Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And the 100 days Janklow was more than similar cases in South Dakota or other states for same type of crime.
And that's truly sad... If you are right. I don't have facts to back up my belief... but 100 days for running a stop sign and killing a motorcyclist is ridiculous.
I guess my concern with the speeding tickets is not so much an individual speeding ticket but the continued failure to change ones habits in spite of multiple indications of a serious problem. If she got 20 tickets in 21 years then you know she was speeding quite a bit more. Despite getting pulled over, and issued a ticket year after year after year, she failed to either a) recognize a problem and change behavior accordingly or b) consider the consequences of these actions to both her, her career, and the safety of others.
In the case of a), It leads me to believe that she may lack the ability to spot trends and scenarios over long terms that require legislation. In the case of b) it reflects to me a focus on herself and lack of focus on others. The laws don't apply to her, she is too important to be slowed down by the law and speed limits. She has too much on her plate and cannot plan things out to give the proper times for travel, so always rushing, always late.
This has been a good discussion and I appreciate everyone who has shared their opinion. I can understand those who feel this is not a big issue, but I feel its an important indicator of potential problems.
Like sweaty Teddy Kennedy who had a run in with a bridge, someone got dead and was never held accountable?
Speeding in South Dakota doesn't add points to your record. You can however get cited into court and explain your actions and law enforcement officer can do that. And a judge can take action.
I suppose everyone has things they are willing to accept and not accept when looking at the candidates actions of the past - we all tend to weigh crimes differently in our minds than the law/court weighs them -
If I was wavering because the only 2 candidates on the ballot were missing too many of my own ideals I think it would be reasonable to say I will pick the one that doesn't run the stop sign going 10 miles over the speed limit past the park across from my house. So ya it's fair game IMO, and it appears to be based on facts.
Few of us Truly/Personally know any of the candidates (or ever will) so it is OK for us to judge them on what we do know because what politicians actually say, and what they actually do well.........- if someone is totally against Herseth, well, Noems tickets aren't going to mean squat at the voting booth, and if someone hated George Bush Sr., well, it wasn't going to matter much if they heard Clinton smoked a little weed in college - now if someone is stuck with which of those bumbling idiotic politicians am I going to support this year those things will most definitely come in to play.
Every political figure has their flaws. Noem may speed too much and Herseth-Sandlin has spent more time in Washington than in South Dakota. Despite her speeding tickets, Noem would be a good candidate. There will be a number of people, including I, who will not make up the mind until the two have an honest debate and close to election. I would care about where each stands and an honest debate/debates as opposed to the number of speeding tickets that one candidate receives.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.