RAVE HYSTERIA AMUSING

Misbehaviour Isn'T Exclusive Domain Of Dancers

Ald. Jon Lord is waiting for an invitation to a rave.

Surely, one's not long in coming for the alderman who's determined to
keep an open mind on the merits and demerits of the all-night dance
bashes. Good for him.

The hysteria that swept city hall in the wake of an isolated stabbing
incident following a rave outside a southeast hall was amusing to
behold. It's as if raves have just arrived in Calgary in the past few
weeks.

In fact, they've been filling halls, party rooms and underground
venues for years with little fallout.

One would think violent, drugged behaviour and the need to curb it was
now exclusively the domain of raves.

Ald. David Bronconnier quite correctly points out city paramedics'
repeated visits to certain drinking establishments.

Det. Steve Walton of the city police drug unit, who supports tighter
controls on raves, says there's a big difference between bars and the
dance parties.

"Fifty percent of the people in bars aren't under the influence of
illegal drugs," he says.

Exactly -- in bars, almost everyone's under the influence of legal
liquid dope, the absence of which would sharply reduce the number of
officers on the street.

One 17-year-old, who's attended numerous raves, echoes many of her
contemporaries by saying she's never seen a violent incident amid the
din of electro-pop.

"Didn't you have raves," she asks.

Well, sort of. They were rented community halls where garage rock
bands held court and patrons danced and consumed alcohol and illicit
substances. Sometimes the police would be needed at these spirited
events, but they rarely made the papers.

Violence would erupt at some, as it does still at booze-fuelled house
parties, but it wasn't the flavour of the month, so little note was
taken.

The concerns surrounding raves inevitably centre on drugs -- Ecstacy,
GHB and other substances that have also made their way to or
originated in other venues --like lounges and bars.

It's actually an 80-year-old substance tested by the U.S. government
in the 1950s as a possible cold war combat drug. It was found to lack
the required toxicity.

But there have been problems -- most notably overdoses through the use
of Ecstacy cut with adulterants.

It seems more of a drug control issue than anything.

And we already know how successful halting substance use has been in
the one-sided war against drugs.

We can all talk a lot about it and mount campaigns, but the end result
will be the same: The forbidden fruit will have its way.

Keeping drugs out of raves will be daunting at best; dealers will
simply adapt by selling before or outside the venues with consumption
following suit.

When city council meets June 21, the topic of raves, regulating them
and, theoretically, banning them, will be debated. But banning this
centrepiece of youth culture that embodies so much more than Ecstacy
isn't being realistically entertained.

Some aldermen are even cool at the notion of regulating these dances.
"You can't regulate common sense and common courtesy," says Ald. David
Bronconnier.

In a city with no age curfew, is it even realistic to ban 12-year-olds
from dance halls devoid of liquor licences?

Det. Walton says in his rave forays he's seen pre-teens partaking --
until 6 a.m. when things finally break up.

Should the city craft a responsible parenting bylaw?

What probably will be established are regulations requiring permits at
mainstream rave venues ensuring "proper" security and the presence of
EMS personnel.

Rave organizers -- who often charge exorbitant entry fees -- should
foot the bill for such services.

This current manifestation of youth culture -- like so many others
before it -- will play itself out.

The city whose McMahon Stadium rock concerts died through a noise
bylaw will be stuck with raves -- and even grow accustomed to them.