Jump to content

Now that recreational pot will be legal what is the threshold for carrying while under the influence?


Recommended Posts

The standard for carrying is the same as the standard for driving.

 

625 ILCS 5/11-501. Driving while under the influence of alcohol, other drug or drugs, intoxicating compound or compounds or any combination thereof.

 

(a) A person shall not drive or be in actual physical control of any vehicle within this State while:

 

(7) the person has, within 2 hours of driving or being in actual physical control of a vehicle, a tetrahydrocannabinol concentration in the person's whole blood or other bodily substance as defined in paragraph 6 of subsection (a) of Section 11-501.2 of this Code. Subject to all other requirements and provisions under this Section, this paragraph (7) does not apply to the lawful consumption of cannabis by a qualifying patient licensed under the Compassionate Use of Medical Cannabis Pilot Program Act who is in possession of a valid registry card issued under that Act, unless that person is impaired by the use of cannabis.

 

 

625 ILCS 5/11-501.2. Chemical and other tests.

 

(a)(6) Tetrahydrocannabinol concentration means either 5 nanograms or more of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol per milliliter of whole blood or 10 nanograms or more of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol per milliliter of other bodily substance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how 5 nanograms translates in to amount consumed or smoked?

It doesn't. Regular consumers have blood concentrations that remain elevated all the time, even when they're not impaired. Nevertheless, blood concentration is really the only thing that's objectively testable, considering field sobriety tests are subjective and generally not admissible as evidence in courts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I wonder how 5 nanograms translates in to amount consumed or smoked?

It doesn't. Regular consumers have blood concentrations that remain elevated all the time, even when they're not impaired. Nevertheless, blood concentration is really the only thing that's objectively testable, considering field sobriety tests are subjective and generally not admissible as evidence in courts.
In testimony they were talking about cheek swab tests but I assume that needs to be sent out.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Per testimony in the House there is no test for levels that is currently admissible in IL courts, at least when it comes to DUI.

 

 

I do wonder how that is going to work, I am guessing someone will be convicted and the courts will settle it. Would be ironic to see it eventually get all the way to the SCOTUS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VEHICLES
(625 ILCS 5/) Illinois Vehicle Code.

(625 ILCS 5/11-501.2) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 11-501.2)
Sec. 11-501.2. Chemical and other tests.

 

.....

(a-5) Law enforcement officials may use standardized field sobriety tests approved by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration when conducting investigations of a violation of Section 11-501 or similar local ordinance by drivers suspected of driving under the influence of cannabis. The General Assembly finds that standardized field sobriety tests approved by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration are divided attention tasks that are intended to determine if a person is under the influence of cannabis. The purpose of these tests is to determine the effect of the use of cannabis on a person's capacity to think and act with ordinary care and therefore operate a motor vehicle safely. Therefore, the results of these standardized field sobriety tests, appropriately administered, shall be admissible in the trial of any civil or criminal action or proceeding arising out of an arrest for a cannabis-related offense as defined in Section 11-501 or a similar local ordinance or proceedings under Section 2-118.1 or 2-118.2. Where a test is made the following provisions shall apply:
1. The person tested may have a physician, or a
qualified technician, chemist, registered nurse, or other qualified person of their own choosing administer a chemical test or tests in addition to the standardized field sobriety test or tests administered at the direction of a law enforcement officer. The failure or inability to obtain an additional test by a person does not preclude the admission of evidence relating to the test or tests taken at the direction of a law enforcement officer.
2. Upon the request of the person who shall submit to
a standardized field sobriety test or tests at the request of a law enforcement officer, full information concerning the test or tests shall be made available to the person or the person's attorney.
3. At the trial of any civil or criminal action or
proceeding arising out of an arrest for an offense as defined in Section 11-501 or a similar local ordinance or proceedings under Section 2-118.1 or 2-118.2 in which the results of these standardized field sobriety tests are admitted, the cardholder may present and the trier of fact may consider evidence that the card holder lacked the physical capacity to perform the standardized field sobriety tests.
....

 

They may also adopt the use of the rapid eye test which has been used for more than 30 years to detect drug use sufficient to justify a request for a blood test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will all the Illinois pot sniffing dogs lose their jobs now?
They will probably be reassigned to other duties like sniffing cargo trucks at roadside stops, etc. I was at an airport where the TSA lines were so backed up they decided to let the dogs do the prescreening. Everyone formed two lines and had to walk past the dog on the way to the baggage x-ray. If you made it without triggering the dog you got to keep your shoes and belt on even if you didn't have PRE status.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're gonna drink... lock up your guns at home.

If you're gonna smoke dope... lock up your guns at home.

This! Now do auto insurance rates go up? Just asking?

 

I did a google search.

 

 

Preliminary research indicates that the legalization of recreational marijuana in 10 states has increased accident rates, the Insurance Information Institute said Wednesday.

 

The group cited an October 2018 study by the Highway Loss Data Institute that shows collision claim frequency was 12.5% higher in Colorado and 9.7% higher in Washington than in nearby states that did not legalize recreational use of marijuana. Oregon also had a 1% greater rate of collision claims than neighboring states.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will all the Illinois pot sniffing dogs lose their jobs now?
They can't (or won't be able to) solely use the smell of pot to develop reasonable suspicion. They'll try to and even if they find more than the 1 oz (residents) or non-resident amount, the search will be suppressed. Just like they can no longer solely use the sight of a firearm as reasonable suspicion to arrest or detain because it isn't per se illegal to possess a firearm. Now, dealing with feds will be a different story since it's still schedule I.

 

Dogs will get far less work because, even though they CAN run the dog around the car for no reason, what's the point if they can't use the dog's alert to conduct a search. They'll need more than the smell of pot to develop RS. Colorado Supreme Court has said the same.

 

https://www.npr.org/2019/05/26/727107486/colorado-court-complicates-life-for-drug-sniffing-dogs

 

EDIT:

As Mick has pointed out, other drugs exist that dogs do detect. That won't change. If your pupils are pinpoints or jacked wide open, that's RS for something other than pot. Get out the dog. Just won't be able to use anything related to pot smell. Could use a roach in plain sight as RS for DUI. It gets dicey.

 

Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I wonder how 5 nanograms translates in to amount consumed or smoked?

 

 

Will all the Illinois pot sniffing dogs lose their jobs now?

 

First answer: Have you ever watched Live PD? - If the cop thinks you are stoned, you are stoned.

Second answer: No, the dogs are trained to sniff out more then just pot.

 

"First answer: Have you ever watched Live PD? - If the cop thinks you are stoned, you are stoned"

 

Yes that is why its is unconstitutional. The Police can make a arrest without any proof that you are impaired. If your eyes are red from lack of sleep or allergies then you must be stoned. If the cop doesn't like you he can arrest you even without probable cause because it his his opinion that you are stoned even though he's not a Doctor or medical professional.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course if your eyes and bloodshot, the won't even need a dog. That's enough reasonable suspicion to drag you out of the car and either administer FSTs or straight up demand blood and/or breath test. So how does that even factor into the discussion? We're not talking about driving under the influence here. We're talking about possession. All else equal with no other factors to develop reasonable suspicion, they will not be able to use smell alone to develop RS to get you out of your car and search it. Nor will they be able to use it as RS to administer FSTs and/or demand a blood, breath, and/or piss sample. They don't need RS to walk a dog around the car but...say they walk a dog around, find a lawful amount of pot, no signs of intoxication. No other crimes. What can they do? Nothing. They just wasted resources.

 

LEOs develop reasonable suspicion. RS is not probable cause. It is grounds to prolong the stop (seizure under 4A), investigate further, but not to arrest. It is usually multiple factors. Bloodshot eyes, reeks of pot, nervousness (yeah I know), traffic violation like multiple lane violations as PC for the stop, etc. It's rarely just one factor.

 

Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that recreational pot will be legal what is the threshold for carrying while under the influence? With alcohol you can gage it by the number of drinks but how will CCLers know if they are legally too stoned to carry a weapon?

 

Not that the conceal carry people are a monolithic group, I would have thought that the carry group wouldn't be high on the user list for dope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Now that recreational pot will be legal what is the threshold for carrying while under the influence? With alcohol you can gage it by the number of drinks but how will CCLers know if they are legally too stoned to carry a weapon?

 

Not that the conceal carry people are a monolithic group, I would have thought that the carry group wouldn't be high on the user list for dope.

In general, probably true... with exception for medical use. The folks here who support mj are typically not users themselves, they're just people who believe in personal freedom.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Now that recreational pot will be legal what is the threshold for carrying while under the influence? With alcohol you can gage it by the number of drinks but how will CCLers know if they are legally too stoned to carry a weapon?

 

Not that the conceal carry people are a monolithic group, I would have thought that the carry group wouldn't be high on the user list for dope.

 

 

 

I am prescribed pretty heavy painkillers for a problem in my lower back, if/when Federal law changes I am willing to try anything , especially MM as an alternative. I think a lot of people in chronic pain are in the same boat and honestly a lot of them are not waiting for Federal law to change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also curious about the prohibition on CCL if you have a MM card. Now that it will be recreational, that should go away. Unless it has already and I missed it.

What CCL prohibition?

 

Q If I am a qualifying patient or designated caregiver pursuant to the Compassionate Use of Medical Cannabis Pilot Program Act and hold a valid Medical Cannabis Card, are my Firearms Owners Identification Card and Concealed Carry License still valid?

 

A Medical marijuana cardholders will not have their FOID or CCL cards revoked, or be denied issuance of a FOID or CCL card, due to their status as a medical marijuana cardholder. Such cards are State-issued, governed by State law, and State law requires that a person's status as a medical marijuana cardholder not result in the denial of any right or privilege.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Second answer: No, the dogs are trained to sniff out more then just pot.

But they cannot tell the handler what exactly they smell nor can they distinguish between a single joint and several pounds.

 

I was talking to an ISP buddy of mine about this yesterday. He said all the current dogs will have to be retired and new dogs will have to be trained. A hit on pot would/could invalidate the whole search and untraining them for pot would be impossible. They warned them that the cost would be enournous if legalized but they didn’t listen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...