A committee hearing was held yesterday where reducing the degree of crime for ingesting drugs such as cocaine and meth from a felony to a misdemeanor. And there seems to be two distinctly different trains of thought:
Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg said changing ingestion to a misdemeanor would be “disastrous” for the state.
It would make prosecutions more difficult and push the costs onto the counties, according to Ravnsborg. He wants legislators to consider options such as “stair stepping” presumptive probation and creating incentives for working with law enforcement.
and…
Sen. Craig Kennedy, D-Yankton, questioned why South Dakota feels the need to be the only state that charges people with a felony for ingesting a controlled substance. He pointed out that more than half of the female prisoners and nearly half of male prisoners serving time for ingestion are Native American.
Actually, I think the AG’s approach for incentives for users in working with law enforcement to take their suppliers off the street makes a lot of sense.
Your thoughts?
Ingestion laws do more harm than good. We are the only state left with one on the books. That also contributes to SD having the highest incarceration rate in the US. We can’t punish addicts out of addiction.
Snitches get stitches. You’re better off reducing demand than supply. A great way to create a repeat offender is to ruin their job prospects with a felony. But maybe that’s the end goal.
The title of this post is somewhat misleading. Ingestion statutes don’t criminalize use, but rather criminalize the possession of substances because the substance is found in the body. Yes – one would have to “use” to get to that point. Our legislature has deemed that possessing the chemical makeup of a narcotic in ones system is equivalent to possessing the actual substance itself. There is already a misdemeanor ingestion statute on the books which captures substances such as air duster, marijuana, etc.
Hypothetically – anyone who travels to CO or WA, uses marijuana, which is legal in those states, travels back and is in within the state of SD, is technically committing a crime. I believe the ingestion statues are flawed because they technically cannot prove where the actual crime took place i.e. where someone ingested the drug. For instance, someone driving back from vacation in CO who drives all across SD to get home would be technically liable to each county they travel through.
“Disastrous” is adding a felony charge to someone who is already at rock bottom so they have little hope of ever climbing out of the hole. Felonies should be reserved for criminals who actually victimize others. No victim, no crime.
Ravnsborg’s making, at least according to the article’s paraphrase (no quotation marks, I wonder what his actual words were), a vacuous argument that I see police and prosecutors lobbying the legislature use all too often: “if you change the law we won’t be able keep enforcing the old law anymore”. Duh, and so what?
His suggestion – to use the criminal charge to get small-time guys to “roll” their suppliers – is something they could be doing right now. To what extent are they, and how well is it working?
From the numbers, it seems like they are throwing a bunch of the small fish in prison and not getting to the big fish.
How? Because of sb70 there is no incentive to cooperate with law enforcement
The AG is on the right track…keep up the good work don’t let all these sissies get you down.
More libertarianism mush. I’ll start taking a Libertarian seriously when they join in securing the border. Ad long as a democrat party is promising cradle to grave welfare, a Libertarian immigration policy is fallacy. Pull your enlightened head out of your pitch black butt !
And we’ll start taking you seriously when you don’t hide behind a veil of anonymity.
Signed,
Gideon (my real, actual name)
Are people taken seriously even when they use their real, actual name?
One of President Trump’s greatest legislative achievements was the First Step Act, which, of many things, decreased penalties for non-violent drug dealers. It passed with bi-partisan support, but was spearheaded by Republicans. The Attorney General’s proposal is not following President Trump’s lead, and South Dakota is the ONLY state that penalizes ingestion as a felony (for example, under federal law, ingestion and possession are misdemeanors). I respect the AG, and he is doing a very good job. He is wrong on this issue. Opposition to presumptive probation was prominent on the American Conservative Union and American’s for Property’s scorecard this year (opposition being the conservative side). One does not need to be in favor of legalization of drugs to realize the same thing that the President and these conservative organizations have figured out, which is overpenalization is NOT the conservative side on these issues, and in fact, is wasting everyone’s tax dollars for what has proven to be a failure, requires increased taxes, and is a liberal boondoggle.
Well I have lost all respect for Americans for Prosperity…they are on the wrong side on so many issues
And the President? Come on – this is all based on empirical data…
Law enforcement needs all the help they can get and our ingestion laws help protect the public and our businesses. They make the choice to use drugs. It is another tool to help those get the help they need.
Not according to empirical data, but that is a good sound bite.
You mean the data that doesn’t account for no one getting violated on probation or parole… you can shove those fake numbers
I agree SB 70 is a disaster, keep fighting the liberals Mr. AG
Bunch of whimps here…
you all go off to mamby pamby land and keep up the HUG A THUG program…..disgusting…
Keep up the fight AG, I got your back! for the rest of you…watch this video