* Believe it or not, the Senate unanimously passed a common sense drug bill today. From a press release…
“This measure is in response to a case where an individual who was taking drugs with a friend and the friend began to overdose,” Silverstein said. “The friend died because that individual was too afraid to call for emergency assistance because they would go to jail for having drugs.”
Senate Bill 1701 provides immunity from prosecution for an individual found to possess drugs as a result of the individual seeking medical help for an overdose. Immunity depends on the amount of drugs found on the individual and is only granted to first time offenders. These safeguards will ensure that drug dealers cannot use this law to escape prosecution.
“This bill does not let the bad guys go, and immunity does not apply to every individual,” Silverstein continued. “But, we do not want to lose someone we love who made a bad decision that caused them to fear seeking help.”
The immunity only applies to relatively small amounts of drugs. A dealer wouldn’t get the immunity, but an overdosing user would. The first time offenders limitation is a problem, in my opinion, but it ain’t easy passing bills like this, so we have to take what we can get.
- Ghost - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 1:49 pm:
Its a good start. Intead of immunity, they could just say no evidence obtained as a result of the call for help, or getting help…or words to that effect, can be used against the person in a criminal proceeding, regardless of the amount or first time status. i..e a dealer should be able to summon help. If the cops already have evidence against them apart from the call, they are not protected or no immunity attaches.
- downstate hack - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 1:52 pm:
A common sense bill. I applaud the Illinois Legislature, which is unfortunately, something I can seldom do.
- Palatine - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 1:55 pm:
The pigs finely flew. No way. Congratulations to the Senate for unanimously passing this bill which will hopefully bring back a loved one from near death.
- Cincinnatus - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 2:07 pm:
Better they just decriminalize this stuff and tax the hell out if it…
- Cincinnatus - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 2:08 pm:
Oh, and when you decriminalize it, you need to beef up DUI.
- Palatine - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 2:21 pm:
Cincinnatus gotta disagree with the DUI idea
- Cincinnatus - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 2:49 pm:
I don’t believe we should try to control individual behavior in a private setting. We have every right to control that behavior in public. Beefing up Under the Influence laws (didn’t necessarily mean driving) is a correct role of government. In a related vein, if someone is under the influence, their insurance company should be able to refuse paying the person a cent (in the case of accident, the insurance company shall pay other parties for injury).
It’s sorta like the behavior equivalent of “You Break It, You Buy It.”
- Stuck with Sen. CPA - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 2:56 pm:
Man, if this had been law, it would have ruined a really cool scene in Pulp Fiction.
- Just Observing - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 3:17 pm:
Great, common sense legislation! Agreed that the legislation is too limiting, but it is a start.
- Vote Quimby! - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 3:24 pm:
Cincinnatus: you can get down from your high horse now…
- Vote Quimby! - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 3:30 pm:
meaning should insurance companies be off the hook when people knowingly violate other laws, like speeding, and cause damage?
- Cincinnatus - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 3:46 pm:
No for liability, yes for personal injury. And the insurance company should be able to drop ‘em like a stone…
- Cincinnatus - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 3:49 pm:
VQ,
And the insurance company can price various options up and down the risk chain. If a person wants insurance for accidents that causes damage or injury while breaking the law, they should pay more. Similarly, the insurance company can offer lower rates to those who will accept personal responsibility for their own damage and/or injury.
- Kasich Walker, Jr. - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 4:08 pm:
No one overdoses on marijuana.
Seattle’s City Attorney Pete Holmes is dismissing all marijuana cases & won’t file charges in future cases. Governor Quinn should insist the same be done throughout Illinois until common sense prevails at a national level.
- Cheryl44 - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 4:18 pm:
- Cincinnatus - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 2:49 pm:
“I don’t believe we should try to control individual behavior in a private setting.”
So if my husband beats me in the privacy of our home, you’re okay with that?
- Small Town Liberal - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 4:21 pm:
- No for liability, yes for personal injury. And the insurance company should be able to drop ‘em like a stone… -
So some 17 year old smokes a joint with his friends on a Friday night. Sunday he’s driving to his little sister’s first communion and he’s running a little late. He’s doing about 10 mph over and he runs off the road a bit, overcorrects, and flips his car. His arm is broken and he has some internal injuries from his seatbelt. But he was clocked speeding a moment before the accident and they test his blood and discover THC. In Cinci’s world, the insurance company is off the hook completely and this kid just got saddled with a debt that will take him a lifetime to pay off. Not to mention he’ll never be able to drive again, because no one will insure him. So he’s going to be forced to pay off his debt running a lemonade stand in his parents’ front yard. There’s a world I want to live in…
- Kasich Walker, Jr. - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 4:34 pm:
STL: would he had been covered by insurance if he was drunk?
Also, THC blood testing is a bit different from alcohol in that a user will test positive days after smoking and no longer under the influence.
- wordslinger - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 4:48 pm:
Maybe individual cases do make good general law sometimes.
God help the confused soul who didn’t make the call. That’s a heavy load.
From my experience, I can’t think of any coppers, firefighters or EMT I’ve ever known who would care to advance a drug possession bust in such a situation.
They have pretty important jobs, and understand that. They’re looking to save the life. Mickey-Mouse drug possession is a daily occurrence.
Maybe it’s different in other parts of the country, but I can’t imagine an Illinois prosecutor who would push a drug possession charge based on evidence obtained from the defendant calling 911 to save someone’s life.
And I don’t think I’ve ever met a judge who wouldn’t toss such nonsense out in the most contemptuous terms.
That’s for Kafka, or Texas, maybe.
- Cincinnatus - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 5:03 pm:
- Cheryl44 - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 4:18 pm:
- Cincinnatus - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 2:49 pm:
“I don’t believe we should try to control individual behavior in a private setting.”
“So if my husband beats me in the privacy of our home, you’re okay with that?”
Yes, if you agree to be beaten, otherwise that is a ridiculous assertion. He can beat himself to a bloody pulp and put a bullet in his own brain, but he cannot lay a hand on you unless you consent. The idea is that a person can decide to destroy himself, but when the behavior involves another, all parties must consentt. The right of privacy allows one to do what one pleases to oneself without affecting another unwilling person.
- Timmeh - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 5:43 pm:
Do DUI laws really need to be beefed up? The penalty is already really high. As long as it covers drug use, I don’t really see the need to beef it up anymore.
At some point, I think you’re not deterring anyone by increasing it; you’re just making it tougher for people who learned their lesson the hard way to lead their lives.
- Not It - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 6:37 pm:
Whoppee! The General Assembly finally made a common sense decision. Let’s throw them a party! Let’s throw them a parade! Let’s make today “Illinois Honors the General Assembly Day” to commerate the one time they did something common sense.
Now let’s wait for them to do something stupid and self-serving…3…2…1…
- Anonymous - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 7:23 pm:
There was an op-ed in the Trib (me thinks) yesterday about the forces within the Right Wing (like Grover, seriously how do you name your kid that?) and the NAACP joining forces as to the major problem of filling our prisons with people with mental problems (where they never receive treatment for underlying causes) or petty drug offenses. The Right is finally figuring out that prisons are very very expensive to run, that locking them up does no good, and that there has to be a better solution.
Why hasn’t pot been legalized whereas beer and alcohol has flown freely the past 80 years? Numbers. Isn’t something like 75 percent of adults had a drink in the past year whereas only 20 percent have smoked in the past 12 months. And of those 20 percent, only have will admit to it. Think about all of those tax dollars lost, think of all of those tax dollars being spent on prisons, guards, the court system, etc; think about eliminating gangs as we know it.
- amalia - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 7:41 pm:
unanimous…..WOW. was there a special planet alignment I missed?
more of this kind of legislation, please.
and, will everyone who has smoked pot in their life please speak up. legalize it, tax it, and sell it from storefronts!!!!!!!!!!
- Avy - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 8:42 pm:
Count me in 100% with Cincinnatus. If the Senate did anything based on common sense, there are probably ramifications based on money that we are presently not aware or at best, it’s just a dumb accident.
I have interviewed a large number of high ranking elected officials and law enforcement officers who strongly belive in legalizing eveything and understand how far that will go to destroy gangs and ease crime. They also know that publicly uttering it will be the end of their careers.
- OneMan - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 10:03 pm:
You might not be able to OD on Pot, but your actions when on it can injure others.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1987_Maryland_train_collision
- amalia - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 10:09 pm:
meanwhile, in less sensible crime law news, the Sun Times has a very disturbing aspect to the story about the shooting in Oak Brook. The killer researched on the internet and found that Illinois does not have the death penalty. and so he decided to kill the woman he stalked. and we’re how many days past the signing of the bill?