Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: “A policy paper masquerading as a complaint”
Next Post: Old habits die hard
Posted in:
* Northern Public Radio…
The law allowing recreational marijuana in Illinois takes effect next year, and those in enforcement are getting ready. This includes a special category of police. Sergeant Nick Cunningham leads the Canine Unit in the Winnebago County Sheriff’s Office. Guy Stephens spoke with Cunningham recently. Guy began by asking what effect the new law will have on his work.
NC: One of the major impacts for the Canine Unit is that all the patrol dogs that we currently have are trained to locate marijuana, cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamines. Once marijuana is legalized, as far as any searches that we would do — on the street, on vehicles — we will not be able to use those patrol dogs. So in order to compensate for that we’ve just purchased two brand new dogs, two labs, that are going to be starting training next week. And those dogs will be training for narcotics, but they will only be trained for cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine. Myself and every other trainer in the nation will tell you that we cannot retrain those dogs that we already have. If they’ve already been trained on marijuana, it’s not something that we can reliably take out of them.
GS: How many dogs are affected?
NC: It’s a major impact for the canine community. There’s approximately 420 narcotics dogs in Illinois right now. All of those dogs, up until just very recently, were trained on marijuana. So you’ve got 420 dogs that can’t be retrained.
OK, first of all, there are 420 drug dogs in Illinois? How ironic.
But, to the point, Rep. Kelly Cassidy, the legalization bill’s chief sponsor, pointed to the floor debate where members went out of their way to establish “significant legislative intent” that searches with existing dogs would remain admissible for probable cause.
Possessing large amounts of cannabis will still be illegal after January 1st. If somebody has ten pounds of weed in their car, for instance, they can still go to jail. So there is no reason to retire those canines and spend money on new ones.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 2:40 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: “A policy paper masquerading as a complaint”
Next Post: Old habits die hard
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Sorry Rich, but you can’t user the dogs for cannabis. The dogs will be giving hits on people lawfully possessing cannabis. If a dog hits on you, the dog cannot discriminate quantities. Therefore, you will get searched for being a law-abiding citizen. This is constitutionally suspect.
Comment by SW Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 2:49 pm
420 dogs trained? That cannot be a coincidence…
Comment by Steve Rogers Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 2:50 pm
===Sorry Rich, but you can’t user the dogs for cannabis===
It’s not my opinion. Take it up with the sponsor.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 2:52 pm
So, you really can’t teach an old dog new tricks. Or make them forget old ones or something…
Comment by Cubs in '16 Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 2:54 pm
“If a dog hits on you, the dog cannot discriminate quantities.” Maybe not, but seems to me it would be useful to establish probable cause for a search.
Comment by Skeptic Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 2:56 pm
Bill sponsors don’t determine what constitutes probable cause that a crime was committed. They determine what the crimes are.
Comment by The 647 Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 3:01 pm
=== Maybe not, but seems to me it would be useful to establish probable cause for a search. ===
Only time (and court cases) will probably tell, but I’m guessing some judges would have some real problems with searches simply based on the detection of marijuana under the premise that the driver MIGHT have quantities that exceed the legal possession limit.
Comment by Just Observing Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 3:02 pm
==establish probable cause for a search==
Yeah, it’s a big time bummer that they didn’t make cops get new dogs. This is just going to be fodder for searches that shouldn’t be happening.
But it sounds like they aren’t planning on training new street dogs on weed? So once this crop of pups heads into retirement maybe the issue is moot?
(I tried to think of a good pun in place of moot, but everything seemed like it was running towards a deleted comment or ban hammer. But they’re out there.)
Comment by lakeside Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 3:03 pm
Seems the dogs are a little overqualified when the new law takes effect. Strikes me that the dogs could find you innocent, if you are, and not in possession of anything besides the proscribed amount of weed. Probability for a search can already turn up an innocent person who is then sent on their way with a “thanks for cooperating”. I think these dogs still have value.
Comment by A guy Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 3:16 pm
Yep, this is by far the biggest problem the state of Illinois faces.
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 3:17 pm
To one of Rich Miller’s points: If you listen to/read the entire interview, I asked about this and Sgt. Cunningham answered: No dogs will be retired, in Winnebago County at least. He says there’s more than enough work for the current dogs in his department looking for other drugs, patrols, school or jailhouse searches, etc. The new dogs will supplement them for specific purposes, i.e. an auto search in certain circumstances. Policy guidelines on how this all plays out in the event await clarification by the state’s attorney.
Comment by Guy Stephens Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 3:21 pm
Strikes me that the dogs could find you innocent, if you are, and not in possession of anything besides the proscribed amount of weed.
Americans do not have to prove anything…thank the Constitution.
Comment by Dotnonymous Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 3:30 pm
Just don’t use them as drug dogs. Most of them are trained to assist with police work such as locating or subduing a suspect.
Comment by The Dude Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 3:32 pm
The dogs can be used. The nay sayers are looking to Colorado which allowed marajuana through a constitutional change. This meant a person has a constitutional right to marajuana and the police could not infringe, in any way, on that right. Because Illinois passed this through a legislative process, statute can, and did, impose regulatory realities in Illinois.
Comment by Polpen Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 4:11 pm
The time has come for Illinois to regulate alcohol, like it regulates Cannabis.
Comment by Maryjane Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 4:20 pm
===impose regulatory realities in Illinois===
I had a dog sniff/search the inside of a car when I was traveling in Colorado post legalization. I had already disclosed the amount of cannabis in my possession and given it to the law enforcement officer for verification. While the dog was jumping around the inside of the car it stepped on my gas station cup of coffee in the cup holder and smashed it causing a caffeinated mess. The officer gave me back my herb and sent me on my way. I still love dogs.
What is the legal limit to how much alcohol or tobacco or cheeseburgers an American adult is legally allowed to possess outside the home? It is only a result of prohibition 2.0 that these dogs that have been trained are even a consideration.
Comment by Kentucky Bluegrass x Featherbed Bent x Northern California Sinsemilla Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 4:21 pm
Illinois law permits you to carry on your person 1/4 ounce of explosives, so under the trainer’s logic, explosive sniffing dogs are also obsolete. I think I’m on board with keeping explosive sniffing dogs around despite the possibility of a person with a legal amount of explosives being unreasonably searched.
Where are they using these dogs anyway? You still can’t have cannabis in schools and the courts have put some severe restrictions on the use of drug sniffing dogs during traffic stops.
Comment by JSS Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 4:37 pm
- you will get searched for being a law-abiding citizen. This is constitutionally suspect. -
Seems to be a good argument against using dogs period. I’d be fine with that.
Comment by Excitable Boy Wednesday, Jul 24, 19 @ 5:35 pm
So using a legal product will be probably cause for a search. No way that will be misused. /S
Comment by Mason born Thursday, Jul 25, 19 @ 5:24 am
Usually States follow other states law. So look at the resent
Colorado Supreme Court ruling on Cannabis K9”s. K9 dogs can not determine the amounts of drugs in a car.
Example: I buy 20grams from the dispensary I’m over the age of 21 and get stopped for speeding. The cannabis dog alerts on my car. He just alerted on legal substance I can have and it now my legal right to have thanks to IL law. Anything else is
fruits of the poisonous tree. Wake up people.
Comment by Bparkerguns Thursday, Jul 25, 19 @ 7:51 am
I have learned to be skeptical any time local law enforcement says they are against something because it might lead to infringements on citizens’ Constitutional rights or exhrbitant and unnecessary expense. I mean:
- John Burge
- background checks on meeting attendees
- armored personnel carriers
- multi-million lawsuit settlements
- 15 years of racial profiling data
For heaven’s sake if you are really that worried: create a lottery to adopt a law enforcement animal; don’t allow law enforcement to enter; use the money you raise to train new animals.
Comment by Thomas Paine Thursday, Jul 25, 19 @ 9:22 am