Court Rules Burning Pot Smell Does Not Justify Police Entry

Originally posted by jsobecky
Somebody care to answer these questions? Remember, this topic is not about pot!


Q1: You roll your own cigarettes. A cop stops you for a traffic violation and sees a stub in your ashtray. It looks just like a roach.

Probable cause?

Yes, the majority of the stubs you find are marijuana, I would say 97% from my experiance.


Q2: My point is, you're taking away one of the 5 senses as a discovery mechanism.

What's next, taking away sight, because not everybody has 20-20 vision?

I certainly hope not, there are a lot of officers with glasses.

Originally posted by JamesMcMahn
Sometimes the jon of those in charge is to protect you from yourself.

That's what scares me... Because it usually comes at the cost of my personal freedoms. All the government has to say is "it's for your protection."

And... before shots disregards my posts because I seem to be pro pot. I don't smoke... Anymore. I hope he will take my opinions seriously now...

Originally posted by LostSailor

Originally posted by JamesMcMahn
Sometimes the jon of those in charge is to protect you from yourself.

That's what scares me... Because it usually comes at the cost of my personal freedoms. All the government has to say is "it's for your protection."

I honest think that we do have to protect people from there own bad choices, I tried to help a lot of people, I think I did more follow-ups than any two officers in my Department. I am also a big believer in TCP, I think that can help clear out a lot of drug dealers from the neighborhood.

Originally posted by jsobecky

Q2: My point is, you're taking away one of the 5 senses as a discovery mechanism.

What's next, taking away sight, because not everybody has 20-20 vision?

The problem with smell is there is no way to prove you smelled something... The officer can't bottle the smell to bring it to the court case. If he physically sees you smoking it he KNOWS you are smoking it. Smell can to easily mistaken. In my opinion.

Then... The police officer knows he has the advantage right away. Who are the courts going to believe? A respected police officer or that evil pot head?

Originally posted by JamesMcMahn
I honest think that we do have to protect people from there own bad choices, I tried to help a lot of people, I think I did more follow-ups than any two officers in my Department. I am also a big believer in TCP, I think that can help clear out a lot of drug dealers from the neighborhood.

James,

I don't want you to think I am anti-police pro anarchy or anything like that. I respect officers and their jobs. I don't have the balls to do what they do.

I, however, have a difference in opinion on this matter. You were trained and told that it was your duty to serve and protect. Am I correct?

I, on the other hand, still believe that as long as I am not hurting anyone else. And smoking pot in my own residence is not hurting anyone else. That I have a God given right to do whatever the hell I want to my body.

Originally posted by LostSailor
The problem with smell is there is no way to prove you smelled something... The officer can't bottle the smell to bring it to the court case. If he physically sees you smoking it he KNOWS you are smoking it. Smell can to easily mistaken. In my opinion.

Well, neither can a scream for help, or the sound of a gunshot, be bottled. Should we disallow that?

Then... The police officer knows he has the advantage right away. Who are the courts going to believe? A respected police officer or that evil pot head?

The police have the advantage every time, in any case.

If a cop wants to pull you over, all he has to say is that he observed you swerving in the lane. How do you defend against that?

Originally posted by jsobecky

Well, neither can a scream for help, or the sound of a gunshot, be bottled. Should we disallow that?

I agree 100%. But can you agree with me that a scream for help or a gunshot means that someone is being harmed... Or possibly harmed? If you smell pot wafting out of someone's window... Who is being harmed?

I guess I just don't know. It all depends on your feelings about marijuana I guess.

*edit*

Oh yeah James,

Can you explain the term TCP? I honestly don't know what that is. Thanks.

[edit on 12-3-2007 by LostSailor]

TCP is Team-Community Policeing. It is when the members of a neighborhood work in concert with the police department. Its when the officers get to know the members of the nieghborhood and earn their trust.

Originally posted by LostSailor

Originally posted by jsobecky

Well, neither can a scream for help, or the sound of a gunshot, be bottled. Should we disallow that?

I agree 100%. But can you agree with me that a scream for help or a gunshot means that someone is being harmed... Or possibly harmed? If you smell pot wafting out of someone's window... Who is being harmed?

I guess I just don't know. It all depends on your feelings about marijuana I guess.

The issue of harm is irrelevant. The real issue is the disallowment of certain types of evidence into court.


Here are my feelings about marijuana:

I think it is less harmful than alcohol or tobacco.

I see no problem with allowing personal consumption, as long as you don't drive 40MPH in the fast lane with your left blinker on! Then, you're too stoned to drive!

As far as how much personal quantity should be allowed? Well, today I can fill my basement with bottles of Jim Beam if I choose to. Why should there be a limit on pot?

You will see changes in the marijuana laws in your lifetime, believe me. In 20 years, this discussion will be "priceless".

Associate Chief Justice Michael Wilkins dissented, saying that detecting the odor of marijuana can at times justify police entry into a home without a warrant.
"In a case where illegal drugs are being burned out of sight but not out of smell, and where the quantity of drugs is unknown to the officers, a presumption that the drugs are being destroyed rather than merely consumed is not unreasonable," Wilkins wrote.

Who would destroy marijuana other than the authorities? Associate Chief Justice Wilkins is not in tune with the real world.

What an idiotic conclusion.

Peace

Originally posted by JamesMcMahn
TCP is Team-Community Policeing. It is when the members of a neighborhood work in concert with the police department. Its when the officers get to know the members of the nieghborhood and earn their trust.

We had one of those meetings just last week. An officer came here and spent 3 of his evening hours with us, explaining how we could best work together.

This guy spent his personal time to help his community. But you can bet it won't show up in tomorrow's newspapers.

Fact Is:

You can buy things that smell like "pot" but are not "pot". Due to this their is a chance that it will not be "pot" and they are not breaking any laws. The system is based on punishing the guilty, based on evidence not on punishing the innocent because of something you smell.

Originally posted by Odium
Fact Is:

You can buy things that smell like "pot" but are not "pot". Due to this their is a chance that it will not be "pot" and they are not breaking any laws. The system is based on punishing the guilty, based on evidence not on punishing the innocent because of something you smell.

Everytime I caught a whiff of Marijuana it turned out to be marijuana. I am not saying it couldnt happen but who else besides a pothead is going to have marijuana incense.

But James, you can't arrest someone for being a pothead, just for possessing pot. If there's a chance that the smell could be something other than pot, then we can't allow that as a valid reason for entry.

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
But James, you can't arrest someone for being a pothead, just for possessing pot. If there's a chance that the smell could be something other than pot, then we can't allow that as a valid reason for entry.

Being that the overwhelming majority of the time it is marijuana, it should be valid.

What about the overwhelming majority of people who wear patchouli oil that are pot smokers? Should that also justify a search? Why or why not?

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
What about the overwhelming majority of people who wear patchouli oil that are pot smokers? Should that also justify a search? Why or why not?

I can tell the difference in patchouli oil and marijuana.

Originally posted by JamesMcMahn
I can tell the difference in patchouli oil and marijuana.

I believe he is asking... If the majority of people wearing patchouli oil are smokers... What is preventing that from becoming a reason to search people? That patchouli oil covers up pretty much any smell including marijuana.

Originally posted by LostSailor

Originally posted by JamesMcMahn
I can tell the difference in patchouli oil and marijuana.

I believe he is asking... If the majority of people wearing patchouli oil are smokers... What is preventing that from becoming a reason to search people? That patchouli oil covers up pretty much any smell including marijuana.

I am only going to do something if I smell the drug itself.

Originally posted by JamesMcMahn

Originally posted by LostSailor

Originally posted by JamesMcMahn
I can tell the difference in patchouli oil and marijuana.

I believe he is asking... If the majority of people wearing patchouli oil are smokers... What is preventing that from becoming a reason to search people? That patchouli oil covers up pretty much any smell including marijuana.

I am only going to do something if I smell the drug itself.

Well, apparantly not anymore


Keep fighting the good fight dude, eventually you'll nab all the potheads. And when you do, the world will be a much better place (sarcasm).