[Megamel29]

Originally Posted by 30564U ↗

This goes back to the probable cause/reasonable suspecision discussion. It's just a matter of time before the courts no longer allow K-9's to determine cause for a warrantless and in this case groundless search. Currently there is nothing wrong with this search...absolutely nothing! Let that sink in for all of you guys that smoke marijuana and aren't really careful. If that dog hits on your car...and if you're smoking or in possession while inside the car, you're gonna get caught...because marijuana stinks and any idiot can smell it. This asshat probably smoked in the vehicle or stored marijuana in it...and what happens when it's hot inside the vehicle...that's right it really smells. I hate to say it, but Hip Hop and smoking dope go hand in hand. If you don't want this to happen to you be smarter that this idiot. Why the police didn't use the dog at the entrance to stop pedestrians is beyond me, they would have had more arrests and citations than they could write. This was bad policing, but it isn't illegal or against common policy. Let this be a lesson.

You're just making assumptions. Just like the police in this case, you have absolutely no proof.

[Sharon]

Police got a waft of what they presumed was marajuana so haphazardly did their job. Pity the truck was damaged in the process

Having a warrant for every search is daft and could inhibit the police in serious cases.

[TheVrist]

Originally Posted by rapeWhistle ↗

It's a 650, the 550 has the Super Duty(light duty) body,
not a Medium Duty body and chassis.




..but, yeah, fuck him!

Normally these 4th Amendment issues make me foam at the mouth,
but then i noticed the 'HornBlasters' body wrap kit.

Fuck that guy.

which ever, so far I haven't met anyone that owns one of these actually use them for anything other than pecker extension.

[Xfactor]

I see them all the time. People in suits going to work. Its a dysfunction of character.

[K9Grip]

Originally Posted by rapeWhistle ↗

It's a 650, the 550 has the Super Duty(light duty) body,
not a Medium Duty body and chassis.




..but, yeah, fuck him!

Normally these 4th Amendment issues make me foam at the mouth,
but then i noticed the 'HornBlasters' body wrap kit.

Fuck that guy.

Listen, I love big trucks and SUV's, but what's the point in this one? For that price you wouldn't want to haul or do anything with it and fuck it up.

[30564U]

Originally Posted by Xfactor ↗

Bullshit. The search not reasonable because the police must generally show that it is more likely than not that a crime has occurred. Suspect was never questioned. People in the United States are entitled to privacy and freedom from government intrusion.

Cpl. Fanning: (813) 431-3577

Wow...not sure what police school you attended, but your wishful thinking won't make it true. What they did was completely within the law and common industry policy. I'm not saying it was smart or not rebutable in court had they found anything, but it was a legal action...period. It's done all the time with dogs. You can hold your breath, stomp your feet, and poop your diapers, but it was legal as the law stands today. Should it be...probably not, unless exigent circumstances exist or we're talking about terrorism. Clearly this was neither...but the search was good and would have more likely than not flown in court. Either way, I don't really care, it doesn't have anything to do with me...if you do the same thing and get caught you were advised, so go to it.

[30564U]

Originally Posted by Megamel29 ↗

You're just making assumptions. Just like the police in this case, you have absolutely no proof.

Again, who cares? While I respect your right to disagree, to what do you base your opinion? I base my opinion on thirty years of being a cop. Just because you want something to be a certain way, won't make it that way. What the officers did was completely lawful...stupid yes, but lawful. The dog's alert was all that was needed to conduct their ham handed search. I don't need proof of a crime, only the basic reasonable suspecision or probable cause that a crime was committed or being committed. The dog's altert or the officer's sense of smell (if it was stinking that bad) was all that's needed. Of course this was a dumb move. The officers would have been better off walking around the entry area with the dog and making arrests or writing citations. It would have been way more bang for their buck. This search was waaaayyy tooooo much effort with not a lot of gain, even if they'd found a bail of marijuana. If you choose to argue and pee your pants over the search's legality, and you do the same thing and get caught, just remember you were advised. It's none of my business and it won't effect me either way.

[Megamel29]

Originally Posted by 30564U ↗

Again, who cares? While I respect your right to disagree, to what do you base your opinion? I base my opinion on thirty years of being a cop. Just because you want something to be a certain way, won't make it that way. What the officers did was completely lawful...stupid yes, but lawful. The dog's alert was all that was needed to conduct their ham handed search. I don't need proof of a crime, only the basic reasonable suspecision or probable cause that a crime was committed or being committed. The dog's altert or the officer's sense of smell (if it was stinking that bad) was all that's needed. Of course this was a dumb move. The officers would have been better off walking around the entry area with the dog and making arrests or writing citations. It would have been way more bang for their buck. This search was waaaayyy tooooo much effort with not a lot of gain, even if they'd found a bail of marijuana. If you choose to argue and pee your pants over the search's legality, and you do the same thing and get caught, just remember you were advised. It's none of my business and it won't effect me either way.

It just bothers me that any cop can say their dog alerted to something and that gives the cop the right to go through someone's property. It's not as if they had been eyeing this guy for drug trafficking (that we know of anyway).

[30564U]

Originally Posted by Megamel29 ↗

It just bothers me that any cop can say their dog alerted to something and that gives the cop the right to go through someone's property. It's not as if they had been eyeing this guy for drug trafficking (that we know of anyway).

Yep...you're correct, it is a complete abortion of the law...but it's legal. And if anyone thinks they're going to invoke their rights, stomp their feet, and play lawyer during the encounter is going straight to jail...at least for the evening. In fairness to the two idiot officers involved here, they didn't know when they began the search that this wasn't a trafficking issue. By the way, did anyone else's vehicle get searched during the concert? If not, then that lends more credence to the officer's search and more credibility to the dog's drug sniffing ability. No judgement here, but if they only alerted on one car at a hip hop concert for marijuana, then I feel pretty confident saying that the officers didn't search enough and there was dope in that asshat's abortion of a truck.

[TheVrist]

Thing about the k-9 units, they can testify the dogs alert was him pissing on the wheel. My dads ex wife was in a k9 unit, and one evening at a cookout she openly admitted she would que the dog to bark rather it smelled anything or not, because the officer originally pulling a vehicle over would ask them for the probable cause.