Originally posted by Bassthang
Somebody better qualified than me can work out the legal & procedural nicities of this, but it doesnt look good.
This bill is certainly a “warning shot” which shows the level of intolerance against our scene; but doesn’t actually change all that much.
Most raves have well over 100 people anyway; whether the cops go in heavy or not still depends partly on the whim of senior officers (who still have to authorise the CJA action) but also on available Police resources.
if the cops want to stop the backup party, they can just follow you about anyway or call the neighbouring force on the radio network – UK police are now getting new digital equipment which makes this very easy.
the amendments do not either change the “trigger” of CJA; in legal terms a senior police officer still has to justify that “serious distress” is being caused to non-participants. In most cases the benchmark is 3 locals calling the Police to report it, or the Environmental Health Officer of the local Council showing technical evidence of a noise or health hazard.
however, the changes could be more detrimental to the spring/summer outdoor party season; which has always had land use / class conflicts.
These are further exacerbated by the facts that more people attend parties these days, events go on for longer and most people travel to outdoor parties in motor cars and vans, which take up a lot of space on the roads! It soon becomes obvious to the locals they have been “invaded” – ravers are about as popular in an English country village as the British Army is in Basra….. (unless of course the younger villagers are themselves party people, which is sometime the case!)
This “middle england backlash” has caused a lot of pressure to be put on rural police forces and other authorities (such as councils) by the people living in the UK countryside, many of whom have money and power.
But in towns and cities the venues are buildings abandoned by corporate owners who no longer need them; in many cities there is far more commercial property than there is actually a market demand for!
Buildings are often left insecure and often semi-derelict as the cost of maintenance, and security (even paying the ‘phone bill to keep the burglar alarms comms line on) outweighs the potential revenue from the building as it stands! In many cases, the freehold owners only want to to strip and refurbish or even demolish the building and sell the land. Until such time as the building is ready for this work, it is not a great loss if squatters make use of it – although the owners will understandably take a dim view of wanton vandalism occuring as a consequence of a party.
A well chosen venue in a city is often a warehouse formerly used for heavy industry. This is designed for activities that potentially created a lot of mess and noise; and is in area of town well away from people. You can rinse it out in here without the locals being kept awake; as many in Reading last weekend found out 🙂
The “townie” pubs, clubs and the “bling bling” types who settle their disputes with firearms in city streets do not leave many spare resources available to “turn over” a rave; unless the organisers are unlucky, their security arrangements are compromised, or through foolishness or greed they permit a party to cause obvious trouble to “normal society”.
if a town party results in cars rat-running through residential streets at 4am, people forming a big suspicious looking queue outside a warehouse as the “door staff” are demanding money and creating a bottleneck, a new building is getting trashed big time or, fires or fights are happening which result in the attendance of other Emergency Services, it is obvious the old bill will try to put a stop to it!
Sadly, all these things have happened over the last few years and have been noted by “normal society”. That is one reason why these sort of laws get passed 🙁
This law can be got round by people and the scene evolving. If we want the parties to continue, we have to consdier the wider surroundings and consequences to an extent – and show “normal society” they are not “run by drug barons to corrupt your children.”, in other words, make them more inclusive social occasions; rather than “anti-social” ones!
