The State of Alaska vs a bush pilot and a 6-pack of beer

[edo2000]

Back to the original thread- I think comparing aircraft forfeiture for smuggling alcohol to a remote village in Alaska with confiscating cash from a person speeding on Interstate 80 is disingenuous. Very different situations.

Politically, I lean mostly libertarian and abhor excessive regulation and government. Hey, I was born and raised in Alaska. However, tiny, isolated Alaska communities with zero law enforcement are special cases, IMO. Living and flying to the bush in Alaska, I have seen more than one camp situation involving antisocial drunks. Usually most of us carried sidearms. This can quickly become a very concerning scenario. Drunks can be unpredictable and irrational.

As mentioned above, more than 80 percent of communities in Alaska are not accessible by the road system. The vast majority of this 80% has *zero* local law enforcement. Thus, we have hundreds of communities, mostly ethnic Alaska native, with law enforcement response times of 24 to 72 hours, depending on flying weather. And AK flying weather is often bad. The Alaska State Trooper aviation section is the largest in the country, with 50+ aircraft - King Airs, Cessna Caravans, 206's, 185's, Super Cubs. But still... 24-72 hours.. the shooting is over. What is left is cleanup.

The aircraft forfeiture regulations are designed for one reason- to discourage pilots who fly to the bush from smuggling alcohol to dry villages. The combination of tiny communities, plentiful firearms, and mean drunks is not a nuisance. It is a life and death issue. Many innocents have died. The communities have spoken on their approach to mitigate the problem. It has been effective. I have friends who are AK State Troopers. They enthusiastically support the dry village concept and not because of revenues generated by auctioning aircraft.

The pilot referenced in the OP may have many good reasons for transporting however many gallons of alcohol to a dry village. Courts will decide. But if his intention was to supply alcohol to a village where it is specifically banned for safety reasons, I hope he loses his plane. Either way, the next pilot will think twice.

 

[Dana]

Except this case isn’t about putting anything you want in your body. It’s about transporting illegal cargo.

True, but if the government didn't restrict what substances people can use, the cargo wouldn't have been illegal.

 

[Clip4]

True, but if the government didn't restrict what substances people can use, the cargo wouldn't have been illegal.

You may eat all the turtle soup you like, but you may not be able to transport, possess, catch or buy the turtles you want to make soup from..

The law violated was not a local ordinance. It is Alaska Statute § 04.16.220, any vehicle, aircraft, or vessel used to illegally transport or import alcohol into a dry village is subject to mandatory criminal forfeiture, regardless of the quantity of alcohol or the owner's intent.

If you fly commercially in AK, you should have known this law and took precautions according.

 

[Rick A]

Alaska Statute § 04.16.220, any vehicle, aircraft, or vessel used to illegally transport or import alcohol into a dry village is subject to mandatory criminal forfeiture, regardless of the quantity of alcohol or the owner's intent.

Politically, I lean mostly libertarian and abhor excessive regulation and government. Hey, I was born and raised in Alaska.

The pilot referenced in the OP may have many good reasons for transporting however many gallons of alcohol to a dry village. Courts will decide. But if his intention was to supply alcohol to a village where it is specifically banned for safety reasons, I hope he loses his plane. Either way, the next pilot will think twice.

Alaska Statute § 04.16.220 does not appear to allow the courts to consider intent. Fly it in (or possibly plan to) then lose your plane, regardless of intent.

Politically I'm also a Libertarian and abhor excessive regulation, fines and seizures... and greatly dislike the hammer of government working overtime in their search for regulatory nails.

I've watched enough reality TV shows filmed in Alaska that show multiple State Troopers raid outdoor parties and chase teens through the woods in search of underage drinkers. Or, Fishing Vessels that brave 30' waves and ice in the Bering Sea to race back to port in short duration fishing seasons, in time to hopefully avoid the state from seizing million dollar cargos of seafood. Or, deckhands in jeopardy of being washed overboard, counting and measuring thousands of crabs at night, on icy decks in extremely dangerous conditions, in order to avoid the state from fining the vessels owners after finding a crab too small, or the wrong type of crab, knowing the catch will be inspected by state employees once safely back at port. A tough and extremely dangerous job (not including the state inspectors with their measuring tools and clipboards).

I would think that the Statutes written that demand tough regulation of industry throughout Alaska are as strict and non-negotiable in court as what pilots face with alcohol in their possession. It's no wonder the costs of all this are huge compared to the lower 48. It's not only due to the large size of the territory, but I suspect it is also related to the amount of state employees carrying hammers in a state set up chock full of potential targets just waiting to be whacked.

 

[Bell206]

I've watched enough reality TV shows filmed in Alaska

I suppose you also believe they really are making illegal alcohol on the Moonshiners reality show too?

 

[Clip4]

Alaska Statute § 04.16.220 does not appear to allow the courts to consider intent. Fly it in (or possibly plan to) then lose your plane, regardless of intent.

Politically I'm also a Libertarian and abhor excessive regulation, fines and seizures... and greatly dislike the hammer of government working overtime in their search for regulatory nails.

I've watched enough reality TV shows filmed in Alaska that show multiple State Troopers raid outdoor parties and chase teens through the woods in search of underage drinkers. Or, Fishing Vessels that brave 30' waves and ice in the Bering Sea to race back to port in short duration fishing seasons, in time to hopefully avoid the state from seizing million dollar cargos of seafood. Or, deckhands in jeopardy of being washed overboard, counting and measuring thousands of crabs at night, on icy decks in extremely dangerous conditions, in order to avoid the state from fining the vessels owners after finding a crab too small, or the wrong type of crab, knowing the catch will be inspected by state employees once safely back at port. A tough and extremely dangerous job (not including the state inspectors with their measuring tools and clipboards).

I would think that the Statutes written that demand tough regulation of industry throughout Alaska are as strict and non-negotiable in court as what pilots face with alcohol in their possession. It's no wonder the costs of all this are huge compared to the lower 48. It's not only due to the large size of the territory, but I suspect it is also related to the amount of state employees carrying hammers in a state set up chock full of potential targets just waiting to be whacked.

Are you sure? Core libstate's role should be strictly restricted to protecting people from violence, theft, and fraud, and enforcing voluntary contracts

Alaska Statute § 04.16.220 does not appear to allow the courts to consider intent. Fly it in (or possibly plan to) then lose your plane, regardless of intent.

Politically I'm also a Libertarian and abhor excessive regulation, fines and seizures... and greatly dislike the hammer of government working overtime in their search for regulatory nails.

I've watched enough reality TV shows filmed in Alaska that show multiple State Troopers raid outdoor parties and chase teens through the woods in search of underage drinkers. Or, Fishing Vessels that brave 30' waves and ice in the Bering Sea to race back to port in short duration fishing seasons, in time to hopefully avoid the state from seizing million dollar cargos of seafood. Or, deckhands in jeopardy of being washed overboard, counting and measuring thousands of crabs at night, on icy decks in extremely dangerous conditions, in order to avoid the state from fining the vessels owners after finding a crab too small, or the wrong type of crab, knowing the catch will be inspected by state employees once safely back at port. A tough and extremely dangerous job (not including the state inspectors with their measuring tools and clipboards).

I would think that the Statutes written that demand tough regulation of industry throughout Alaska are as strict and non-negotiable in court as what pilots face with alcohol in their possession. It's no wonder the costs of all this are huge compared to the lower 48. It's not only due to the large size of the territory, but I suspect it is also related to the amount of state employees carrying hammers in a state set up chock full of potential targets just waiting to be whacked.

Usually libertarians believe the state's role should be strictly restricted to protecting people from violence, theft, and fraud, which is exactly what the voters of Beaver, AK did when they voted their community dry. It’s what about all governments do by outlawing drugs.

 

[hypoxia]

Usually libertarians believe the state's role should be strictly restricted to protecting people from violence, theft, and fraud, which is exactly what the voters of Beaver, AK did when they voted their community dry. It’s what about all governments do by outlawing drugs.

I flew into Beaver early one Saturday or Sunday morning. There was activity in the village and some guys helped unload the airplane. I asked what was going on as other villages wouldn't have anyone up at that time. They said they were dry, no drinking, no fighting and they were proud of that. I have flown enough medivacs out of other villages due to alcohol to appreciate that. There's not a pilot in Alaska that is ignorant of the penalty for alcohol and hunting violations.

 

[Rick A]

It’s what about all governments do by outlawing drugs.

And we know how well that's working out.

I'm not arguing that assisting the citizens of Beaver and other small remote communities obtain a dry community is a bad thing. Punishing aircraft owners and others by seizures is (IMO) doing it on the cheap and kicking the can down the road using the well-worn excuse that there's never enough money in the budget to do more to protect people and help them live a happier life.

Whether or not cultural issues are being addressed as to why some of their residents want to drink themselves into a rage-filled drunken state and kill people, I don't have a clue. But I'd suspect it has something to do with poverty and despair, which is not much different than what's happening in many cities and communities around the world.

I believe most people would agree that the goal of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" as found in the United States Declaration of Independence should be granted a higher priority of government spending than measuring the size and amount of crabs, or chasing teens though the woods to check their ID's.

The money's there to provide more safety, it's just being spent on things determined to be more important than people being shot, beat up and living in poverty and fear.

 

[MauleSkinner]

I believe most people would agree that the goal of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" as found in the United States Declaration of Independence should be granted a higher priority of government spending than measuring the size and amount of crabs, or chasing teens though the woods to check their ID's.

So laws that were created to protect life and liberty should be negated on the basis of an individual’s happiness?

 

[Rick A]

So laws that were created to protect life and liberty should be negated on the basis of an individual’s happiness?

Is not living in fear of being murdered or beat up by raging drunks, and living in an environment of poverty and despair really fixed by seizing the aircraft of alcohol bootleggers?

Is the threat of an aircraft seizure, and the arrest of violent offenders an average of 36 to 72 hours after the felony is committed really the ONLY answer to providing "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" in these communities... as doing anything else is considered too expensive to consider? Guess so...

 

[MauleSkinner]

Is not living in fear of being murdered or beat up by raging drunks, and living in an environment of poverty and despair really fixed by seizing the aircraft of alcohol bootleggers?

Are you living in fear of being murdered or beat up by raging drunks? If not, it’s apparently working, AND your pursuit of happiness is successful.

Is the threat of an aircraft seizure, and the arrest of violent offenders an average of 36 to 72 hours after the felony is committed really the ONLY answer to providing "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" in these communities... as doing anything else is considered too expensive to consider? Guess so...

There are no perfect laws, but unless or until they’re changed, they’re the framework we have to live with. What is your suggestion?

 

[Rick A]

Are you living in fear of being murdered or beat up by raging drunks? If not, it’s apparently working, AND your pursuit of happiness is successful.

There are no perfect laws, but unless or until they’re changed, they’re the framework we have to live with. What is your suggestion?

Just a few possibilities if the 15.6 BILLION dollar budget for less than a million people population could find a few spare bucks:

Small secure armories with 24/7/365 surveillance. Alcohol breath testing devices to gain access to weapons and ammunition. Local citizens trained and deputized with legal powers to detain and lockup violent drugs, under the direction of regional State Police Officers. Direct communication ability with outside authorities 24/7/365. Regional dry out and mental health facilities where appropriate, or jail for chronic offenders.

Regarding aircraft... no seizures. Instead use fines and groundings for specific lengths of time. Maybe seizures for second offenses. Jail for third time.

 

[Clip4]

And we know how well that's working out.

I'm not arguing that assisting the citizens of Beaver and other small remote communities obtain a dry community is a bad thing. Punishing aircraft owners and others by seizures is (IMO) doing it on the cheap and kicking the can down the road using the well-worn excuse that there's never enough money in the budget to do more to protect people and help them live a happier life.

Whether or not cultural issues are being addressed as to why some of their residents want to drink themselves into a rage-filled drunken state and kill people, I don't have a clue. But I'd suspect it has something to do with poverty and despair, which is not much different than what's happening in many cities and communities around the world.

I believe most people would agree that the goal of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" as found in the United States Declaration of Independence should be granted a higher priority of government spending than measuring the size and amount of crabs, or chasing teens though the woods to check their ID's.

The money's there to provide more safety, it's just being spent on things determined to be more important than people being shot, beat up and living in poverty and fear.

Considering you haven’t lived a single day of your life without drug laws, exactly what are you using to determine the current laws are failing and unwarranted? And why do you believe that every government on the globe disagrees with you?

 

[172andyou]

Are you living in fear of being murdered or beat up by raging drunks?

I mean rural areas here in texas have meth, and meth crime related, problems.

 

[edo2000]

Is not living in fear of being murdered or beat up by raging drunks, and living in an environment of poverty and despair really fixed by seizing the aircraft of alcohol bootleggers?

Is the threat of an aircraft seizure, and the arrest of violent offenders an average of 36 to 72 hours after the felony is committed really the ONLY answer to providing "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" in these communities... as doing anything else is considered too expensive to consider? Guess so...

These are difficult issues. But yes, severe penalties for booze smuggling is one very effective way to decrease violence in these remote villages. As someone else explained, AK natives are mostly friendly and hard working. In a village, everyone knows everyone and many are blood related.

But booze often causes irrational behavior, firearms are present, and the normal law enforcement guardrails are days away. The village residents know this and don't want alcohol in their towns. Simple.

You wondered why the state of Alaska spends so much money. Lots of public employees, as you say. Much of it(not all) comes from bringing hundreds of isolated communities power, water, sewer, local schools, air transport, subsidized mail and freight. None of this was present before. This effort seemed simple back in the 70's when our state coffers exploded with oil revenues. Maintaining it all now is anything but. It is nearly impossible to convey the massive logistics of it all to someone who hasn't been there. Every watt of electricity in these places is made with diesel fuel that was flown hundreds of miles in 1940s-era tanker aircraft.

Staffing every tiny, isolated village with a trooper outpost is not remotely viable. And not at all necessary, if booze is not present.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Just a few possibilities if the 15.6 BILLION dollar budget for less than a million people population could find a few spare bucks:

Small secure armories with 24/7/365 surveillance. Alcohol breath testing devices to gain access to weapons and ammunition.

Ah, so a sober person could allow drunks to access the weapons and ammunition. Sounds like the same concept as the smuggling problem.

Local citizens trained and deputized with legal powers to detain and lockup violent drugs, under the direction of regional State Police Officers.

Anything to prevent Joe Citizen from doing that without being deputized?

Direct communication ability with outside authorities 24/7/365.

Do they not have that?

Regional dry out and mental health facilities where appropriate, or jail for chronic offenders.

Do those not exist as well?

Regarding aircraft... no seizures. Instead use fines and groundings for specific lengths of time. Maybe seizures for second offenses. Jail for third time.

Why not go straight to a lynch mob meeting every airplane, and if alcohol is found, stuff a beer bong down their throat, fill ‘em up, and hang them on site? Let the exploded bodies be the deterrent. If someone is mercenary enough to facilitate ruining and/or destroying lives for money and seizures don’t work, fines and groundings certainly aren’t going to work.

 

[Bell206]

Is the threat of an aircraft seizure, and the arrest of violent offenders an average of 36 to 72 hours after the felony is committed really the ONLY answer to providing "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" in these communities...

Except the one thing you continually gloss over, its those exact communities who want the current system. And if you don't want your aircraft seized, don't fly to those villages that elect to be dry.

 

[Rick A]

Except the one thing you continually gloss over, its those exact communities who want the current system. And if you don't want your aircraft seized, don't fly to those villages that elect to be dry.

It's not may intention to gloss over that fact, I do appreciate free choice. It's the seizures, plus a lack of any additional methods that could help them that don't seem to exist.

From what I surmise, which may be true or not, is if the communities that decided to become dry did so because they really would like more help, learned there's not enough money to go around, so they're happy to get what they got.

 

[Bell206]

From what I surmise, which may be true or not, is if the communities that decided to become dry did so because they really would like more help, learned there's not enough money to go around, so they're happy to get what they got.

Not true. Those communities received the exact help they requested, which in turn has saved a lot of lives. But the fact you don’t want to believe that, or any of the other additional facts given to you in good faith by knowledgeable people with personal experiences on the topic, simply points to one of two things: you either suffer from arrogance or ignorance on the subject. You pick.

 

[Rick A]

Not true. Those communities received the exact help they requested, which in turn has saved a lot of lives. But the fact you don’t want to believe that, or any of the other additional facts given to you in good faith by knowledgeable people with personal experiences on the topic, simply points to one of two things: you either suffer from arrogance or ignorance on the subject. You pick.

Before I'll agree to being ignorant or arrogant on this subject (only two choices of stupid?), first show me where I said a community's decision to go dry was wrong and not helpful. You, and many others seem to believe, or at least imply, that the seizures of aircraft are all that can done to fix a cultural problem that I've clearly stated runs much deeper than the alcohol alone. The institution of severe financial penalties to pilot/owners losing their aircraft to the state seems to be considered by many to be the only affordable or practical solution due to the lack of available funds left over after managing a huge state with higher priority needs.

I believe there's more that can be done to attempt to improve the lives of within these obviously violent and dangerous native communities. The forceful action of reducing alcohol use by residents by stopping aircraft deliveries (I disagree with gov't seizures) may be helpful, but only a beginning. It's a bandaid on a much greater problem.

FWIW, here's what AI has to say about a larger problem and I agree:

"The high alcohol involvement in rural Alaska crime is the product of several reinforcing factors, and researchers emphasize that alcohol is often a symptom of deeper problems rather than the root cause itself.

Historical Trauma
Alcohol was introduced by Western explorers and fur traders in the 1800s. Decades of forced assimilation, boarding schools, and loss of cultural identity created intergenerational trauma that persists in many Alaska Native communities. Alcohol misuse became intertwined with that legacy.

Economic Deprivation & Isolation
Villages are accessible only by air, boat, or snowmobile, with very few jobs. Being "caught between the subsistence economy of old and the cash economy of today," residents face overwhelming idleness and despair. Unemployment and poverty are among the strongest drivers of drinking.

No Access to Treatment
There are essentially no treatment facilities in remote villages. Programs are "hard to sustain in communities accessible only by air," so addiction goes unaddressed. People self-medicate with alcohol—often foul-tasting homebrew or bootleg liquor—because no other coping resources exist.

The Bootleg & Homebrew Economy
Over 100 villages have voted "dry" or "damp," but this creates a black market where a $25 bottle of liquor sells for $200+. Bootlegging is lucrative, and homebrew is widespread—some residents report 12-year-olds making and selling it. Restrictions also shift drinking from social patterns to binging and hoarding, which is more dangerous.

Seasonal & Environmental Factors
Extended winter darkness, extreme cold, and cabin-fever conditions confine people indoors for months. Alcohol-related crime and domestic violence measurably spike in winter.

Cultural Disruption
Rapid industrialization and modernization disrupted traditional roles and values. Young people exposed to media showing comfortable urban lifestyles feel further dislocated. Skewed sex ratios (young women leaving for cities) add social tension.

Weak Deterrence
With no local police in many villages and state troopers hours or days away, crimes go unreported or uninvestigated. This allows patterns of alcohol-fueled violence to persist and escalate without interruption.

In short, the Anchorage Daily News summarized it well: the drinking is "far more a symptom of many problems than the problem itself"—racism, joblessness, cultural loss, isolation, and idleness all converge in small, remote communities with no safety net."

 

[Palmpilot]

Maybe we should send SCOTUS a few amicus cases of beer......

Wouldn't that constitute bribery?

Oh, wait...

Never mind!

 

[Palmpilot]

...Civil forfeiture, OTOH, is another matter... an evil that encourages a kleptocratic government.

Apparently the due process clauses were only a suggestion.

 

[Palmpilot]

The fact that the State of Alaska is subcontracted (at no charge to them?) at the request of a Sovereign nation to handle law enforcement investigations and Judicial prosecutions is (IMO) out of bounds.

It seems the citizens of Alaska and possibly the US Government Treasury may somehow be subsidizing the entire indigenous population at the will of laws, policies and customs established by a Sovereign entity, then lobbied to State politicians to help "babysit" a population with their own special problems, blamed on all the people that allegedly created the problem, and now are forced to pay for it.

When state agencies prosecute citizens, jail offenders, and confiscate their property on behalf of policies and laws developed by citizens of an indigenous nation (outside the geographic boundaries of the Sovereign) are allowed, I would hope American Citizens are also not forced to pay and suffer the consequences for it. But somehow in this upside down world we all live, I'd bet we pay for all of it, like it or not.

Treaties are included in the Supremacy Clause.

 

[hypoxia]

In the early 1980's Rampart, Alaska which is located on the South bank of the Yukon river (population 50) had no electricity and no roads that went anywhere. The Yukon was their highway. What they did have was Alascom television. Residents used gasoline powered generators to charge 12 volt car batteries which powered the 12 volt televisions so they could watch shows like Beverly Hills 90210. I always wondered what the effect on the kids and families was.

 

[UngaWunga]

Yes, and those civil forfeitures are often overturned when they get to a judge.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2025/01/14/retired-marine-scores-legal-victory-as-judge-blocks-nevada-law-enforcement-from-using-federal-loophole/

Illinois Appellate Court overturns forfeiture on Eighth Amendment grounds | Illinois State Bar Association

www.isba.org

Judge orders return of seized Land Rover that led to SCOTUS civil forfeiture case - The Indiana Lawyer

After seven years, two appearances before the Indiana Supreme Court and a trip to the United States Supreme Court, a Marion man fighting for the return of his seized vehicle has won his battle, with a trial court judge ordering the “immediate” return of his SUV. But a pending appeal means the...

www.theindianalawyer.com

Assuming you can afford the time and money to fight the state in court. Many can't.

 

[Bell206]

You, and many others seem to believe, or at least imply, that the seizures of aircraft are all that can done to fix a cultural problem that I've clearly stated runs much deeper than the alcohol alone.

Yes. Because its been very effective for the simple reason the only way alcohol gets into 80+% of the villages is by aircraft. So again, if you don’t want to lose your aircraft, don’t fly alcohol into dry villages. Which is also no different than committing similar infractions in the lower 48 and losing your aircraft; or as of late, lose your boat based on latest forfeiture auctions.

And speaking of asset forfeitures, interestingly Pennsylvania is in the top 10 for the most criminal asset seizures among all states. Yet Alaska ranks in the lower third. And same with “cultural” substance abuse issues since PA has a similar number of affected people as AK, however, they’re within a geographic area 14 times smaller than AK. Maybe look to your own state’s affairs first before commenting on how other states conduct their business? Especially when there’s limited or zero comparison between the two states.

 

[geezer]

SARCASM WARNING


"In short, the Anchorage Daily News summarized it well: the drinking is "far more a symptom of many problems than the problem itself"—racism, joblessness, cultural loss, isolation, and idleness all converge in small, remote communities with no safety net."

Simple solution, in one generation.

Subsistence living in the undeveloped regions of Alaska is destructive to those living there.

Relocate all of them to urban areas of Alaska, provide free housing, and a Federal food credit card plus a stipend of cash for other needs. Send their kids to conventional schools, separate classroom for each grade, and a majority of fully assimilated natives and white students.

In one generation, the kids will be assimilated and qualified for normal occupations.

The desolate regions will go back to wolves, caribou, and moose.

THERE WOULD NO LONGER BE DRY VILLAGES, FLYING IN OF ILEGAL ALCOHOL, OR FORFITING OF AIRPLANES.

What is the value of unassimilated people living in a traditional manner, now known as poverty?

SARCASM WARNING END

 

[Lindberg]

Just a few possibilities if the 15.6 BILLION dollar budget for less than a million people population could find a few spare bucks:

Small secure armories with 24/7/365 surveillance. Alcohol breath testing devices to gain access to weapons and ammunition. Local citizens trained and deputized with legal powers to detain and lockup violent drugs, under the direction of regional State Police Officers. Direct communication ability with outside authorities 24/7/365. Regional dry out and mental health facilities where appropriate, or jail for chronic offenders.

Regarding aircraft... no seizures. Instead use fines and groundings for specific lengths of time. Maybe seizures for second offenses. Jail for third time.

So you want more cops and more law enforcement and more use of force by the government. Like most online discussions with self-identified Libertarians, this will likely be the most confusing part of my day.

 

[Rick A]

So you want more cops and more law enforcement and more use of force by the government. Like most online discussions with self-identified Libertarians, this will likely be the most confusing part of my day.

Confusing?

Fact: One of the primary duties of government, at all levels, is to provide for the publics' safety. A Constitutional duty.

Fact: The majority of citizens in some remote native villages want murders and abuse caused by violent drunks reduced following a vote among themselves, and they voted "dry". That's a good thing.

Fact: The state of Alaska agreed to assist remote villages by offering law enforcement (including Judicial) methods to help keep them dry using limited law state funds, to the best of their ability to pay for it. Another good thing.

Therefore, when the majority of sovereign citizens within a native village legally vote on additional methods of providing safety, this time within the geographic boundaries of their village, now all that's needed is money, and the political will on how and what to spend it on.

Free people. Legal vote. Local solutions and control. Accomplished without the use of seizures provided by a well-funded proxy, that very likely may be determined to be unconstitutional in its application and lack of a practical method of redress and accountablity when misapplied. Seems Libertarian to me.

You may disagree, but IMO a low population state with a 2027 budget of 15.6 Billion dollars could research and evaluate additional methods (if wanted) to assist native people in their efforts to enjoy "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".

Historically, (IMO) Alaskan native people have gotten a raw (non-Libertarian) deal, per:

The United States government implemented specific programs and policies aimed at the Alaska Native population to disrupt traditional cultural structures and assimilate them into mainstream American society.​

​

The U.S. government established a network of federal Indian boarding schools that removed Alaska Native children from their villages. These schools prohibited children from speaking their native languages, wearing traditional clothing, consuming traditional foods, or practicing their religions, thereby creating intergenerational trauma and forcing cultural assimilation.​

​

Government actions also included legal mandates that required cultural abandonment for political rights. In 1915, the Alaska Territorial legislature passed a law allowing Natives to vote only on the condition that they give up their cultural customs and traditions.​

 

[MauleSkinner]

Confusing?

Fact: One of the primary duties of government, at all levels, is to provide for the publics' safety. A Constitutional duty.

Fact: The majority of citizens in some remote native villages want murders and abuse caused by violent drunks reduced following a vote among themselves, and they voted "dry". That's a good thing.

Fact: The state of Alaska agreed to assist remote villages by offering law enforcement (including Judicial) methods to help keep them dry using limited law state funds, to the best of their ability to pay for it. Another good thing.

Therefore, when the majority of sovereign citizens within a native village legally vote on additional methods of providing safety, this time within the geographic boundaries of their village, now all that's needed is money, and the political will on how and what to spend it on.

Free people. Legal vote. Local solutions and control. Accomplished without the use of seizures provided by a well-funded proxy, that very likely may be determined to be unconstitutional in its application and lack of a practical method of redress and accountablity when misapplied. Seems Libertarian to me.

You may disagree, but IMO a low population state with a 2027 budget of 15.6 Billion dollars could research and evaluate additional methods (if wanted) to assist native people in their efforts to enjoy "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".

And on top of that,

you want more cops and more law enforcement and more use of force by the government.

 

[Lindberg]

Confusing?

Yes.

Fact: One of the primary duties of government, at all levels, is to provide for the publics' safety. A Constitutional duty.

Is that, in fact, a fact?

Fact: The majority of citizens in some remote native villages want murders and abuse caused by violent drunks reduced following a vote among themselves, and they voted "dry". That's a good thing.

Ok.

Fact: The state of Alaska agreed to assist remote villages by offering law enforcement (including Judicial) methods to help keep them dry using limited law state funds, to the best of their ability to pay for it. Another good thing.

Including seizure of property used to violate the will of the majority.

Therefore, when the majority of sovereign citizens within a native village legally vote on additional methods of providing safety, this time within the geographic boundaries of their village, now all that's needed is money, and the political will on how and what to spend it on.

Including seizure of property used to violate the will of the majority.

Free people. Legal vote. Local solutions and control. Accomplished without the use of seizures provided by a well-funded proxy, that very likely may be determined to be unconstitutional in its application and lack of a practical method of redress and accountablity when misapplied. Seems Libertarian to me.

Wait, what? Didn't the free people legally vote for the law that allows these seizures? But you don't like that law that they voted for or want it enforced. See, now I'm confused.

You may disagree, but IMO a low population state with a 2027 budget of 15.6 Billion dollars could research and evaluate additional methods (if wanted) to assist native people in their efforts to enjoy "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".

Additional methods, in addition to the methods that the Free People have already chosen to assist in their efforts to enjoy life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Additional methods like a greater law-enforcement presence in their villages.

 

[Rick A]

Yes.

Is that, in fact, a fact?

Ok.

Including seizure of property used to violate the will of the majority.

Including seizure of property used to violate the will of the majority.

Wait, what? Didn't the free people legally vote for the law that allows these seizures? But you don't like that law that they voted for or want it enforced. See, now I'm confused.

Additional methods, in addition to the methods that the Free People have already chosen to assist in their efforts to enjoy life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Additional methods like a greater law-enforcement presence in their villages.

I doubt the political leadership of each dry village can direct the state police how to operate law enforcement assets. Creating budgets and taxation to allocate funds are the job of state legislatures, i.e., here's some money, now go stop the smuggling.

The state is strapped, it's geographically large, the native population of voters are small in number, and certainly not very politically influential. The state does the best they can to help a little, with whatever funds out of their operating budget that can be spared (table scraps?).

Seizures of private property are a cheap method to offer some help to the native villages while simultaneously raising some chump change to pay the bills.

If you have any documentation that proves the rural village directs the methodology that the state of Alaska uses to enforce implementation of state laws against smuggling alcohol, I'd like to see it. And I'll stand corrected.

 

[MauleSkinner]

If you have any documentation that proves the rural village directs the methodology that the state of Alaska uses to enforce implementation of state laws against smuggling alcohol, I'd like to see it. And I'll stand corrected.

So are you saying that the methodology was unknown to the people who voted for no alcohol, or it changed after they voted for no alcohol?

 

[Lindberg]

I doubt the political leadership of each dry village can direct the state police how to operate law enforcement assets.

What is this in response to?

Creating budgets and taxation to allocate funds are the job of state legislatures, i.e., here's some money, now go stop the smuggling.

So more taxes?

The state is strapped, it's geographically large, the native population of voters are small in number, and certainly not very politically influential.

I'm not sure what you mean by this and how you jumped to this from your post celebrating that the native population was able to ban alcohol as an act of self-determination. Are they influential or are they not?

The state does the best they can to help a little, with whatever funds out of their operating budget that can be spared (table scraps?).

Yeah, here the state is enforcing the law that you were cheering just a few posts ago.

Seizures of private property are a cheap method to offer some help to the native villages while simultaneously raising some chump change to pay the bills.

So is seizing property used to commit crimes a good thing or a bad thing, because here it sounds like a good thing, but I thought you said it was a bad thing.

If you have any documentation that proves the rural village directs the methodology that the state of Alaska uses to enforce implementation of state laws against smuggling alcohol, I'd like to see it.

Does your earlier post count as documentation?

Fact: The majority of citizens in some remote native villages want murders and abuse caused by violent drunks reduced following a vote among themselves, and they voted "dry". That's a good thing.

Fact: The state of Alaska agreed to assist remote villages by offering law enforcement (including Judicial) methods to help keep them dry using limited law state funds, to the best of their ability to pay for it. Another good thing.

 

[Rick A]

Ah, so a sober person could allow drunks to access the weapons and ammunition. Sounds like the same concept as the smuggling problem.

Anything to prevent Joe Citizen from doing that without being deputized?

Do they not have that?

Do those not exist as well?

Why not go straight to a lynch mob meeting every airplane, and if alcohol is found, stuff a beer bong down their throat, fill ‘em up, and hang them on site? Let the exploded bodies be the deterrent. If someone is mercenary enough to facilitate ruining and/or destroying lives for money and seizures don’t work, fines and groundings certainly aren’t going to work.

So are you saying that the methodology was unknown to the people who voted for no alcohol, or it changed after they voted for no alcohol?

Your assumption maybe also have become negatively engrained by decades of the native Alaskan's past disappointments in their dealings with government authority, and like you believe, the seizures of private transportation property are the ONLY solution to improve the personal safety of law-abiding citizens.

I don't agree with settling for low bars of performance and accountability. Yes, dry native communities are seeing a big improvement in safety provided by the attention asked of law enforcement. They want it, and it helps. That's a fact.

Government creates the poison, and then offers antidotes. The cultural poison is multi-generational, and well researched and documented. It represents a huge component of their violence, abuse and alcohol related issues. Now, what next? Anything? Or is everybody happy with the antidote of selling smugglers' aircraft and agreeing they've done enough to fix to the core issues, as cheaply as possible?

 

[Lindberg]

Like most online discussions with self-identified Libertarians, this will likely be the most confusing part of my day.

My record remains intact.

 

[Rick A]

My record remains intact.

You seem to think Libertarian means no government, not limited government. Whatever.

 

[Lindberg]

You seem to think Libertarian means no government, not limited government. Whatever.

No, I'm well aware that "Libertarian" usually means "the laws I like for unarticulated reasons and no more."

 

[MauleSkinner]

Your assumption maybe also have become negatively engrained by decades of the native Alaskan's past disappointments in their dealings with government authority, and like you believe, the seizures of private transportation property are the ONLY solution to improve the personal safety of law-abiding citizens.

My only assumption is that something less severe than what currently doesn’t work isn’t going to work. And obviously I don’t think it’s the ONLY solution.

 

[Bell206]

If you have any documentation that proves the rural village directs the methodology that the state of Alaska uses to enforce implementation of state laws against smuggling alcohol, I'd like to see it. And I'll stand corrected.

Stand corrected. Its called the Local Option rule found in Title 4 of the Alaska State Statutes and allows local municipalities to vote on whether to prohibit or allow sales of alcoholic beverages within the confines of their municipal borders. How these municipalities, ie., villages, vote on that Option determines how the state police enforce those laws. Since not all villages are dry, with some permitting selective alcohol sales and others completely wet, how those specific alcohol laws apply to each village would alter how the state police enforce the alcohol laws for each specific village.

But what makes your comments so rich is that they come from a citizen in a state that exterminated and assimilated all native populations to the point that Pennsylvania does not officially recognize any of the native peoples or lands. And due to that lack of official state recognition, none of those native decedents have access to any public benefits found in states that do recognize their native peoples like Alaska. So it seems Alaska is actually light years ahead of Pennsylvania when it comes to providing for, supporting, and protecting all their constituents regardless of if they are native or not. Maybe help your own native peoples get at least recognized before critiquing another state's methods in protecting those recognized native populations?