http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... 1GUFRV.DTLQuote:
A bill by a San Francisco assemblywoman who wants to ban raves at public venues in California is being criticized as too broad because it could forbid many other kinds of parties.
Assemblywoman Fiona Ma, D-San Francisco, said she simply wants to ban raves from publicly owned venues, such as Daly City's Cow Palace and the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum. She said the drug-fueled dance parties are typically unruly and have led to numerous deaths, overdoses and arrests.
While Ma said the measure would not apply to private events, such as weddings and birthday parties, the bill would make it a misdemeanor for anyone to conduct "a public event at night that includes prerecorded music and lasts more than three and one-half hours" - with the exception of private entities, such as bars or clubs, that have business licenses.
Violators would be fined at least $10,000.
Critics of the bill say it's vague, could end up impacting events other than raves, and if passed, would be ripe for a court challenge.
"The expression in legal analysis is 'overbroad,' " said UC Berkeley law Professor Frank Zimring. "The problem is it sweeps innocent people up with not-so-innocent people. The problem of combining prerecorded music and a time period because you are worried about teens taking drugs is that it would also apply when there are no teenagers, or apply when there are no drugs."
Matt Kumin, a civil rights attorney in San Francisco, said the bill could violate two constitutional rights: freedom of assembly and equal protection. He said political assemblies and religious gatherings, for example, don't have business licenses and would also be swept up under the current language.
"I applaud any effort to keep people away from tainted drugs, or drugs that were made illegally, but you can't do it this way," he said. "This shows a severe lack of understanding of constitutional guarantees."
Ma said she is open to tweaking the bill and wants to hear from those in the nightlife community in the coming months. A law change is necessary, she said, because it's been hard for local or state lawmakers to hold publicly owned venues accountable. State venues such as the Cow Palace are owned by the state but are operated by boards of directors appointed by the governor.
"There are certain events at these facilities that don't cause this type of outcome, and there are others that do, typically where younger people gather. The drugs seem to be linked to these types of activities," Ma said. "We will save lives and resources. Everyone knows this is happening, but nobody is doing anything."
Two people died after overdosing on drugs at the Cow Palace in May, and a teenage girl also suffered a fatal overdose at a June event at the Coliseum.
Alix Rosenthal, a nightlife and culture advocate in San Francisco, said the bill is targeting the wrong thing.
"If the problem is tainted drugs, it seems the solution is penalizing people who distribute tainted drugs," she said. "This is like saying, 'A kid got hit in the head with a baseball at a birthday party, so we're going to ban all birthday parties.' "
Sen. Leland Yee, D-San Francisco, has pushed for Daly City officials to have more oversight power over the Cow Palace facility. But his chief of staff, Adam Keigwin, said the senator would not support Ma's bill as written.
"Sen. Yee doesn't believe that the answer is banning raves; the rave is not the problem in and of itself. The problem is the activity that is happening at raves combined with lack of adequate law enforcement and health services," he said. "Raves can be done the right way, and young people need outlets and things to go to. There's nothing wrong with a rave - it's a type of music, a social scene. It is illegal activity happen at raves we need to go after."
More evidence that many lawmakers don't care one bit about the Constitution.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
