The Shotgun Blog
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Motorhomediaries.com's journey interrupted (Developing)
The arrests seem to have been in response to the crew video taping the police after being pulled over for a traffic stop.
The guys of the Motorhome Diaries were our guests on The Hot Room last week, and I can guarantee you we'll be talking about this on tonight's Room.
The motorhome was cruising eastward towards New Orleans when they ran into a traffic stop by Jones County police. The reason for the stop has not yet been ascertained. But the three guys are all being held on various charges according to information obtained by Freekeene.com:
- Adam Mueller - Disorderly Conduct and Disobeying an Officer
- Pete Eyre - Possession of a Beer in a Dry County
- Jason Talley - Disorderly Conduct, Disobeying, and Resisting Arrest
We will be updating this post as more information becomes available. I am also trying to figure out a way we can help. There has been a suggestion of a fund for bail money. If I can get specific details, I will post them here.
I offer a symbolic smash the state! shout-out in solidarity with the guys.
Posted by Mike Brock on May 14, 2009 | Permalink
That will teach them not to mouth off to a policeman. What's the matter: afraid to suffer for your cause? Losers.
Commendations to the Jones County Sheriff's Office for their defense of public safety and liberty from a bunch of clowns.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2009-05-14 3:31:44 PM
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-05-14 3:34:31 PM
Oh look, the pro-authoritarian trolls! How surprising!
Posted by: Mike Brock | 2009-05-14 3:39:45 PM
You may not like a law but until it is changed, you are honor bound to adhere to it! Get involved and change laws don't break them! Also, if he resisted that cop then I hope that punk got a baton whack! The cops are always wrong and these guys are just upstanding citizens right. I guess there is no possibility that these three guys could be at fault. Hey Mike, ever thought of being a defense attorney? It seems to suit you. You could take up Ted Kazinski's case and tell us how his bombing spree was really the state's fault! It is amazing how many people on this blog root against the cops. The funny thing is that so many of these same people would look to the police for protection if they become a crime victim.
Posted by: Brad | 2009-05-14 4:10:23 PM
Right on, Mike! Keep us informed.
Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 2009-05-14 4:24:37 PM
You may not like a law but until it is changed, you are honor bound to adhere to it!
I am? Really? I didn't know that you speak for me. But now that I do, can I have your number so I can call you for future clarifications on my opinions before I express them. I wouldn't want to get anything wrong about my opinions.
Posted by: Mike Brock | 2009-05-14 4:40:21 PM
Was the WS honour bound to adhere to Alberta's human rights laws as they apply to publishing restrictions?
Were abolitionists required to turn in run-away slaves?
We have a right and even an obligation to resist unjust laws.
Mike as a defence attorney? I like the idea.
By the way, if the prevailing order in America is fascism, then no doubt these fellas are guilty of disorderly conduct.
Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 2009-05-14 5:11:09 PM
This is very sad and not at all what I had hoped for the boys. It is people like Brad who would have locked Rosa Parkes in the slammer for sitting at the front. There are plenty of bad laws on the books that everyone breaks everyday. The police can obviously charge anyone for any number of things they feel like at the time. Having a beer in a dry county? Come on. Besides if it is ok for the police to put cameras in their cars and on our streets and film us, why the hell can't we film them? Remember Mississippi Burning?
Posted by: Lindy | 2009-05-14 5:53:55 PM
Three "libertarians" get arrested, it isn't yet clear why, and we have defence funds being established, inferences to fascism, yet when the parts of the Gardiner Expressway were closed by Tamils not a word from the Toronto "libertarian" scribblers.
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-05-14 6:45:15 PM
Why does everyone cite Rosa Parks? Does anyone know what happened in Montgomery, AL in December 1955? I doubt it. She was not the first African American person to be arrested for refusing to give up their seat to a white under segregation! Why was she picked when others fell victim? She was considered acceptable by the black middle class, and by white liberals and a good candidate to stand behind when organizing the bus boycott. That's why she was the hero.
These three punks are losers, and no one but equally languid people will back them. Find more respectable people other that drug dealers and users! They antagonize more than rally!
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2009-05-14 7:53:30 PM
We mention the Rosa Parks example to demonstrate that the argument "if you don't like the law, change the law, but you must respect it at all times" is a bullshit argument.
An unjust law is no law at all.
And yes, a law prohibiting the possession of "a beer" is an unjust law. Just as are laws prohibiting the possession of marijuana, etc.
The idea that people hold "compliance with the law" as the highest moral standard is scary to me. That's actually totalitarian thinking.
If revolutionary Marxists won the election and demanded you relinquish all property, and you refused, would you brand yourself immoral for "not following the law"? Or would you find yourself morally entitled to break such a law?
I know I would. I'd even feel morally entitled to resist Marxists attempting to expropriate my property with violent and lethal force. And I would feel morally justified in doing so, no matter what "laws" the Marxist government passed.
So go ahead and have you totalitarian law worship, and laugh at people are are arrested for breaking unjust laws.
Posted by: Mike Brock | 2009-05-14 9:13:31 PM
Police swooping own to stop the the crime of carrying beer in a dry county is what the wipeheads want- that we prohibit alcohol , which is supposed to be worse than pot..We note nobody ever died from having a beer either but this guy got arrested..why? because thats the law--he broke it and here comes the penalty.. and it ais going to be hard enough so the offender won't want to do it again..
Same mechanics of behavior modification the cops use on wipeheads.. so we have now achieved intoxicant equlity-
Now isn't this a special day or what ? The courts love him enough to punish him so he won;t bring beer where its prohibited - 10,000 years of brewing and this is how it winds up we point out that the law courts also love wipeheads enough to discourage them from carrying dope around where it is prohibited. If pot is ever legalized, it will be across a mixd patchwork of states, provinces and counties..
Wipeheads will never be welcome in many parts of the world even after any so called partial legalization..tax you in one place arrest you in another..
Posted by: 419 | 2009-05-14 10:46:49 PM
-Zebulon Pike, "Three punks are losers."
Zeb, have no experience being a punk but obviously tonnes of experience being a loser." You have three aliases on this blog and you always say the same thing so go flick your troll bean somewhere else.
Posted by: Lindy | 2009-05-14 11:11:48 PM
I do not have three aliases. But there are people whose opinions resemble mine.
The Rosa Parks experience only works if one considers the difficulties changing bus segregation laws encountered and overcame. It took a year-long boycott of Montgomery buses, which only became possible due to the willingness of ordinary people, white and black, to sustain it. Libertarians lack organization and motivation, so the example just doesn't work. It's what happens when the only people who need their "help" are drug dealers and others whom most consider to be criminals. Rosa Parks could be seen as an innocent victim of an unjust system, but not Emery or other vermin.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2009-05-15 10:09:02 AM
I love the 'duck hunter' (as opposed to 'bible thumper') conservative posters on this blog. Whenever push comes to shove on liberty vs. police power, they always choose police power. Without hesitation and with firm conviction.
That should be a serious wake-up call to all the libertarians on this blog who think there is some hope converting conservatives to libertarian thinking.
Just because they have economics sort of right, you think you can get them over. Good luck. They have open contempt for all civil liberty except gun rights. They are living embodiments of the left's inaccurate picture of fascism.
They want Singapore -- a near free-market with no civil rights. If that's your idea of freedom, you're not a libertarian. If it isn't, you're never going to get them to believe in classical liberal civil liberties. They hate personal freedom and _love_ punishment.
And the bible-thumper types are obsessed with single issues no one else cares about. They're cranks. They're like the 9-11 truthers. People like that are not in the market for intellectual renaissance. They should be free to preach their views, but their influence should be fenced.
Face it. You're never going to get any where with either of them. Give up.
Posted by: Robert Seymour | 2009-05-16 8:54:07 AM
There is no law prohibiting beer in the home or on the premises of an RV IN THE FRIDGE! This charge was bogus because the police couldn't make up anything else in order to arrest all three.
Posted by: Jeff | 2009-05-16 10:00:34 AM
Jeff: Disorderly conduct and disobeying an officer ARE crimes. They should have behaved themselves and this could have passed.
What's the matter? Are they not prepared to suffer for their cause? Losers.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2009-05-16 10:25:12 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.