The DJs who play the electronic music are usually computer-generated. Raves began in Britain’s mid-1980s after clubs closed. Since then, the rave has spread around the globe and is now a global youth culture. The admission fee for a rave can range anywhere from $5 to $200. Recent concerns about drug abuse at raves are a result of the fact that rave events can attract up 30,000 youths ranging from 14-25 years old. Policies have been developed to control raves and promoters must be licensed to hold and publicize a rave. Banning raves will only push them underground, making them more dangerous as they are harder and more difficult to control. The government should take responsibility for making raves safer. They shouldn’t ban rave parties.
If bans were imposed, they would only lead to illegal underground raves at unsuitable venues. Underground raves can be far more dangerous that controlled raves. The government could ban raves but they would move underground to become much more dangerous. For a venue to be granted a rave permit, it must follow the rave protocol. This protocol is designed to ensure that rave venues are safe. The protocol states that venues must be reviewed well before the event and must offer free running water. Lack of space, air and water has led to many deaths at underground raves. Allan Ho, a Ryerson student aged 21 who died of an ecstasy-induced overdose on October 10, 1999. He was at an underground rave, which took place in an abandoned factory with poor ventilation and no running-water. It was not a suitable venue for a 3,500-person rave. Police officials called it a “firetrap”. Underground raves are dangerous. Remember that Allan Ho died in an unlicensed venue. (Chow, 2000). Promoters risk everyone’s safety by turning off the water when underground raves are held. Underground raves take place at a location that is kept a secret until the last few hours (Wier 2000). To avoid police surveillance, the promoters will not have paramedics on site like they would at a controlled rave. It is far better to line up ambulances, firefighters, as well as 70 cops on paid duty, outside the event, to deal with any problems that may arise before they occur (Levy, 2000). In the last three year, 21 rave-goers were saved by paramedics. Without paramedics outside, 21 people could have died of drug overdoses. The government needs to allow for more control over raves instead of banning it, so that raves are not forced underground.
Youth culture is raves, and even if governments try to stop it, they will still exist. Youth culture used to be a major concern for politicians and their parents. As with rock concerts of the 70s and 80s, drug use was a problem. But stopping it wouldn’t solve the issue, as they would likely get worse. The youth culture was not going to stop. The youth cultures in the past like disco, Elvis and swing kids, as well as rock fans all used drugs. However, they all expressed themselves and politicians didn’t want to stop that. As well as being a way to relieve stress, raves are also viewed as a place where people can feel accepted. The incredible sensory experience was not what impressed me, but the wonderful group of people that shared the experience with me. Six thousand beautiful and young humans were having fun together. There were no fights. No crying. Nobody is ill on the stairs. Everyone was smiling. Six thousand sisters and brothers of all classes, races, and sexualities living in harmony. Beautiful. (Raver)
In Canada, raves were born 10 years ago. They began as an event where teenagers would break into a warehouse, bring in speakers and equipment, and then party until the police arrived. Rave parties are now held in public, with lasers, artificial smoke, records spinning and many friends to meet. The raves of today are irresistible. They represent the youth of today. Raves threaten Canadian life itself (Fatino. 2000). Raves don’t threaten anything, but to ban them is to destroy youth culture. Raves must not be banned. The youth culture cannot be destroyed by the government.
The government should ban raves. However, they can provide better control of legal raves. They could also increase drug education. The UK has tried to ban raves before, but failed. After raves had been outlawed in the UK, they gradually moved to dance clubs, where alcohol and drugs were dangerously mixed together (Weir 2000). Alcohol and drugs together posed an even greater threat to the public’s health. Drug education is much more important than trying stop people from taking drugs in raves. This is because drugs are available outside raves at places such as clubs, concerts and even schools. It is better to educate the public on the dangers and the amount of drugs that can be taken before it becomes dangerous. Toronto’s city government has shown that raves are much safer on public property than private property. Since March 1997, 14 raves were held at the Canadian National Exhibition grounds. It was found that 298 officers on paid duty were employed. There were also OPP licensed Security Guards. There were 82,100 attendees at 13 raves. Of those, 21 were taken to hospital. No one died and 86 were arrested. All 21 of the people who were hospitalized were later released (Downing 2000). The numbers above show that paramedics and police can help out when needed when a rave has been controlled. The law requires that at controlled raves there be a minimum of one paid-duty police officer per 500 attendees. If there are more than 1,000 attendees at a rave, the ambulance service has to be contracted for four hours. The reason controlled raves have a higher level of safety than underground raves is because these standards are met. It is also possible to deter drug dealers by having a large number of uniformed or plainclothed policemen present. A rave underground would not have any police officers around or present. Underground raves are a safe place for drug dealers, and so they have no reason to be afraid. Drug abuse is not curable, but imposing strict rules on raves will help reduce it. The government should not outlaw raves, but instead make them safer so that everyone can enjoy them.
This issue cannot be dismissed. If raves were banned, youth culture would find new ways to express their self. The government cannot tell teenagers how to behave, but it can ensure that they are safe and do not harm themselves or others. Government-controlled raves have proved to be safer. Banning raves is only going to push them underground, which will lead to more drug abuse and fewer people available to help. While the government cannot control what happens in a party, it can make sure that youths are in a more safe environment. The government should educate the public about the dangers of drugs, rather than waiting until it is late to find out. The government should not ban raves because they do not harm society. They are simply misunderstood.
