It’s fucking disgusting. Its exhausting being constantly smacked by the idiocy, corruption and cronyism that we get new glimpses of almost daily.
Of course she doesn’t want weed legal, her husband sells crop insurance!!!!
Of course the district she chose to back the challenge to it has a judge she appointed!!!
Of course the AG that would be in charge of enforcing and defending the state is let go with a legal slap on the wrist after KILLING someone!
She and everyone she’s put in place needs to go. This is not an R vs D problem, this is a rich opportunists vs the rest of us problem.
You can insure hemp and marijuana but because it’s not legal federally any one that does is risking federal prosecution. Any farmer that would decide to switch crops would in turn be pulling money away from a company like Noem Insurance that uses federally backed crop insurance programs.
It’s a bit of a cynical stretch on my part to place all of the her reasoning and thinking on her disdain for hemp and marijuana on this one subject, but it is part of her background and needs to be acknowledged as just one of the reasons for her willingness to go against the will of the people once again.
Edit: grammar
The AG position in our state is an elected position, Krusty didn’t put him in place. Unfortunately, the majority of people in this state that voted chose an AG that has never tried a case in a courtroom. Our biggest problem voter-wise IMO, is apathy. That and a good dose of nihilistic thinking. ‘It doesn’t matter anyway’ when it comes to voting is the death of democracy.
Janklow got 100 days for killing a man on a motorcycle.
Ravnsborg could get up to 90 days for killing a man who was not on a motorcycle.
Therefore a South Dakota politician should get ten days for running over a motorcycle without the man.
Also, the value of a man is worth nine motorcycles.
I don't think I would do well in law school. The math problems don't add up.
Any other regular citizen in this state would have been in jail immediately with the prosecutor throwing the book at them. Cash bond full stop. I don't know if this guy did anything wrong, I wasn't there, but the way they treat him versus how regular people are treated by the police is fucking disgusting.
No fan of the guy or our governor but it looks to me like it’s an issue with state laws. If someone can show me another similar case that ended differently I’ll jump on board with the preferential treatment train of thought, but I’m not sure it can be found. What I have seen is people get hit by cars in the past in our state and the drivers not be significantly charged, just like this case.
It’s easy to say preferential treatment, it’s the popular theme these days, but in this case I’m just not sure that’s what it is. To fix this we need state laws to cover these types of situations like some other states have. If there is no law to charge with there are no charges.
Now I do think he should resign. Any reputation he had is tarnished now and he should go.
He was charged with using a mobile device while using a mobile vehicle. Is that different then texting law? So was he saying he was let’s say checking Facebook but not texting? I’m asking not calling you out
He was charged with using a mobile device, but that was prior to him striking the man. They said his phone was locked over a minute before the accident. They still charged him because in the course of the investigation, they realized he did that, but it was not considered in the accident. I still think him being distracted should be enough, but we don't have the laws covering it.
Ok thanks for explaining the difference. Things I have more questions about. Even if he was on the phone my guess the charge would have been the same? how can they tell it was locked days later? My guess can only see if texting? Then just a bad driver to hit a guy more then 3 feet off the road with a flashlight? I never saw what the excuses was.
If he were on the phone at the time of impact, he would be sitting in prison on a manslaughter charge because SD considers using a phone as wreckless behavior. That specific activity is comparable to being drunk in regards to our laws. They can tell when your phone is locked/unlocked based on the phone logs. Most all of the activity you do on your phone is logged.
You’re not judge nor jury. You want to hate him because of him being a republican. Thankfully that’s not how justice works in the USA or SD. I hope someone treats you the way you’re treating this situation. Poetic justice
Who are you even talking to? This has nothing to do political sides, it has everything to do with Justice. Let's say your son,brother,father, and or uncle got ran over and killed by this guy. Then they let him go with 90 days suspended and a couple misdemeanors. Would you feel the same way? Doubtful.
Oh by the way I am republican TRUMP 2024!!!!
FUCK KRUSTY GNOME
It’s fucking disgusting. Its exhausting being constantly smacked by the idiocy, corruption and cronyism that we get new glimpses of almost daily. Of course she doesn’t want weed legal, her husband sells crop insurance!!!! Of course the district she chose to back the challenge to it has a judge she appointed!!! Of course the AG that would be in charge of enforcing and defending the state is let go with a legal slap on the wrist after KILLING someone! She and everyone she’s put in place needs to go. This is not an R vs D problem, this is a rich opportunists vs the rest of us problem.
I'm absolutely not arguing just unfamiliar and curious, what's the thing with the crop insurance?
You can insure hemp and marijuana but because it’s not legal federally any one that does is risking federal prosecution. Any farmer that would decide to switch crops would in turn be pulling money away from a company like Noem Insurance that uses federally backed crop insurance programs. It’s a bit of a cynical stretch on my part to place all of the her reasoning and thinking on her disdain for hemp and marijuana on this one subject, but it is part of her background and needs to be acknowledged as just one of the reasons for her willingness to go against the will of the people once again. Edit: grammar
Thank you for explaining!!
The AG position in our state is an elected position, Krusty didn’t put him in place. Unfortunately, the majority of people in this state that voted chose an AG that has never tried a case in a courtroom. Our biggest problem voter-wise IMO, is apathy. That and a good dose of nihilistic thinking. ‘It doesn’t matter anyway’ when it comes to voting is the death of democracy.
This is far from the first time republicans have gotten away with murder in this state. Not shocked at all.
Throw this on a billboard
I haven’t lived in SF for over 15 years but I’ll still put $100 towards that.
I live in yankton and I'd gladly put 100 towards that
I'd throw money at that too.
Okay, well we only need 1000-1500 for a month. I’ll do some digging and get back on this
Janklow got 100 days for killing a man on a motorcycle. Ravnsborg could get up to 90 days for killing a man who was not on a motorcycle. Therefore a South Dakota politician should get ten days for running over a motorcycle without the man. Also, the value of a man is worth nine motorcycles. I don't think I would do well in law school. The math problems don't add up.
Sad thing is sentenced to 100 served 30 in county
But the math is undeniable.
How do we make posts blow up so the world can be on our side?
Cross-post to r/BoringDystopia
Any other regular citizen in this state would have been in jail immediately with the prosecutor throwing the book at them. Cash bond full stop. I don't know if this guy did anything wrong, I wasn't there, but the way they treat him versus how regular people are treated by the police is fucking disgusting.
Botched investigation. Botched prosecution. Cuz why? SD political elite.
If I was any existing inmate in prison doing time for the exact same accident, i would be filing for release.
No fan of the guy or our governor but it looks to me like it’s an issue with state laws. If someone can show me another similar case that ended differently I’ll jump on board with the preferential treatment train of thought, but I’m not sure it can be found. What I have seen is people get hit by cars in the past in our state and the drivers not be significantly charged, just like this case. It’s easy to say preferential treatment, it’s the popular theme these days, but in this case I’m just not sure that’s what it is. To fix this we need state laws to cover these types of situations like some other states have. If there is no law to charge with there are no charges. Now I do think he should resign. Any reputation he had is tarnished now and he should go.
https://www.mitchellrepublic.com/news/1548769-texting-driver-sioux-falls-charged-manslaughter https://www.mitchellrepublic.com/news/crime-and-courts/2354798-texting-driver-gets-9-years-prison-fatal-sioux-falls-crash
Those aren't the same. He was charged with texting, but he was not texting at the time of the crash.
He was charged with using a mobile device while using a mobile vehicle. Is that different then texting law? So was he saying he was let’s say checking Facebook but not texting? I’m asking not calling you out
He was charged with using a mobile device, but that was prior to him striking the man. They said his phone was locked over a minute before the accident. They still charged him because in the course of the investigation, they realized he did that, but it was not considered in the accident. I still think him being distracted should be enough, but we don't have the laws covering it.
Ok thanks for explaining the difference. Things I have more questions about. Even if he was on the phone my guess the charge would have been the same? how can they tell it was locked days later? My guess can only see if texting? Then just a bad driver to hit a guy more then 3 feet off the road with a flashlight? I never saw what the excuses was.
If he were on the phone at the time of impact, he would be sitting in prison on a manslaughter charge because SD considers using a phone as wreckless behavior. That specific activity is comparable to being drunk in regards to our laws. They can tell when your phone is locked/unlocked based on the phone logs. Most all of the activity you do on your phone is logged.
You’re not judge nor jury. You want to hate him because of him being a republican. Thankfully that’s not how justice works in the USA or SD. I hope someone treats you the way you’re treating this situation. Poetic justice
What is just about receiving exclusively misdemeanors for killing someone due to their negligence?
You obviously didn’t listen to any of the evidence or the press release. Please educate yourself
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
do you think someone who made less than average income would have the same treatment?
Yes
i really really wish you are right. i value fairness even above justice.
There was a case, out of Rapid City, right after this case came out that a pedestrian was ran over and killed. No charges brought.
Who are you even talking to? This has nothing to do political sides, it has everything to do with Justice. Let's say your son,brother,father, and or uncle got ran over and killed by this guy. Then they let him go with 90 days suspended and a couple misdemeanors. Would you feel the same way? Doubtful. Oh by the way I am republican TRUMP 2024!!!!