Boonstock

[Gixxer]

Because music festivals in the summer has become a very big business in the last few years. With the recent news release of the 24 year old girl that died at boonstock, the question came up about preventing future deaths at music festivals.

If you feel your wasting your energy in here southy you're free to leave and not comment anymore.

[southy]

Because music festivals in the summer has become a very big business in the last few years. With the recent news release of the 24 year old girl that died at boonstock, the question came up about preventing future deaths at music festivals.

If you feel your wasting your energy in here southy you're free to leave and not comment anymore.

Hilarious, I don't need your permission to leave or not comment Gixxer. I get and understand that a young woman died at Boonstock .. What I don't get is your justification that drugs are ok at Shamb. Drugs kill plain and simple. You cannot control what or how much an individual consumes. Do I have an answer? No!!

[Gixxer]

Hilarious, I don't need your permission to leave or not comment Gixxer. I get and understand that a young woman died at Boonstock .. What I don't get is your justification that drugs are ok at Shamb. Drugs kill plain and simple. You cannot control what or how much an individual consumes. Do I have an answer? No!!

You're correct you cannot control what or how much an individual consumes, however you can test, inform, and educate what is out there being consumed. Bad drugs that are laced with something else is what kills people.

What is safer in your opinion not having a testing tent turning a blind eye and pretending like people are not using drugs at these festivals, or having a testing tent and letting people know that they can have their pills tested without fear of being busted?

What do you think would happen if a bunch of these pills hit a music festival that didnt have pill testing?
http://www.castanet.net/news/Kelowna/96 ... ook-heroin

Do you believe the deaths at these music festival couldve been prevented if their was pill testing?
http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/overdose-d ... -1.1944664

[the truth]

educate, lol lol lol lol when I was a kid in the 70's I knew drugs could kill you, I am sure kids people now know this just as well,
drug tent ????? enable much in your life--way to dummie down people give them a drug tent to make them feel a false sence of safety, now wounder more people are doing more f up drugs then ever, the way people like you think

[Gixxer]

educate, lol lol lol lol when I was a kid in the 70's I knew drugs could kill you, I am sure kids people now know this just as well,
drug tent ????? enable much in your life--way to dummie down people give them a drug tent to make them feel a false sence of safety, now wounder more people are doing more f up drugs then ever, the way people like you think

Here we go old out dated thinking at its finest. Looks like you didnt take the time to read some of the links posted in this thread.

Drug tent and false sence of safety, what the hell are you talking about?

[the truth]

out dated thinking lol lol are you for real everyone knows they should not do drugs by now

[Gixxer]

out dated thinking lol lol are you for real everyone knows they should not do drugs by now

Yes thats right old outdated thinking because people dont do drugs in 2016.

http://www.castanet.net/news/BC/163258/ ... y-over-ODs

[FreeRights]

No fluff, we have a very open and frank relationship with all of our 4 kids. Two have degree's, one diploma'ed and one journeyman. All responsible young adults now making at least 60k yr. They are not into getting chit faced but do drink. Three of them smoke weed....and in front of us. They even share with their mother.
So no, my daughter is not lying to me. What reason would she possibly have to say she can take some Palm Bays into Sham if it were not true? Some youthful bragging point? If you knew her, you would know it was not her style.
There is plenty of alcohol at Sham. Don't kid yourself.

There is alcohol that gets through access control, but all that is found at the gates and elsewhere is removed and disposed of. Shambhala does not apply for nor hold a liquor license, so if they allowed alcohol use they would be open to incredible amounts if liability and for an event with the tenure that they do, it's very unlikely that they would accept that risk.

Your daugher is either misinformed, she sneaks it in, or she knows a security guard that lets her have it. I guarantee that if you were to attempt to do the same at the main gates at Shambhala, you would not have any alcohol on the other side.

Festivals are some of the most audited events for liquor compliance and other licenses and terms. The ones that survive surely do comply fully to whichever licenses that they have.

Nothing is failsafe (especially where humans are involved)

And I am not suggesting to get rid of the testing because drugs are illegal, I am suggesting there is flawed logic when you have a security detail a few hundred feet away that are there to prevent substances that are banned (as part of the event policy), yet these substances are clearly getting in if there is a testing tent in plain view and inviting the patrons to use "for their safety".

Kinda like having a no firearms policy and then having a tent giving away free bullets for the sole purpose of loading the guns that are not permitted.

educate, lol lol lol lol when I was a kid in the 70's I knew drugs could kill you, I am sure kids people now know this just as well,
drug tent ????? enable much in your life--way to dummie down people give them a drug tent to make them feel a false sence of safety, now wounder more people are doing more f up drugs then ever, the way people like you think

Both of you should look at this a different way, because you have unrealistic expectations of how event security works and how event patrons are.

Security can conduct searches at the gates, but as you know from other events around town, if you're screening thousands of patrons and their vehicles, it is unlikely that every bit of contraband is detected and disposed of. To be fair, the primary items that security are searching for are actually weapons and other items that may pose a threat to public safety & security, not drugs and alcohol. If they do find contraband, it gets disposed of.

A big thing that you haven't grasped is that security are not law enforcement officers. Their intent and duties is generally not to enforce the law. They operate at Shambhala to ensure the safety and security of patrons and staff, as well as provide protection for company assets. While they seek to prevent drugs from entering the festival grounds, their primary duty is not to enforce drug laws, but rather to ensure festival-goers remain safe. To this end, and accepting that not every item of contraband would be recovered at the entry gates, they permitted the current standing harm reduction program exists to further ensure the patrons safety and security, and I think that they are innovators in that regard.

The perception that security professionals are rented police officers is basically inaccurate. They enforce policies and procedures, and ensure safety and security for everyone at events, banks, shopping malls, what have you.

It certainly isn't enabling or contradictory. It's taking that additional step to make sure everyone's well-being is looked after.

[fluffy]

I agree that one perception of a drug testing facility is that it implies a condoning of illegal drug use, but another way to look at it is a realistic view that drug use at this type of function is pretty much a given so why not take steps toward minimizing the risk?

This is an attitude that may have been missing from the Boonstock mix. The organizers seemed intent on putting the minimum required safety requirements in place. Still, that being said, it is worthy of note that the recent release of the findings into the death of the young lady at Boonstock ruled it as "accidental" and placed no blame on the festival management.

[southy]

Still trying to see the difference between alcohol and drugs. Allow one and minimize but ban the other? Or is the liability issue with alcohol as has been previously mentioned. Great they are testing drugs but I'd like to know the numbers. And how does that relate to total numbers of attendees. Granted not all those who attend would be using. Or perhaps they are.

[fluffy]

Still trying to see the difference between alcohol and drugs.

In my experience, as far as things like music festivals go, a drugged crowd is better behaved than a drunk crowd. Booze is a sloppy drug. Another point to consider is that the cost of liability insurance for an event like this is going to be a whole lot cheaper without a liquor license.

[FreeRights]

Still trying to see the difference between alcohol and drugs. Allow one and minimize but ban the other? Or is the liability issue with alcohol as has been previously mentioned. Great they are testing drugs but I'd like to know the numbers. And how does that relate to total numbers of attendees. Granted not all those who attend would be using. Or perhaps they are.

It has to do with liquor licensing.

I'm not sure if they will ever release the numbers to the public. I certainly wouldn't, but if it wasn't making a positive impact, they wouldn't continue to do it.

[Gixxer]

In my experience, as far as things like music festivals go, a drugged crowd is better behaved than a drunk crowd. Booze is a sloppy drug. Another point to consider is that the cost of liability insurance for an event like this is going to be a whole lot cheaper without a liquor license.

So true drunk crowds are usually ego driven with lots of fightings, drug crowds are more laid back.

[FreeRights]

In many years involved with planning and managing a wide range of security operations, I also find that alcohol heavy events are considerably more difficult to control than non alcohol or even events with drug usage. To be fair, there are a ton of variables that create the difference (liquor licensing requires X amount of security in y area, while the absence of one does not add those additional requirements), but in general they are easier to manage.

[Gixxer]

Still trying to see the difference between alcohol and drugs. Allow one and minimize but ban the other? Or is the liability issue with alcohol as has been previously mentioned. Great they are testing drugs but I'd like to know the numbers. And how does that relate to total numbers of attendees. Granted not all those who attend would be using. Or perhaps they are.

They dont allow one and minimize but ban the other.

What numbers would you like to know exactly?

I would guess its at least 80% of the people there are on some kind of drug, and thats about 12000 people