tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post5678860658831874589..comments2023-08-25T05:18:29.312-06:00Comments on Madville Times: Feds Fail to Enforce River Law: Time for SD to Act!caheidelbergerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03261598066395322681noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-50450964367951100992010-07-29T09:18:05.140-06:002010-07-29T09:18:05.140-06:00I can see how you got that from my response. Howe...I can see how you got that from my response. However, my main point is the Feds have failed in their duty to enforce the law. The reason I say the state needs to pass a law first mirroring the Federal law is not because its up to our state to decide what law should be enforced but the fact that "the local heat" currently is unable to enforce the federal law and the feds are not enforcing it. How do you give the local authorities the ability to enforce the federal law? <br /> <br />Your article says "yup, they're<br />illegal, but we can't touch 'em. Only a federal agent can enforce federal law, and the National Park Service hasn't even stationed a ranger in the area."<br /><br />So the question is why isn't the local heat able to enforce the Federal law? Why weren't AZ police able to ask for ID?<br /><br />As long as the Federal law falls with in the original intent of the US constitution then yes the state should enforce it.Aaron Heidelbergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00345672388506501247noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-89350193190990389332010-07-29T08:51:33.864-06:002010-07-29T08:51:33.864-06:00Ah, so your interest in state's ability to enf...Ah, so your interest in state's ability to enforce federal law depends entirely on our perception of whether a law is needed or not, not whether the law is indeed the law of the land. Are we doing rule of law or rule of men here? Doesn't sound very constitutional to me....caheidelbergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03261598066395322681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-23975443871767201772010-07-29T08:38:07.642-06:002010-07-29T08:38:07.642-06:00I meant to say "your" not "you"...I meant to say "your" not "you" on my last comment.<br /><br />Yes, IF our state government feels that the people of SD need this law and IF SD passes a law that mirrors the federal jet-ski law and is constitutional then yes the state should enforce it.Aaron Heidelbergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00345672388506501247noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-64208183766004839722010-07-29T08:10:57.658-06:002010-07-29T08:10:57.658-06:00Now, now, no need to start calling each other stup...Now, now, no need to start calling each other stupid. <br /><br />But so I'm clear: you, Aaron, would support stronger state enforcement of federal regulations on personal watercraft, right? Because the law is the law, right?caheidelbergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03261598066395322681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-87063201412177967952010-07-29T07:53:53.296-06:002010-07-29T07:53:53.296-06:00Yeah, lets ask AZ that question. There answer woul...Yeah, lets ask AZ that question. There answer would be: "BECAUSE THE FEDS ARE NOT ENFORCING THE FEDERAL LAW!!" <br /><br />In Jim's analogy it would be like the DEA not enforcing drug laws and the state did not have the power to.<br /><br />Just like you stupid jet-ski analogy.Aaron Heidelbergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00345672388506501247noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-33022283740781896682010-07-29T06:11:44.392-06:002010-07-29T06:11:44.392-06:00Care to ask Arizona that question, Jim?Care to ask Arizona that question, Jim?caheidelbergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03261598066395322681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-68704045203702229402010-07-28T17:55:45.540-06:002010-07-28T17:55:45.540-06:00Why would we have to pass a law that is already on...Why would we have to pass a law that is already on the books. <br /><br />I'm not in law enforcement and not up on who can do what. Why can't locals enforce the law that is already in place. It is still a law, they are law enforcement personnel, wouldn't it be better for all that locals take care of this issue rather than bringing in outsiders or increasing government even more. <br /><br />As an example, possessing marijuana is against federal law, yet the DEA aren't the only ones who are allowed to arrest you for it.Jim Hocknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-70676938563326672832010-07-27T11:28:40.741-06:002010-07-27T11:28:40.741-06:00Indeed, my feelings are mixed, too. I like enjoyin...Indeed, my feelings are mixed, too. I like enjoying the wilderness without jetskis, ATVs, or government agents intruding on the solitude I enjoy in my kayak or tent or on my bicycle. Is there a way we can educate the two-stroke jockeys to respect the law and the general welfare without resorting to increased presence of law enforcement? How do we get people to realize they can fully enjoy nature with no more powerful motor than their two arms and legs?caheidelbergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03261598066395322681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-61927318361588329392010-07-27T09:27:04.138-06:002010-07-27T09:27:04.138-06:00I wouldn't say that I contacted the local auth...I wouldn't say that I contacted the local authorities to "crack down," but rather to inquire as to whether the law was still in place, and why (if it was in place) it wasn't being enforced.<br /><br />A very big part of me would rather <i>not</i> see the authorities on the river regularly--we've already had a number of incidents in the past few years wherein folks (usually those without the expensive power boats) who were doing nothing wrong, but perhaps looking a bit raggedy, were closely questioned about their activities and their watercraft. <br /><br />I personally had to shout at GF&P personnel to stay away from my dog, who regularly swims from the Clay County Park dock to the island directly across from it--they apparently assumed I was going to allow my dog to drown--when it was their interference (pulling alongside with their boat, calling to her, and confusing her) that was the real problem.<br /><br />So, my feelings are really mixed here. I want the river to be a bit "wild" both in terms of its natural course and in the lack of constant patrols and presence of authorities--I just wish people with jet skis would obey the law and go elsewhere--or better yet, borrow, build, or buy a kayak and learn to enjoy that stretch of river without the loud noises and oil-stench.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-72507739141881732632010-07-27T09:07:21.744-06:002010-07-27T09:07:21.744-06:00Well if it is so important to SD residents maybe S...Well if it is so important to SD residents maybe SD should pass a law that mirrors the Federal law. (Like in AZ did) Then the state can enforce it. Question is do you you think the Feds will sue the state of SD for enforcing it?Aaron Heidelbergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00345672388506501247noreply@blogger.com