7mo ago

Smell of burnt cannabis alone no longer justifies a police search of a vehicle, Illinois Supreme Court rules

www.chicagotribune.com /2024/09/19/smell-of-burnt-cannabis-alone-no-longer-justifies-a-police-search-of-a-vehicle-illinois-supreme-court-rules/

Archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20240920014357/https://www.chicagotribune.com/2024/09/19/smell-of-burnt-cannabis-alone-no-longer-justifies-a-police-search-of-a-vehicle-illinois-supreme-court-rules/

60 comments

That's good. The article talks about how K9's should be handled with the legalization of weed. Should they be retired if they still respond to weed, etc.
Of course K9's aren't trained to actually smell anything. They're just trained to respond to an officers command, giving police the freedom to search any vehicle they please.
- Of course K9’s aren’t trained to actually smell anything
  Can we stop with the conspiracy theories please? This is just stupid.
  
  It's a fact that they have an extremely high false-positive rate. Whether that's intentional or not doesn't change the fact that it serves law enforcement's interests.
  
  There was a study done where police K9 units where told they'd be testing the accuracy of the dog's ability to find drugs. In actuality, they were testing the handlers. Handlers were told drugs were hidden in a certain location, but there wasn't actually drugs there. Despite that, all their dogs alerted several times to the location the handlers were told about.
  
  Knew a k9 cop. He freely admitted this is how it works.
  
  No, you're right. I do believe they're trained to detect things, and thought about editing it, but I stuck with the poor wording.

Shit I thought that became the case when Illinois passed its recreational law.
Will police have to retire police dogs if they still react to weed?
Yes. Police dogs "alerting" on something that isn't illegal, in a way that is indistinguishable from "alerting" on something that is illegal, are no longer qualified to be drug sniffers.
- That makes it no different than it already is, most of those dogs will "alert" whenever they're signaled regardless whether they smell anything. Information online suggests anywhere between a 26-44% positive ID rate though numbers on that seem a bit sketchy from different sources.
  
  Hence the quotes around "alert." I chose to keep my previous comment about accurate dog sniffs in order to address the question of "police dogs that react to weed even though the smell of weed is not illegal." Inaccurate sniffs are a completely valid, but separate concern.

Drugs won the war!
- And just like most wars, it was bullshit that it was fought in the first place and the largest source of casualties was innocents.
  
  They needed some excuse to give hippies felonies so they couldn't vote

Good, because that's absolute bullshit. Especially when it's legal in Illinois.
That said, don't drive while high please.

This is the police .... if you get pulled over by a jerk of an officer, they'll find a different excuse to search your vehicle ... or at the very least hold you up, get you out of your car and generally give you a hard time.
Do your lights work? How's your tire treadwear? Is your documentation up to date? You were driving about five over the limit. This is a ride check.
And one of the worst questions I absolutely hate being asked by a cop ... "Where are you going?"
- Remember, they are asking if they can search your vehicle. You are allowed to say no. Then they must justify an arrest
  
  It's an imbalance of power.
  If a guy with a gun and a license to kill ... which is basically what a police officer is ... if they start asking questions, I'm answering politely.
  I'm not going to argue with them or disagree with them .. even if I say 'no' I'm still at risk based on the personality of the cop.
  I'm also a big brown skinned long haired indigenous person so whenever I get stopped by a cop ... I'm doing what I'm told or I risk getting beaten, arrested or even shot.
  This is also the reason why I placed four different cameras with audio around my vehicle.
  
  "Am I being detained?"
  "I do not consent to any search of my person or property."
  "I am exercising my right to remain silent."
  "I will not answer any further questions without an attorney present."
  
  You are.
  And they are also allowed to then say they smell something and bring in a dog that responds to their commands to establish a "hit" to justify searching anyway.
  If its not the smell of weed, it will just be a different smell that they claim. The issue is your rejection of their search is functionally meaningless.
- This might not be completely true, but I was told by a former cop that technically anything obscuring the driver's view through the windshield is something they can use against you. Hanging air fresheners, bobble heads, a mounted dash cam... it's just one of those things that isn't usually enforced.
- “Where are you going?”
  Chaotic neutral: To a lecture on the 4th amendment.
  Chaotic evil: Your mom's house.
- you are under no obligation to tell them where you're going/have been.
  
  Whenever I start disagreeing with an officer or telling them I don't have to answer any questions .... the response is usually that I have an attitude and that they don't like my behavior.
  It's subtle intimidation because they know that if I stand up for myself long and hard enough .... they'll detain/ arrest or use force, ask questions after and justify their actions later.
  It's easier to walk a fine line between complying and trying not to upset a bully with a gun.

They'll just say they smell fentanyl and then pass out.

Cool. Now revoke QI!

They'll just shift to "is that crack I smell?"
- "I don't know what crack smells like officer, but I'll defer to your personal experience."
  gets face bashed in
  "...almost worth it."
- Please don't talk about my body

Yeah so useful for all the people who avoid going to Illinois for all of the obvious reasons. I was born in Illinois, and don't even like to drive through there.

Are you smoking weed or am I having a stroke?

If the wording is correct, this is a pointless win. Who's going to prove whether they smell burnt cannabis or fresh cannabis? 99% of people with burnt cannabis smell have fresh cannabis on them too.

60 comments