It sounds like Sioux Falls City Council and City Hall need to learn from the mistakes of Portland, OR -- where I lived for 28 years before returning home to SD. So I speak from experience when I say: The end result your policies and rhetoric is Portland OR. You chide law enforcement? They do too. You hate Trump. They do too. You make excuses for lawlessness and drug addiction? They do too, so both abound in their communities.
You are scaring me, Sioux Falls. Seriously. Look around and learn from the mistakes of others.
Only??? Although the statistics definitely needed clarification, getting 99 arrests out of the 3 day weekend is more than the weekend before I would bet. I imagine those not going to jail posted bail, they weren’t just let go. Let’s clean up our streets and get the drug offenders behind bars. Our kids and communities deserve the best we can give them in terms of safety.
Rumor is that the jail was 100% full to capacity. So must have been quite a few arrests. Were the 30 that were released done so because the jail was full? How often is the jail 100% full? Seems like that is proof that the Prairie Thunder program is working.
How on earth do you go from "rumor" to "must have been" = "proof"? That is as speculative as Farmgal's "imagine". Can we please, and I am truly not trying to be rude, state when it's simply an opinion and not claim it to be a fact or a truth? The article really did not leave room for what you stated. According to the article, the original report said "arrests". To justify having inflated the report, the officials re-defined "arrests" to not only include those not taken into custody and jailed (not exactly getting the "worst of the worst" off the streets?), but also counted each person with multiple charges as being a separate "arrest" for each charge". That is not consistent with the true meaning of the word "arrest".
--Now the reason I am dwelling on this is not to pick on you. We are in a very precarious time in this nation. Our president is claiming that it is appropriate to place military forces in our cities claiming its for for law-enforcement purposes. Many people believe this is an entrenchment of the military in our cities in disguise by a man who wants to weaken democracy and increase authoritarianism. Time will tell. We are not going to solve that issue here. However, it is very important, just like our city officials said, that we deal only with the truth and nothing but the truth when it comes to assessing the magnitude of the crime problem in our nation's cities and whether or not crime has so increased (rather than decreased) so much that it is now necessary that outside forces take over local law enforcement functions. It is therefore critical that we very carefully examine and not simply gloss over the claims of those political officials urging an emergent need to not have local law-enforcement be the ones doing their jobs. Assumptions do not fill that bill. The city officials were 100% correct in questioning the basis for these claims. Today it's the highway patrol which is a good thing. Tomorrow it's some other state's military having been appropriate by an authoritarian. If we want liberty, we have to guard it.
--I fully agree with you and Farmgal, that we need to clean up our streets and get the drug offenders off. We can do that and still watch over our liberty carefully. We have really great local law-enforcement who are already doing a great job. Get tough on crime political stances should be carefully scrutinized.
Of course you are correct and the future is always inherently speculative Scott, and I didn't mean it as established fact. (I perhaps committed the sin I told Mary she should be careful of). But having said that, it is fact that we have a president who refuses to say he won't stay in office after his second term and he apparently is circulating hats for Trump 2028 and is stretching the constitution beyond its known limits more than anyone in our history. and more. I think you will agree that the foundation for rational and reasonable concern as to how far he will take this should be viewed as non-speculative. I would never say he is actually executing a takeover. I can't prove that. He has been and still is however acting consistently with one. Hence a reasonable basis for concern and encouraging people to be aware and not make assumptions. I believe he gets a lot of power by keeping everyone else off balance through never revealing all his cards.
Almost 10 years ago, now, Salena Zito has still summed things up better than anyone has: “the press takes him literally, but not seriously; his supporters take him seriously, but not literally.”
If Trump runs in 2028, as you speculate, I’ll pay for your subscription to Dakota Scout for the duration of his 3rd term. Heck, I’ll even throw in a Trump 2028 hat!
So, in the meantime we should assume he doesn't mean what he says and that none of his actions indicate where he is going? Isn't it negligent to assume he doesn't mean what he says. Authoritarian take-overs that are not bloody coups are done just like this. We should sleep through whatever he is doing?
Actual solid journalism, Dakota Scout. I thought that was a thing of the past.
It sounds like Sioux Falls City Council and City Hall need to learn from the mistakes of Portland, OR -- where I lived for 28 years before returning home to SD. So I speak from experience when I say: The end result your policies and rhetoric is Portland OR. You chide law enforcement? They do too. You hate Trump. They do too. You make excuses for lawlessness and drug addiction? They do too, so both abound in their communities.
You are scaring me, Sioux Falls. Seriously. Look around and learn from the mistakes of others.
Only??? Although the statistics definitely needed clarification, getting 99 arrests out of the 3 day weekend is more than the weekend before I would bet. I imagine those not going to jail posted bail, they weren’t just let go. Let’s clean up our streets and get the drug offenders behind bars. Our kids and communities deserve the best we can give them in terms of safety.
Good article
Rumor is that the jail was 100% full to capacity. So must have been quite a few arrests. Were the 30 that were released done so because the jail was full? How often is the jail 100% full? Seems like that is proof that the Prairie Thunder program is working.
How on earth do you go from "rumor" to "must have been" = "proof"? That is as speculative as Farmgal's "imagine". Can we please, and I am truly not trying to be rude, state when it's simply an opinion and not claim it to be a fact or a truth? The article really did not leave room for what you stated. According to the article, the original report said "arrests". To justify having inflated the report, the officials re-defined "arrests" to not only include those not taken into custody and jailed (not exactly getting the "worst of the worst" off the streets?), but also counted each person with multiple charges as being a separate "arrest" for each charge". That is not consistent with the true meaning of the word "arrest".
--Now the reason I am dwelling on this is not to pick on you. We are in a very precarious time in this nation. Our president is claiming that it is appropriate to place military forces in our cities claiming its for for law-enforcement purposes. Many people believe this is an entrenchment of the military in our cities in disguise by a man who wants to weaken democracy and increase authoritarianism. Time will tell. We are not going to solve that issue here. However, it is very important, just like our city officials said, that we deal only with the truth and nothing but the truth when it comes to assessing the magnitude of the crime problem in our nation's cities and whether or not crime has so increased (rather than decreased) so much that it is now necessary that outside forces take over local law enforcement functions. It is therefore critical that we very carefully examine and not simply gloss over the claims of those political officials urging an emergent need to not have local law-enforcement be the ones doing their jobs. Assumptions do not fill that bill. The city officials were 100% correct in questioning the basis for these claims. Today it's the highway patrol which is a good thing. Tomorrow it's some other state's military having been appropriate by an authoritarian. If we want liberty, we have to guard it.
--I fully agree with you and Farmgal, that we need to clean up our streets and get the drug offenders off. We can do that and still watch over our liberty carefully. We have really great local law-enforcement who are already doing a great job. Get tough on crime political stances should be carefully scrutinized.
Tell all that to the victims.
I’m not trying to be rude, but this seems “speculative:”
“Today it's the highway patrol which is a good thing. Tomorrow it's some other state's military having been appropriate by an authoritarian.”
Of course you are correct and the future is always inherently speculative Scott, and I didn't mean it as established fact. (I perhaps committed the sin I told Mary she should be careful of). But having said that, it is fact that we have a president who refuses to say he won't stay in office after his second term and he apparently is circulating hats for Trump 2028 and is stretching the constitution beyond its known limits more than anyone in our history. and more. I think you will agree that the foundation for rational and reasonable concern as to how far he will take this should be viewed as non-speculative. I would never say he is actually executing a takeover. I can't prove that. He has been and still is however acting consistently with one. Hence a reasonable basis for concern and encouraging people to be aware and not make assumptions. I believe he gets a lot of power by keeping everyone else off balance through never revealing all his cards.
Almost 10 years ago, now, Salena Zito has still summed things up better than anyone has: “the press takes him literally, but not seriously; his supporters take him seriously, but not literally.”
If Trump runs in 2028, as you speculate, I’ll pay for your subscription to Dakota Scout for the duration of his 3rd term. Heck, I’ll even throw in a Trump 2028 hat!
BUT...BUT...BUT...WHICH TRUMP?????
Haha
So, in the meantime we should assume he doesn't mean what he says and that none of his actions indicate where he is going? Isn't it negligent to assume he doesn't mean what he says. Authoritarian take-overs that are not bloody coups are done just like this. We should sleep through whatever he is doing?
Yes