RandomOne

FOXNews.com - DUI Defendant Claims He Is His Own Country - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News

DUI Defendant Claims He Is His Own Country

Wednesday, March 11, 2009

EASTON, Pa. — A man accused of driving drunk said Pennsylvania courts have no jurisdiction over him because he's his own country. After seeing the paperwork that 44-year-old Scott Allan Witmer filed with the court claiming sovereignty, a Northampton County judge said Tuesday he cannot be released from jail until he gets a mental exam.
Witmer, who represented himself, said he believes police lack jurisdiction to pull him over. As he said in court: "I live inside myself, not in Pennsylvania." He said there is no victim in the crime and asked to go to trial.
Defense attorney James Connell, Witmer's standby counsel, said a challenge to the traffic stop would need to be filed as a pretrial motion.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

As dumb as it sounds at first glance, the guy brings up an interesting point. The government has jurisdiction over the land but can it have jurisdiction over your own body? Over your soul and your intellect, your decision making processes? What really gives them the right to tell you what you can and can't decide to do with your body?

You are an independent being, a self, living on top of part of their land, but you are not actually theirs, and they cannot directly control you. Why should what you choose to do with your self be different if you are standing on a different piece of land? Who is really to say what you can and cannot do.?

In the end we are all ultimately free, we only choose when we follow or not follow their rules. The government type doesn't matter because we are all already free people, we can do whatever we like if we really choose to.

I think the greater issue though is that laws governing people shouldn't exist in the first place. Each self is an individual and has their own set of laws for their self regardless. "Laws" are really more just "suggestions on how to live a long and happy life" and should not be enforced except when one self is hurting other selfs..

Neko150

"My House, My Rules" kind of mentality. If you're under America's roof - on her land - you have to abide by her rules. =[

__________________
Marijuana Is Only Addictive In The Sense That All Good Things In Life Are Worth Repeating...

ThoughtBubble

Laws SHOULD just prevent people from exploiting and harming people. However, in America, God Bless'r, laws tell you to act this way and look this way... or else!



Personally, I take civil rights of the 60s' stance on the issue. I'll obey the law, insofar as I see it to be fair and just. When the law of the land is to oppress it's citizens it is my right, my duty to fight back.

Well that and I just can't stop smoking... not that I've ever tried.

troublemaker_42

While that makes sense when applied to "victimless crime" it really isn't a valid argument in this particular case. DUI IS NOT a victimless crime. Intoxicated drivers kill and maim people on a daily basis, and are responsible for millions of dollars worth of property damage annually. While the argument could be made that there is no need for laws regulating so-called "victimless crimes" it simply isn't remotely applicable to this particular case. While I've been guilty of it myself (and paid the price) I have little sympathy for those who put the lives of others needlessly at risk.

Furthermore, the defendant has absolutely NO legal leg to stand on. Even if he is not a resident of the US or Pennsylvania, he is still subject to their laws. If residency was required to charge someone with a crime, I'd bebable to visit Canada or Mexico, and do as I please, because their laws wouldn't apply to me. The man is grasping for straws, and will likely be laughed out of court...alll the way to jail.

__________________
Ted Nugent: "To my mind it is wholly irresponsible to go into the world incapable of preventing violence, injury, crime, and death. How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic."


If total government control equals safety, why are prisons so dangerous?

Bhikku

Drunk drivers kill other people, which invades their personal freedom. If your sovereign "country" invades another "country", I will have no choice but to wage war on you in any way that I can. In this case, it would be to use law enforcement.

I do like his argument though. If I was ever busted for something that WAS a victimless crime, I would use it as well.

__________________

headshot11

Watch the documentary: "ThinkFree - The Magnificent Deception"

I'm not saying DUI is good, but just elaborating on being a sovereign entity.

The guy is actually a 'free man on the land' in Canada, because he disassociated himself from his 'persons'. All the statute laws applies only to his persons.

It's a sick documentary. Check it out.

headshot11

Yes

RandomOne

Thanks headshot, i forgot to exclude your post earlier because i was in a hurry. I honestly meant to because you had the right idea, and I mean to watch that documentary. Anyway headshot = excluded from my earlier post :P

I should just delete the DUI thing, that was just what got my ideas rolling on the subject...

cannabicide420

nobodys there own country. if your disobeying a law put in place to save lives and your on our soil, youre wrong. thats are all there is too. there is no justification for him drinking and driving. and even if he was his own country then hed be over here illegally, and thus within the jurisdiction of pennsylvania and the usa.

__________________
Say man, you got a joint on you?
No, not on me, man
It'd be alot cooler if you did

RandomOne

Ok everyone just wait a sec. This topic isn't about drinking and driving or DUI laws. It's about the philosophical idea of being your own country and whether or not your "self" or just your land and/or body is governed by the state.

What exactly can the state govern? That is the question I mean to pose in this topic.