Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ChileRelleno

Cop Explodes After Citizen Denies Search Without Warrant

Recommended Posts

With every 'nose' dog I've ever seen, a hit is very obvious. The dog stops, and you'd better not have your foot between the dog's butt and the ground, or there's going to be 80lbs of dog on your foot!

 

If this had been a real incident, I'd be screaming for that cop to be fired for abuse of authority. Since it was fake, I'm going to scream for the cops involved to be fired for misuse of property.

 

(Assuming this wasn't something they did for a training film).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With every 'nose' dog I've ever seen, a hit is very obvious. The dog stops, and you'd better not have your foot between the dog's butt and the ground, or there's going to be 80lbs of dog on your foot!

 

Even still, at the end of the day, it's a dog. An animal that will licks it's balls and asshole as quick as it will a filet mignon. It's just not what I consider a solid enough reason to be able to search me, with no other cause. Just my opinion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably cause they were dicking around on duty and brought negative views to thier deparment. You know that whole behavior unbecoming of an Officer thing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was fake then why did he just get fired?

 

Probably because he is using department resources for personal use and probably while on the clock. He will just find another job in the next county and maybe next time he will stick to the donut shops. 021.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've never had working dogs, have you, Shooter?

 

Labs or other Retrievers, pointers, setters?

 

Nope. Just family pets. I get it, though. I know dogs can be highly trained tools of the trade in different fields. I think they're abilities are sometimes amazing (I've heard some crazy stories about our county's bloodhound team).

 

I just don't think that it's enough to have one hit on something, and that's the end of the story. Now an officer is free to search as he pleases. When otherwise, he has to convince a judge to sign a search warrant to do the same thing.

 

I mean, I'm a realist. I know if an officer wants to search you or your vehicle, he will to find some way to do it. I just think on a legit level, it should take more than a dog hitting on something.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah. Explains a lot. (Not trying to be negative, honest)

 

Just like your pets know when they've done something right, a working dog knows that if it smells (whatever), it will get rewarded. If it hits during training and there was nothing there, there's no reward (and usually some expression of disappointment/displeasure). The dogs get very good at only hitting when there really is something there. And they compete to see who's dog will find things fastest, go the farthest, etc.

 

You also hear about the dog's trainers having to change their training programs sometimes. There was one instance where a dog wasn't hitting on the smell of weed or whatever, but had instead fixated on the smell of the plastic wrap! Took them some serious time to figure out how the dog got that fixation in the first place, and then to fix it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My dog "Hits" on anything EDIBLE!!!

Oh, and if you have a ball in the car.....Fugettabout it!!

post-16191-0-33485300-1327095749_thumb.jpg

Edited by RobRez
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fake cop thread with no real explosions = major disappointment

 

IMO, this wasn't that bad whether it was real or fake.

 

I would take verbal abuse over a ticket any day of the week.

 

To all the sensitive people out there:

 

FUCK YOU!!! AND FUCK ALL YOU PUSSIES THAT GET YOUR FEELINGS HURT WHEN SOMEONE USES HARSH FUCKING LANGUAGE AROUND YOU!!! FUCK!!! SHIT!!!! ASS!!! CUNTMUNCH!!! COCKMANGLER!!!! TWATSNAPPER!!!! TITTIES!!!!

You're free to go...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah. Explains a lot. (Not trying to be negative, honest)

 

Just like your pets know when they've done something right, a working dog knows that if it smells (whatever), it will get rewarded. If it hits during training and there was nothing there, there's no reward (and usually some expression of disappointment/displeasure). The dogs get very good at only hitting when there really is something there. And they compete to see who's dog will find things fastest, go the farthest, etc.

 

You also hear about the dog's trainers having to change their training programs sometimes. There was one instance where a dog wasn't hitting on the smell of weed or whatever, but had instead fixated on the smell of the plastic wrap! Took them some serious time to figure out how the dog got that fixation in the first place, and then to fix it.

 

Like I said, I get it. I know dogs can be highly trained. But my opinion stands that the authority to search should not be based on the reaction of a dog, regardless of how well it is trained.

 

We can agree to disagree. Nothing wrong with that.

 

My dog "Hits" on anything EDIBLE!!!

Oh, and if you have a ball in the car.....Fugettabout it!!

 

Good lookin' pup!

 

Fake cop thread with no real explosions = major disappointment

 

IMO, this wasn't that bad whether it was real or fake.

 

I would take verbal abuse over a ticket any day of the week.

 

To all the sensitive people out there:

 

FUCK YOU!!! AND FUCK ALL YOU PUSSIES THAT GET YOUR FEELINGS HURT WHEN SOMEONE USES HARSH FUCKING LANGUAGE AROUND YOU!!! FUCK!!! SHIT!!!! ASS!!! CUNTMUNCH!!! COCKMANGLER!!!! TWATSNAPPER!!!! TITTIES!!!!

You're free to go...

 

Where's the guy who started the thread about Red Jacket using foul language. I think he'd have a heartattack if he read the above.haha.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Shooter that a dog should not be equal to a judge when it comes to making a decision to use the threat of deadly force to search someone's property against their will. That actually makes no sense and seems unconstitutional to me. A dog can easily be trained to signal a false positive. It happens.

 

The low crime rates cited above in a town in WV correlate with the fact that every house in WV has a gun, and every member of the family knows how to use it. Not a great place to go lurking around at night on someones property.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Shooter that a dog should not be equal to a judge when it comes to making a decision to use the threat of deadly force to search someone's property against their will. That actually makes no sense and seems unconstitutional to me. A dog can easily be trained to signal a false positive. It happens.

 

You're right, it can. The reason that even the cops don't want false positives is that it only takes ONE case where the dog reacted to something that wasn't there and then they can't use a dog's reactions anymore. Just ONE case, and they lose a tool that lets them quickly sort through things that would normally take a couple days of dedicated searching.

 

Just like there are contests for hunting dogs and tracking dogs, there are contests for police dogs.

 

I've been around military working dogs, but the working dogs I've spent time with were all hunting dogs or assistance dogs (one of my friends has a 'stress-dog', Java's great to grab ahold of around finals at school. Nothing lowers your stress levels like throwing a ball for a dog and giving belly rubs). Java's full-time job is to be alert for threats in a crowd. Her job is to growl if there's trouble, because if there's no threat in the crowd it's safe for her human to enter. Her owner has a bad case of PTSD, Java is to help with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drug dogs have been wrong before. A simple google* search can provide plenty of evidence to show the statistics.

 

Fact, drugs dogs are some times right, some times wrong.

 

I dont know where you are going with the whole "if a drug dog is wrong once it will never be used again" because thats just bullshit.

Edited by Chevyman097
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Customs,TSA, Homeland Security, & local PD use our passsenger jets to train dogs 2-3 times a week. Both bomb & drug dogs. These dogs are good.

Edited by Jetmech

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You wanna know where I'm going with the 'it only takes ONE case'?

 

Lemme finish that thought out for you. It only takes ONE case where the dog was trained to give false positives. Then that's variously, malicious prosecution, false police reports, etc. No police department wants that, which is why they work really fucking heard to make sure that their dogs don't give false positives.

 

But I do object to the use of a dog as the first screening tool. There should be probable cause to bring out the dog, but certain areas get stuck with the 'by agreeing to XYZ you have waived all your rights' TSA bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see what you are saying now. Was a bit unclear.

 

Police dogs are good in a lot of situations. But I think in some cases the use of them is taken advantage of. But, what is to stop an officer from saying "hey the dog hit on this car", but the dog didnt. No one can argue with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A friend of mine had a very similar incident near Victoria, Texas a few years ago. Got pulled over and the cop asked to search his car. He said no. The Cop had him sit by the side of the hwy for over an hour waiting for a K9 unit to arrive. K9 gets there, finds nothing. Cop asks him, if you were clean, why didn't you consent? My friend said "because it's my right". Cops (at this point) drove off all pissed off and started following him a few miles down the road until he crossed the county line.

 

I see what you are saying now. Was a bit unclear.

 

Police dogs are good in a lot of situations. But I think in some cases the use of them is taken advantage of. But, what is to stop an officer from saying "hey the dog hit on this car", but the dog didnt. No one can argue with them.

 

Want to hear another funny one. My neighbor worked K9 in our local school. He got pulled over somewhere near Del Rio, and consented to a vehicle search. While doing the search, his dog "hits" on the cop car! So he tells the cop "hey man, you got drugs in your car? Because my dog just hit on you". Fucking hilarious. The cop immediately told him to leave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the problem is that a refusal of search is considered probable cause, then they bring the dog. I guess I just think a judge should make that decision. JMO , god bless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the problem is that a refusal of search is considered probable cause, then they bring the dog. I guess I just think a judge should make that decision. JMO , god bless.

Not in Indiana. You have the right to refuse search. I have had people when asked say no and thats it. I tell em thanks and conclude our buisness.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been searched twice when I was younger and one of those times they damaged my car, found nothing and didn't apologize or even bat an eyelash at damaging the interior of my $40,000 SUV. I didn't know I had the right to tell them they needed to get a warrant. Now I am fully ready to make them demonstrate PC, get a warrant and litigate them for damages to my property and even keep a lawyer on retainer for just that purpose. I sometimes hope I will get pulled over so I can fire it up on them and give them a good bending over when they find NOTHING. This happens every day in every jurisdiction in the US, it's an epidemic of attempted violation of the US Constitution, a "fishing trip" if you will and it should be stopped.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, and you don't have to wait for the dog.

 

"I do not consent to any searches."

"May I have my documentation back now that you are doing with it?"

"Am I free to go? Am I being detained?"

 

The cop has to have probable cause to bring the dog, not bring the dog to get the cause.

Unless he can articulate probable cause, once the traffic stop is done, he must release you

otherwise it is illegal detention. The police know this, and deal with it by not telling you that

you are actually not being detained and can go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

Tromix - Lead Delivery Systems
Dinzag Arms
CHAOS, Inc
Mississippi Auto Arms, Inc
Cobra's Custom
Carolina Shooters Supply
R & R Targets
LONE STAR ARMS
SGM Tactical
Mach 1 Arsenal
K-VAR
C&S Metall-Werkes
American Specialty Ammo
Csspecs Magazines
Phoenix Technology
Evlutionz LLC


  • Chatbox

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
×
×
  • Create New...