Alabama Homebrewer Arrested

[tunoffun]

But on a federal level Homebrewing is legal. Distilling of spirits isn't...it's pretty cut and dried. I'm not arguing state's rights here, but on a Federal Level Homebrewing is legal. The other isn't.

Distilling spirits for personal use IS legal under federal law. The difference is you have to apply/receive a permit and pay taxes for any amount, where w/ wine & beer you're allowed to produce a certain amount tax/license free. Admittedly not the same level of freedom - but legal none-the-less.

We still are looked down on despite the laws. Hence the double standard between wine and beer and homewinemaking and homebrewing. Home winemaking was either never made illegal during prohibition or it was instantly legalized with the repeal. Homebrewing wasn't.

Incorrect. Prohibition didn't exempt wine. The Volstead act allowed winemaking & consumption for the purposes of religious ceremony only. Granted, this provided a loophole which was abused to some extent - but when abused - it was outside the boundaries of the law and therefore just as illegal as the use/manufacture of any other form of booze.

Wineries CAN ship wine directly to the consumer, but breweries can't. Even high end ones like Stone or Rogue. Hell you can get a 100 dollar bottle of wine shipped to you from a winery but you can't get a bottle of Utopia sent to you from Sam Adams.

There is no federal law or mandate which differentiates between wine & beer in regards to intrastate (or interstate) distribution. It's a states issue, and every state has different laws in this regard. Where there are prohibitions, in most cases they apply equally to beer & wine (though I will admit there are exceptions.. usually driven by the wine lobby, which as I'm about to point out, has an interest in doing so where breweries do not).

The difference you're concerned with has more to do with economics and logistics than anything else. It may make sense - from both a seller & consumer's point of view - to pay $8.00 in shipping for a $50.00 (min) bottle wine. But it hardly makes sense to pay twice that shipping a 12-pack that retails for $15.00 at the corner store you can walk to. And then there's the shipping companies themselves, that for their own legal reasons, choose not to deal with beer. Simply put - shipping beer direct to customers just doesn't make a whole lot of sense... especially when you add in the legal complications of age verification.

The reason you can't find breweries shipping direct to consumers isn't because of some grand conspiracy. It's because they wouldn't benefit from it.

 

[batonrougegu]

My previous question, however, is about distillation in general. If the AL man in question had only beer-brewing equipment and his neighbor had the still, would we (not as homebrewing representatives, but as individuals) stand behind the homebrewer who's breaking the law, but be outraged by the distiller? They're both against the law, and both felonies... If your answer is "because homebrewing shouldn't be a felony," someone could always respond "distillation shouldn't either."

Lets say he only had beer making equipment,the federal law can overturn the state law.So if it went up to federal court at that point they could overturn the "state" and let him go for whatever reason they have,probably for being a "vet"
and dismiss all charges.

 

[olllllo]

The reason you can't find breweries shipping direct to consumers isn't because of some grand conspiracy. It's because they wouldn't benefit from it.

Yea there is no market value for a shipped Westvletern 12 or a Russian River Consecration.

http://brewforia.com/
http://www.bruisin-ales.com/shipping.php

Those are two that I know personally and they would disagree.

 

[cenla]

My previous question, however, is about distillation in general. If the AL man in question had only beer-brewing equipment and his neighbor had the still, would we (not as homebrewing representatives, but as individuals) stand behind the homebrewer who's breaking the law, but be outraged by the distiller? They're both against the law, and both felonies... If your answer is "because homebrewing shouldn't be a felony," someone could always respond "distillation shouldn't either."

The bold text is the key to how I would respond. It's illegal to homebrew in AL, and so it makes no sense to me to get all worked up about getting busted for doing something you knew was wrong. You want to take the chance you won't get caught, then fine. But if you get caught, like this guy did, then that's that.

So, should I delete more of that religious / anti-religious argument or leave "Mr. I don't care's" words up there. I mean, after all, he did even the score and now I'm obliged to nanny all of these posts here in perpetuity.

I vote for delete more. It doesn't add to the topic and creates an opportunity for inflammatory off topic discussion.

 

[Zamial]

My previous question, however, is about distillation in general. If your answer is "because homebrewing shouldn't be a felony," someone could always respond "distillation shouldn't either."

"neither should" is pretty generic. Can't that be tagged onto anything in an infinite list of stuff?

My stance is this. I would 100% LOVE to be able to call up my metal working best friend and tell him we can FINALLY build that "hammer still" he has been planning for the last 10+ years.

I can NOT agree enough with the idea...

HOWEVER, It is wrong in the eyes of my country. I stand to loose "full" citizenship and become a felon, if I am caught. No matter what we do in the next 10 minutes is going to change that...

We need to be PROACTIVE in a GOOD way, Not become anarchists. Yes, I am aware, as we all are. That whiskey and Brandy were made by the "founding fathers" . OWNING a still is a felony according to the laws we have in place now. There is a right way and a wrong way to do something about a law you disagree with. Sometimes the wheels of change move slow but they do move, if we want them too.

 

[cenla]

Lets say he only had beer making equipment,the federal law can overturn the state law.So if it went up to federal court at that point they could overturn the "state" and let him go for whatever reason they have,probably for being a "vet"
and dismiss all charges.

the fed isn't going to mess with state law over one homebrewer, esp. when (as I understand it) the federal statute leaves the legality of homebrewed beer up to the state.

 

[CaptainCoconut]

Because as far as i know, there isn't an organization like the AHA in distilling nor are there large numbers of people that distill that are looking to make it more mainstream and appealing as a craft.

I think the reason the AHA exists and there's nothing like that for distilling stems partly because of the legalities.

As for myself, I personally don't see the point in going through all the cost, time, etc. of making a decent whiskey when I can buy some for under $50. If you're looking for something strong and cheap, there's pretty cheap (and legal!) vodka out there as well.

My personal take on the AL situation is that he screwed up. If you want to do something that's illegal, you can move somewhere where it's legal, work to make it legal, or decide to do it anyway and not complain when you have to face the consequences. I agree that he did a disservice to the homebrewing movement, especially with the inclusion of the still, but I was just curious if there was something more behind people's opinions of the situation. It seemed strange to me that everyone (I think) agreed that he should be hammered for breaking distillation laws, but a decent number of people thought that breaking state homebrewing laws should be excused. Alabama has the constitutional right to make it illegal there, even if we all think it should be legalized.

 

[batonrougegu]

the fed isn't going to mess with state law over one homebrewer, esp. when (as I understand it) the federal statute leaves the legality of homebrewed beer up to the state.

Yes they do leave it up to the states,just saying if it went to any federal court the judge could stick with the states DA or find a loophole and let him walk.
Federal overturns state

 

[CaptainCoconut]

"neither should" is pretty generic. Can't that be tagged onto anything in an infinite list of stuff?

That was exactly my point. Saying "homebrewing shouldn't be a felony" is an opinion, just like "neither should." The fact is, it is currently a felony in AL, and (unregulated) distilling is currently a felony nationwide. It seems you missed my point, I said that to deter the "shouldn't be" response.

 

[CaptainCoconut]

Federal overturns state

Only where there's a Federal law which trumps a State law or if a State law is unconstitutional, which is certainly not the case here.

 

[olllllo]

There is a difference in doing something illegal and keeping it hidden and declaring that you are fighting for civil liberties, or professing this once you get caught.

It's quite another thing to be civilly disobedient, where the point is to get arrested in grand fashion and show people the injustice or problem. What's missing from the legalize distillation movement (if there is one) is the educational public piece. The part where you get people's support. The educational, PR piece can happen without breaking the law.

 

[tunoffun]

Yea there is no market value for a shipped Westvletern 12 or a Russian River Consecration.

http://brewforia.com/
http://www.bruisin-ales.com/shipping.php

Those are two that I know personally and they would disagree.

I didn't say that people wouldn't want it, or that manufacturers wouldn't want to sell it. I said it wasn't worthwhile economically, which I still believe to be the case.

Maybe I'm wrong, and since you know the people referenced above I'd really appreciate your input on this. But it seems to me that what this really all comes down to money.

Are they really unable to sell beer to consumers that can otherwise purchase wine direct to & from the same states? Is this standard practice in the reciprocal states? Or is it just more hassle than it's worth?

I know the wine industry has worked to allow consumer-direct sales where previously none existed. Then again, the big players in wine with deep pocketbooks and strong lobbies can benefit as much from it as the little guys. It seems to be that beer is different only because the big players are better off opposing it. Their not going to capture more market share selling Bud Light on the internet. All their going to do is lose $$ to craft brewers.

 

[CaptainCoconut]

There is a difference in doing something illegal and keeping it hidden and declaring that you are fighting for civil liberties, or professing this once you get caught.

It's quite another thing to be civilly disobedient, where the point is to get arrested in grand fashion and show people the injustice or problem. What's missing from the legalize distillation movement (if there is one) is the educational public piece. The part where you get people's support. The educational, PR piece can happen without breaking the law.

There is a difference, and the actions of this guy probably won't help the legalization of homebrewing. A person can't use civil disobedience as a defense, because it's no defense at all! I'm not aware of this guy doing that though.

I wasn't saying distillation should be legalized, I'm just wondering about what I perceive as an inconsistency in people's ideas about following the law.

Rosa Parks didn't have the intention of getting arrested and losing her job, and she didn't get on the bus with the intent of starting anything. She followed all the segregation laws, but she decided when she'd had enough, and she took a stand (or rather, she didn't). I'm not comparing homebrewing and segregation, but every person has to decide how far they're willing to bend to what they consider to be an unjust law.

Personally, I think homebrewing (or wine-, cider-, or mead-making) should be legal for the same reason I think cooking should be legal. It's a natural process, thousands of years old, and just as integral to civilization. To me, requiring people to buy all their beer from a commercial brewery is the same as requiring people to buy all their meals at restaurants.

This country was not formed by publicly protesting an injustice until the English decided to change the law.

 

[munche]

This country was not formed by publicly protesting an injustice until the English decided to change the law.

Not every law that you don't happen to like is an injustice.

If I decide I'm going to drive 100mph down the freeway, because I don't like speeding laws....I won't signal, and I'll weave in and out of the carpool lanes cutting people off, because I don't feel those laws should apply. I'll blow through a stoplight, and when I get to my destination, I'll park in the handicapped space.

That doesn't make me a freedom fighter, it makes me a jerk. Even if I'm a veteran. You can't just pick and choose what laws suit you. Maybe your neighbor thinks he should be able to take things out of your yard or your car. Does he get to not obey the law he doesn't feel should apply?

The dude knew that what he was doing is not only illegal where he lived, but a felony. He decided to do it anyway and got caught. When you knowingly break the law, you decide to take on the risks of what you did. If the Alabama law is such a great injustice to you, move to a more forward thinking state on such laws. Or break the law and run the risk of this stuff.

I have a feeling that all of the people saying this guy should get a pass, would be angry as hell if they were on the bad end of someone breaking a "minor" law that they didn't feel should apply. If I decide there's no reason I shouldn't dump all my garbage in your front yard, is that ok? I don't agree that I should have to dispose of it properly. Ridiculous.

 

[CaptainCoconut]

Munche, slow down and actually read my posts.

In your post you didn't say a single thing that conflicted with anything I've said.

I don't even know how to respond to you, please figure out what I'm saying before you correct me.

Edit: It's not that I don't know how to respond to you, I honestly just don't want to waste my time restating what I just got done saying a couple posts ago.

 

[munche]

Munche, slow down and actually read my posts.

In your post you didn't say a single thing that conflicted with anything I've said.

I don't even know how to respond to you, please figure out what I'm saying before you correct me.

TBH I should have not quoted, I was responding to some of the general sentiment in the thread

Brain no work good without beer :cross:

 

[redalert]

"Not every law that you don't happen to like is an injustice."

Not every law but victimless crimes are not crimes. F..k Alabama and it's stupidity.

 

[tunoffun]

Rosa Parks didn't have the intention of getting arrested and losing her job, and she didn't get on the bus with the intent of starting anything. She followed all the segregation laws, but she decided when she'd had enough, and she took a stand (or rather, she didn't). I'm not comparing homebrewing and segregation, but every person has to decide how far they're willing to bend to what they consider to be an unjust law.

This country was not formed by publicly protesting an injustice until the English decided to change the law.

Some day I hope to buy you a beer, sir. Or more likely, swap one we've made ourselves.

 

[CaptainCoconut]

Some day I hope to buy you a beer, sir. Or more likely, swap one we've made ourselves.

 

[curlyfat]

Personally, I think homebrewing (or wine-, cider-, or mead-making) should be legal for the same reason I think cooking should be legal. It's a natural process, thousands of years old, and just as integral to civilization.

While I agree with your sentiment (obviously), the "It's natural" argument is not going to fly with any lawmakers. After all, growing marijuana, shrooms, and coca are all "natural" processes. Arsenic is a "natural" substance.

Sorry if this is a little off, as I am a little off.... it is 3am afterall..

 

[GeeUnit]

look at the rifle scopes in the picture,looksn like the local law enforcement is trying to make something out of nothing. THE SHERIFF MUST BE UP FOR REELECTION AND NEEDS ALL THE JACK BOOT PROPAGANDA,,OOPS , I MEAN CAMPAIN SUPPORT MATERIAL HE CAN MUSTER!!!!!!!!!!

 

[MVKTR2]

I have a feeling that all of the people saying this guy should get a pass, would be angry as hell if they were on the bad end of someone breaking a "minor" law that they didn't feel should apply. If I decide there's no reason I shouldn't dump all my garbage in your front yard, is that ok? I don't agree that I should have to dispose of it properly. Ridiculous.

Ridiculous? I find your analogy to be so!

Who was the victim of this guy's crime? The analogy put forth by munche is like comparing simple assault with jay walking, two clearly different things on a victim & moral level.

What's immoral isn't always illegal & what's moral isn't always legal. I believe that is the heart of the disagreement over this topic. If 190 proof spirits are legal, what's immoral about making them yourself? Nothing that I can tell, however it's illegal. The people who disagree on this issue are applying this common sense approach. However you are correct, it's the law - plain and simple - and the guy/homebrewers here in MS & AL know it.

How are free people to react to archaic laws? It's the law here in MS that if you're operating a motor-vehicle on a public road and are approaching an intersection you're suppose to stop 100+ feet from the intersection and fire your sidearm into the air... twice. Should I obey this law because after all it's the law! If it's the law we must obey!!! Fact is there are so many hundreds of thousands if not millions of laws on the books that most of us have committed enough 'crime' by the time we reach work in the morning to get ourselves placed in jail for at least 6 months. Those cops need to get on the ball.

Society isn't held together by man's law, it's held together through the laws of fair treatment & morality written on every man's conscious!

Sorry to swing so hard munche, but your analogy was just so far off base. Guy needs to take his medicine, however arguing that his activity is wrong while practicing said activity is hypocritical at best. Things are right or wrong not because of what laws say, but because they're either moral or immoral. It's the reason the law gives consideration to a man that kills someone who raped his sister (I personally have a friend that did this & served 2 years plus a few years probation) vs someone who pre-meditates a murder for profit. Entirely different things just like the difference between brewing in one's home & dumping trash on another's property.

Schlante,
Phillip

 

[passedpawn]

arguing that his activity is wrong while practicing said activity is hypocritical at best.

exactly. Nice. Subtle point not made here before (AFAIK). At least as applies to the beer brewing.

 

[JetSmooth]

Ridiculous? I find your analogy to be so!
[Phillip says some stuff]

Schlante,
Phillip

Sir, you are starting to make sense. I'm going to have to escort you off the Internet. Come with me.

 

[OLDBREW]

The bible belt is a tough place to be brewing shine and beers. The holy rollers down there are the same types that started prohibition. Bama has a long way to go before they legalize brewing

 

[blackls1ttop]

Here is the Sheriff with the contraband.

The stuff in the bottle is supposed to be the 'shine. My starsan bottle looks a lot like that.

nice russian scopes on the bottom

 

[batonrougegu]

The bible belt is a tough place to be brewing shine and beers. The holy rollers down there are the same types that started prohibition. Bama has a long way to go before they legalize brewing

we'll if they drink coca cola in AL,there drinking a product that was modeled in the beginning,to have 15 milligrams of cocaine per bottle.

that I think is worse than alcohol.

It's illegal

But they look over that,Even though 75% of "them" drink Coca Cola
Take it how you wanna,but Coke was model with "illegal Drugs" involved weather they wanna admit it or not.

They just look the other way(they being all the holy rollers in AL)

I mean NO OFFENSE to anyone in AL OR any kinda "god's people" It's just the truth,and I worked for Coke as a sub-contractor,and my main boss there drinks they product and goes to church every week,so take it how you wanna.

http://www.bukisa.com/articles/128517_10-crazy-facts-about-coca-cola-you-did-not-know#comments

 

[JetSmooth]

Actually, when the original formula for "Coca-Cola" was developed, cocaine was a perfectly legal and commonplace substance used for medicinal purposes.

 

[CaptainCoconut]

It's "modeled on" a product that used to have cocaine? Are you serious?

If it doesn't have cocaine in it now, what's your point? Traditionally, beer has made with all kinds of psychoactive substances, much more serious than cocaine. Does drinking beer and being against mescaline make you a hypocrite? Does eating brownies and being against marijuana make you a hypocrite?

Just because you can post anything you want on the internet, doesn't mean you should.

 

[HItransplant]

Actually, when the original formula for "Coca-Cola" was developed, cocaine was a perfectly legal and commonplace substance used for medicinal purposes.

it still is


In fact, coca leaves are also still being used for flavoring (although they are "de-cocainized") in various soft-drinks.

 

[HItransplant]

It's "modeled on" a product that used to have cocaine? Are you serious?

If it doesn't have cocaine in it now, what's your point? Traditionally, beer has made with all kinds of psychoactive substances, much more serious than cocaine. Does drinking beer and being against mescaline make you a hypocrite? Does eating brownies and being against marijuana make you a hypocrite?

Just because you can post anything you want on the internet, doesn't mean you should.

+1
oozing with IQ, right? Im hoping he just had trouble articulating what he was actually trying to say.... or that he's really just yanking everyone's chain.

 

[Airborneguy]

we'll if they drink coca cola in AL,there drinking a product that was modeled in the beginning,to have 15 milligrams of cocaine per bottle.

that I think is worse than alcohol.

It's illegal

But they look over that,Even though 75% of "them" drink Coca Cola
Take it how you wanna,but Coke was model with "illegal Drugs" involved weather they wanna admit it or not.

They just look the other way(they being all the holy rollers in AL)

I mean NO OFFENSE to anyone in AL OR any kinda "god's people" It's just the truth,and I worked for Coke as a sub-contractor,and my main boss there drinks they product and goes to church every week,so take it how you wanna.

This is one of the best internet posts ever.

 

[HItransplant]

BTW.. do we have any updated info on whats going on with this guys case?

 

[CaptainCoconut]

Of course cocaine has medicinal uses, but it's no longer "perfectly legal and commonplace," I think that was his point.

I'd be surprised if there were any timely developments of this case. These things are usually long and drawn out. With a still, I doubt anything but the obvious will happen. If it weren't for that, I'd be much more interested, but as it is, it still makes for good discussion.

 

[Justibone]

Of course cocaine has medicinal uses, but it's no longer "perfectly legal and commonplace," I think that was his point.

It's a local anesthetic which is often used, believe it or not, in the nose, due to its ability to restrict blood flow and the substantial number of blood sources inside the nasal cavity.

I'd be surprised if there were any timely developments of this case. These things are usually long and drawn out. With a still, I doubt anything but the obvious will happen. If it weren't for that, I'd be much more interested, but as it is, it still makes for good discussion.

Yeah, the still is the salient problem.

To add my 2 cents, I don't see anything morally or ethically wrong with distilling or even with growing marijuana, but you can bet your sweet grannie's panties I'd never have anything to do with either unless and until 1) it's legal and/or 2) I get terminal cancer.

 

[jkreuze]

The moral of this story is either don't break the law, or, if you are breaking the law, don't leave evidence of your lawbreaking readily visible to people through your windows.

If this guy had kept his blinds closed he would be fine.

 

[CaptainCoconut]

The moral of this story is either don't break the law, or, if you are breaking the law, don't leave evidence of your lawbreaking readily visible to people through your windows.

If this guy had kept his blinds closed he would be fine.

I don't think that's true at all. From what I understand, they didn't search his house because they suspected homebrewing or distilling, they suspected meth because of a "tip" from a neighbor he'd made enemies with.

 

[JetSmooth]

it still is


In fact, coca leaves are also still being used for flavoring (although they are "de-cocainized") in various soft-drinks.

Yup. Folks would be surprised at what is still used in controlled amounts for legit purposes. But I meant no longer an over the counter "tonic" product.

Hehehe, "de-cocanized".

 

[Airborneguy]

I don't think that's true at all. From what I understand, they didn't search his house because they suspected homebrewing or distilling, they suspected meth because of a "tip" from a neighbor he'd made enemies with.

If this is the case, they sure have easier criteria for getting a search warrant approved in Alabama.

 

[JeepDiver]

I don't think that's true at all. From what I understand, they didn't search his house because they suspected homebrewing or distilling, they suspected meth because of a "tip" from a neighbor he'd made enemies with.

The original article says they searched his land for the Meth, and saw the brewing equipment through his window so they got a warrant to search the house at that point.