• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Canine Drug "Screening" - Should a Sniff be Probable Cause for Police Search?

JBG

DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2017
Messages
1,006
Reaction score
250
Location
New York City area
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Marijuana Legalization Threatens These Dogs’ Collars (link)

New York Times said:
Officer Tulo will turn in his badge in January, forced into early retirement by the country’s waning war on weed....State court rulings mean that Tulo’s keen nose for pot imperils his work on other drug cases.
Here's the issue. "Officer" Tulo is trained to sniff out marijuana and other drugs. Marijuana is now legal in Colorado. Other drugs are not. Any search of a person or car must, under the U.S. Constitution, Fourth Amendment, be based on probable cause. Court decisions have held that a dog's detection of marijuana, or for that matter explosives, gives the human police officers probable cause to make an arrest. If Tulo sniffs out marijuana, and a car and/or person is searched, the search is now, under Colorado state case law, no longer grounded on probable cause. For a similar result see Drug Alerts from Police Dogs Aren't Probable Cause for Vehicle Search, Colorado Court Rules (link).

I believe that this attitude shows a lack of seriousness about crime. Presumably, people who use marijuana are somewhat more likely to be involved in the "drug culture." While allowing an arrest on these may be a bit severe, allowing a search may be more within reason. I believe that ruling out canine searches based upon the drug being the "wrong drug" is a waste of canine talent, a waste of the money spent on training and worse, betrays a lack of seriousness in fighting illegal drugs.
 

AliHajiSheik

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2012
Messages
10,843
Reaction score
3,612
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Marijuana Legalization Threatens These Dogs’ Collars (link)

Here's the issue. "Officer" Tulo is trained to sniff out marijuana and other drugs. Marijuana is now legal in Colorado. Other drugs are not. Any search of a person or car must, under the U.S. Constitution, Fourth Amendment, be based on probable cause. Court decisions have held that a dog's detection of marijuana, or for that matter explosives, gives the human police officers probable cause to make an arrest. If Tulo sniffs out marijuana, and a car and/or person is searched, the search is now, under Colorado state case law, no longer grounded on probable cause. For a similar result see Drug Alerts from Police Dogs Aren't Probable Cause for Vehicle Search, Colorado Court Rules (link).

I believe that this attitude shows a lack of seriousness about crime. Presumably, people who use marijuana are somewhat more likely to be involved in the "drug culture." While allowing an arrest on these may be a bit severe, allowing a search may be more within reason. I believe that ruling out canine searches based upon the drug being the "wrong drug" is a waste of canine talent, a waste of the money spent on training and worse, betrays a lack of seriousness in fighting illegal drugs.

Perhaps they can nationalize these canine officers since it isn't legal Federally. An animal happy doing something should be allowed to continue being happy.
 

trouble13

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
37,708
Reaction score
8,715
Marijuana Legalization Threatens These Dogs’ Collars (link)

Here's the issue. "Officer" Tulo is trained to sniff out marijuana and other drugs. Marijuana is now legal in Colorado. Other drugs are not. Any search of a person or car must, under the U.S. Constitution, Fourth Amendment, be based on probable cause. Court decisions have held that a dog's detection of marijuana, or for that matter explosives, gives the human police officers probable cause to make an arrest. If Tulo sniffs out marijuana, and a car and/or person is searched, the search is now, under Colorado state case law, no longer grounded on probable cause. For a similar result see Drug Alerts from Police Dogs Aren't Probable Cause for Vehicle Search, Colorado Court Rules (link).

I believe that this attitude shows a lack of seriousness about crime. Presumably, people who use marijuana are somewhat more likely to be involved in the "drug culture." While allowing an arrest on these may be a bit severe, allowing a search may be more within reason. I believe that ruling out canine searches based upon the drug being the "wrong drug" is a waste of canine talent, a waste of the money spent on training and worse, betrays a lack of seriousness in fighting illegal drugs.
Train new dogs

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
80,800
Reaction score
48,895
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
I always felt that drug sniffing dogs were a search of property in and of themselves. Dogs don't normally alert to pot or any other drug. They have to be trained. And then when they sniff an area, they're all over the property sniffing, and then if they alert....all of a sudden you have "probable cause" to search. Except you already used the dog to search, and had trained the dog to search specifically for certain products. Additionally, dogs aren't incredibly accurate anyway.
 
Top Bottom