of club drugs, especially in the youth of the nation, and the frustration of past drug policy ineffectively ending the usage of club drugs, serves as reasons why these stakeholders are in favor of the RAVE Act. Supporters say that annually tens of thousands of young …show more content…
Supporters of this legislation seriously want to end the issue of club drugs, such as ecstasy or MDMA, the rights of the rave community’s first amendment right to engage in protected free speech, and assembly are being tampered. All in all, the larger issue of the RAVE Act of 2003 is whether or not the owners and promoters of the rave culture should be liable for the actions of their clients. The different viewpoints of the individuals effected by the legislation and drug policy enacted elaborates on the true controversy of the RAVE