Indians Arrested For Beer Blockade

[Kor37 9]

Indians Arrested for Beer Blockade

By CARSON WALKER,AP

Posted: 2007-06-29 13:17:58

Filed Under: Nation

PINE RIDGE, S.D. (June 28) - Tribal police Thursday shut down a volunteer blockade aimed at keeping beer out of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation , where alcoholism is rampant, and arrested three organizers who refused to leave.

 

 

Only a few vehicles had been checked for alcohol by the time Oglala Sioux tribal police told the volunteers to stop because of safety concerns. After several minutes of arguing, police arrested actor and American Indian activist Russell Means; Duane Martin Sr.; and Frank LaMere, a Winnebago activist.

 

Martin was arrested after it appeared he fought with officers over a spear he was carrying. He spoke in Lakota as more than a half-dozen officers wrestled him to the ground.

 

The three were arrested on charges of disorderly conduct and obstruction of justice, said tribal police Chief James Twiss.

 

"You can ask only so long before you have to arrest them and get them into custody," Twiss said.

 

"It looked like the violence was initiated by tribal police," said Mark Vasina of Nebraskans for Peace. His group and Martin's Strong Heart Civil Rights Movement staged the blockade.

 

About two dozen people were at Thursday's blockade, but only four or five actually were stopping vehicles. About half the people there were reporters.

 

As many as 20 tribal officers were called in to break up the blockade, while about a dozen Nebraska law officers stood by in Whiteclay.

 

Alcoholism is rampant on the reservation , which bans alcohol, and the volunteers had hoped the blockade would help curtail bootlegging. Four stores in Whiteclay, a village just outside the 16,500-member reservation , sell about 4 million cans of beer a year, mostly to American Indians.

 

Blockade workers, wearing bright green construction vests, had planned to stop vehicles, ask occupants whether they had any alcohol and confiscate it if they did. They attempted a similar blockade last year, but it was abandoned when police raised safety concerns, and both sides agreed to work together to address the problem.

 

Beer cans litter reservation roads and the streets of Whiteclay. People loiter outside the stores. Some try to trade tools, electronics and other things for beer.

 

"I'm tired of my people dying. You've got 18-, 19-year-olds trading alcohol for sex," said Martin, whose fellow organizer, Means, was a leader of the American Indian Movement and led the 1973 uprising at Wounded Knee, S.D. Means ran unsuccessfully for the Libertarian nomination for president in 1988.

 

Martin had indicated organizers didn't need support from the tribal government, citing support of the Oglala Sioux's traditional leader, Chief Oliver Red Cloud. But organizers had wanted law enforcers to take over the blockade to ensure it remained nonviolent.

 

Twiss said that he empathizes with the group's mission but that he has to follow tribal law. He added that tribal police conduct at least 15 sobriety checkpoints on the reservation each year and plan to do one starting Friday through Wednesday - including the road between Whiteclay and the reservation .

 

Earlier, acting tribal police Capt. Wilmer Youngman said the searches the volunteers planned went beyond the authority of police. "We can't even search vehicles" without having probable cause to believe a crime has been committed, he said.

 

Twiss said he told the organizers a year ago they needed to change tribal law and make the blockade legal - but they didn't. "They had a whole year to do something legislatively," Twiss said.

 

What?! Impeding a beer truck doing his sacred duty!!!... :biggrin: I say......THE BOOTH FOR THEM!!!

[Odie 0]

Kor, why is it there sacred duty to deliver beer where it is unwanted?

[Theunicornhunter 2]

Sacred and beer aren't even words that belong in the same sentence. :biggrin:

 

Another instance of citizen justice - maybe there's a warning here.

[Charface 0]

[Wishfire 2]

Sacred and beer aren't even words that belong in the same sentence. :biggrin:

 

What about if you're talking about this book?

 

:P

Edited June 30, 2007 by Kraven de Sade

[Kor37 9]

 

This guy is crying because they are keeping him from his beer....... :P

 

Sacred and beer aren't even words that belong in the same sentence. :biggrin:

 

What about if you're talking about this book?

 

:P

 

I've always believed in the healing power of beer!... :P

[bearded ape 0]

beer is very sacred to some of us. i am at my most spiritual when i have a few beers in me.

 

i dont get it, if you dont think beer is a good thing, then dont drink it, but why mess with other peoples activites?

[Odie 0]

beer is very sacred to some of us. i am at my most spiritual when i have a few beers in me.

 

i dont get it, if you dont think beer is a good thing, then dont drink it, but why mess with other peoples activites?

Everything in moderation is best thing for anyone. But when people trading sex for it do think it is a good thing? Do you think it is a good thing when 18 to 19 years are dieing from it? Do you think the litter is a good thing? Do you think it is a good thing when the reservation ban the sales alcohol they are still sneaking it in? Do you think it is a good idea for the reservation to have mostly alcoholics? Alcoholism is largest problem an reservations throughout the country. There is nothing sacred about beer in Native American cultures since there was none before the white man introduce it to the societies.

[bearded ape 0]

no, that all sounds pretty bad in all seriousness, but the fact remains, since when was it their right to interfere with other peoples rights? not even the right to drink, since they do have laws against that on the reservation, but the right to stop someones car and search it when not even an officer of the law can do that?

[Odie 0]

no, that all sounds pretty bad in all seriousness, but the fact remains, since when was it their right to interfere with other peoples rights? not even the right to drink, since they do have laws against that on the reservation, but the right to stop someones car and search it when not even an officer of the law can do that?

 

That is the heart of the problem. Law in forcement is not doing their job or their hands tied from doing it. Either way when people feel their right to take justice they take in their own hands when they feel it is not done by the law in enforement. I agree private citizens should never do the job of the law enforcement! An officer of the law can stop for sobriety checkpoints, and they doing on the reservation 15 times each year. They should be doing that per month!

[Gummy 0]

no, that all sounds pretty bad in all seriousness, but the fact remains, since when was it their right to interfere with other peoples rights? not even the right to drink, since they do have laws against that on the reservation, but the right to stop someones car and search it when not even an officer of the law can do that?

Oh, but the bleeding heart liberals will say that we've beaten down the native americans so badly that we should be going out of our way to compensate them for the injustices that have been done to them.

I see that they've got this Casino Thing up and running pretty good these days. :biggrin:

So spare me about their rights. What about the rights of those who want to purchase beer and can't because of the blockade. Blockades are fine, until they are holding up something that you want/need. :P

[Odie 0]

Oh, but the bleeding heart liberals will say that we've beaten down the native americans so badly that we should be going out of our way to compensate them for the injustices that have been done to them.

Oh, we taken their lands mostly against the treaties Federal government had signed with them. Taken away their way of life. Force them live a life style was against their beliefs. Forced them to taken on names that where not of their culture. Force a language that was not their own. Feed them roting food, because the bison they depend (Sioux) was almost gone through legal hunting. Force them in reservations where diseases where out of control which they did not receive enough medication for the problem. Kill them in mass when they refuse to go in the resevations. Within those revelations the lands (southwestern) cannot support them by raising crops. Yes, they should be compensate for the injustice they and still do receive at the hands of our own government.

 

I see that they've got this Casino Thing up and running pretty good these days. :biggrin:

 

What is wrong with that! Before the casino thing they had nothing, but being depended on the government for hand outs. At least the casinos are bring in money to help them improve their life. With the casinos comes other jobs that where not there before. Business where never attacked into the reservations to the begin with, and those who where there paid very poorly.

 

 

So spare me about their rights. What about the rights of those who want to purchase beer and can't because of the blockade. Blockades are fine, until they are holding up something that you want/need. :P

 

Beer is not a need, and banned on the reservation by their elected representives. If they want the beer badly enough they can travel outside the reservation and get it. I would bet it is not very far to get a can if they want it badly enough.

Edited June 30, 2007 by Odie

[Theunicornhunter 2]

If alcohol only destroyed the lives of those who consumed it - some of the above arguments might stand up.

 

However, alcohol destroys far more than just the lives of those who consume it: traffic deaths, industrial accidents, broken families, rape, domestic abuse, birth defects, neglected children, wasted income, unwanted pregnancy, gun violence, disease etc. are all consequences of or exacerbated by alcohol use.

 

And who pays for all these consequences - you guessed it - the taxpayer - so since people have the pay for, live with or support the consequences of other peoples actions - then they should have a say in those actions.

 

I think it is sad that people have to drug themselves numb to feel good and yet brag about it. I personally have never seen a drunk that wasn't rude, inappropriate or in many cases pathetic. I admit I don't drink and I avoid people and places where drinking goes on. Do I occassionally miss some social opportunities - possibly. But when I do have fun I remember it the next day without any regrets.

 

As for this particular incident - yes, people were breaking the law and will have to suffer the consequences; it appears they had ample time to get the necessary changes in the law.

 

But it also looks like another case where citizens feel compelled to take the law into their own hands because the legal system isn't doing its job - sort of like the Minutemen, and the private child protection groups mentioned on another thread. It's scary when people have to resort to taking the law into their own hands because no good can come of that - it suggests our justice system is either overworked or out of touch. I wonder how many more examples we'll see of this.

[trekz 7]

EXCELLENT post, TUH! Your points on the cost to society of out-of-contol drinking and alcoholism are well put. And Native Americans are particularly prone to problems with alcohol.

 

Russell Means has a history of pushing the envelope for Native American causes to the point where he takes the law into his own hands. That isn't right. But the frustration and anger of Native Americans over the way they've often been treated is understandable, and Odie lists many of these past transgressions against the original stewards of the land we now live on. If you travel through a reservation, it's often very depressing and it's understandable how Native Americans can lose hope. They now are encouraged to set up casinos to raise money. Great, add gambling (and possible addiction to that habit) to all the other problems on the reservation. :biggrin:

 

I don't think anyone is attacking moderate use of alcohol. But alcohol use and abuse is a problem on reservations, reservations that the American government set up, so it should be considered a problem to be solved and not ignored imo.

[Kor37 9]

The Seminole Indians in Florida are so bad off that they just bought the Hard Rock Cafe.......not just 1 or 2.....they bought the whole freaking chain... lock, stock and barrel!!!

[Theunicornhunter 2]

Well, Kor, this didn't happen on a Seminole reservation - and not all reservations (hence tribes) have access to big money making opportunities. And I don't know how the gambling works exactly - though rumor has it the tribes aren't the only ones making the profits - but it is a known fact that rampant poverty does exist on many reservations. And Trekz is right here - talk about another addiction that negatively impacts society as a whole - and that would be gambling.

 

I had a Navajo roommate from Arizone once - she didn't talk about it a lot but it was obvious the people were desperately poor. And the US overnment is/was responsible. If you take away someones means of supporting themselves and make them reliant on government subsidy - what do you expect. In most cases of invasion - the locals are assimilated into the new culture - that didn't happen in the US because we had treaties. So, the tribes have tried to maintain their independence but they lost their previous means of self sufficiency - their entire way of life was eliminated. There is no easy answer here but the "Great White Father" did create a mess.

 

And alcohol and poverty are a disasterous combination - you take people in an already depressed state and they drink to become oblivious - robbing them even more of the means to lift themselves out of poverty.

 

Our government has a tendency to make people dependent on the dole and less self reliant - soon we'll run out of working taxpayers but that's another issue.

 

You know Trekz, I found out about a year ago that one of my grandmothers was part Cherokee - I wish I could find out more about that part of my history.

[MrPsychic 1]

While I support en elected representative entity banning items, it's not up to them to do something illegal, like forced searches of vehicles. That's a blatant violation of the US Constitution, something that they are governed by, being US citizens. For those who say the people were just expressing their First Amendment by protesting beer, that's fine, but Fourth Amendment states that citizens are free from unreasonable search and seizures. In fact, they were doing this to regular people driving in, so that negates your argument of people driving to out of reservation stores Odie.

[Theunicornhunter 2]

If they were performing the searches on tribal land I'm not sure it was illegal - I don't know a lot about tribal rule or law but reservations appear to be sovereign lands. I think the distinction here was that the organizers didn't get the tribal council to change the law to allow their blockade which they could have done.

[Odie 0]

UH, is right reservations are sovereign lands within limits. Either or not US Constitution I really do not know. Anyway if the constitution did apply their rights where violated by our own Federal Government since George Washington. If the group actually changed the minds of tribal council that would allow blockade it would have been done by law enforcement which would have been no different than customs with the Canadian and Mexican boarder. They can search any time without cause.

 

Tribal law bans alcohol within reservation there for paying it must be done on the outside. MrPhsyic, where do you think the alcohol is coming from? Not within the reservation.

[MrPsychic 1]

What about banning cigarettes? There's more evidence for smoking causing cancer and even second hand smoke is horrid too, unless they already banned it.

[Theunicornhunter 2]

The ban wasn't about cancer - although if it were up to me - I'd ban cigarettes :biggrin:

[bearded ape 0]

what about living in a free society where people do what they want and don't blame their problems on inanimate objects but instead accept responsibility for their own stupid actions?

[Theunicornhunter 2]

what about living in a free society where people do what they want and don't blame their problems on inanimate objects but instead accept responsibility for their own stupid actions?

 

I have no idea what you're talking about - but a "Free Society" doesn't mean doesn't necessarily mean do anything you want - "do anything you want" is a motto for anarchy or tyranny. A "civilized" society has the right to protect its citizens from the actions of others to promote the general welfare.

 

And if you're referring to "beer" as an inanimate object - well if it just sat in a bottle on a shelf I guess it wouldn't be harmful. But it is a mind altering drug which does have serious effects when consumed in quantity.

[bearded ape 0]

your right freedom does not mean you can do whatever you want, it means you can do whatever you want as long as it does not interfere with what other people want. that means you can get as drunk as you like, but the minute you run into a car full of kids while under the influence, be ready for some capital punishment. i think killing someone while drunk driving is just as bad as putting a gun to their head and pulling the trigger, and DUI's are like walking around with a loaded gun with no safety. but you'll get in a lot more trouble for walking into a store and waving around a hand gun than you will for driving around wasted, even though there basically the same thing, which is an idiot choosing to endanger others and not being responsible for his actions.

[MrPsychic 1]

There's a difference here between a person who has maybe one or two a day and the person who drinks heavily and drives. You can't categorize them together under one law of banning all alcohol. How about if you get pulled over for DUI, you're banned from buying alcohol for a year, another DUI and it's permanently banned. I myself partake in a few beers now and again and I've never driven drunk, or buzzed, or within an hour of having my last beer.

[Odie 0]

What about banning cigarettes? There's more evidence for smoking causing cancer and even second hand smoke is horrid too, unless they already banned it.

 

 

The ban wasn't about cancer - although if it were up to me - I'd ban cigarettes :biggrin:

 

If it was up to me I would ban them as well. Lost two family members to cancer and related diseases from cigarettes. The problem with banning cigarettes half the country would face jail time and are they already over crowded. California will ban smoking in cars, I really can't how they will enforce it, to stop people from throwing them out of their car to a really dry area. I can't see tell you how many brush fries there have been in this month along the freeway. At least one or two a week. :P

Edited July 1, 2007 by Odie

[Theunicornhunter 2]

There's a difference here between a person who has maybe one or two a day and the person who drinks heavily and drives. You can't categorize them together under one law of banning all alcohol.

 

I don't know that drunk driving was even one of the reasons the tribe had banned alcohol. And as a sovereign nation - yep they can pretty much totally ban alcohol if they choose.