Drug-sniffing dogs are cheating cheaters hoping for steak

[LegatoRedrivers]

You think dogs are bad...

MObugs: Bees--used for detecting drugs?

"Sir, I'm going to have to ask you to step out the the vehicle. Officer BuzzKill here seems to be flying around your person in an erratic manner."

 

[level.eleven]

MObugs: Bees--used for detecting drugs?

"Sir, I'm going to have to ask you to step out the the vehicle. Officer BuzzKill here seems to be flying around your person in an erratic manner."

+1 for Minsc. Wow, blast from the past.

 

[LegatoRedrivers]

+1 for Minsc. Wow, blast from the past.

Butt-Kicking for Goodness!

 

[Kirk Freeman]

How long before they walk up to your house and take the dog for a walk and say "FIDO smelled something, we are coming in and having a look around"

Ummm, first, it's Officer Chompy and I have bad news for you my friend: The cops already do this.

Remember, the dog can never fail. They can search your house with a dog sniff.

http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/07140907msm.pdf

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I wonder how many drug-sniffing dog handler/LEO arrests have gone to court where the LEO worked the dog, and they didn't find anything? It sure is hard to arrest somebody without EVIDENCE. Not to mention that the dogs indicate and the driver/vehicle owner either just used or transported narcotics recently. That odor sticks around. Yep - the dogs are that good.

How many rico seizures have there been? Yes the dogs are that good, but sometimes not. In the late '70s there was a drug search at Highland HS, no drugs were found, but lots of candy was. The officers were giving it to the dogs as a reward. And yes there were drugs there. They had a sniff through at my sons HS a couple of months ago, nothing found. I'm not stupid enough to believe that there were none there. My local pd's K-9 I'm pretty sure will alert over a tennis ball.

BTW - a handler can't cue a dog that's eyeball deep in between the cushions of the front seat and the handler is standing outside the car...jes sayin'...

Doesn't the dog have to indicate on the walk around before they are allowed in the car? And can't the officer cue the dog while he/she is walking it around on the leash? And could it be possible that the dog is eyeball deep between the cushions looking for the french fry I dropped there last week?

That makes me wonder... if I shoot a police dog, have I just "assaulted an officer"? If so, the dog should be bound by the rules of officers, as you suggest.

Nope you would have committed

IC 35-46-3-11
Cruelty to a law enforcement animal
Sec. 11. (a) A person who knowingly or intentionally:
(1) strikes, torments, injures, or otherwise mistreats a law enforcement animal; or
(2) interferes with the actions of a law enforcement animal while the animal is engaged in assisting a law enforcement officer in the performance of the officer's duties;
commits a Class A misdemeanor.
(b) An offense under subsection (a)(1) is a Class D felony if the act results in:
(1) serious permanent disfigurement;
(2) unconsciousness;
(3) permanent or protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member or organ; or
(4) death;
of the law enforcement animal.
(c) It is a defense that the accused person:
(1) engaged in a reasonable act of training, handling, or discipline; and
(2) acted as an employee or agent of a law enforcement agency.
(d) In addition to any sentence or fine imposed for a conviction of an offense under this section, the court may order the person convicted to make restitution to the person or law enforcement agency owning the animal for reimbursement of:
(1) veterinary bills; and
(2) replacement costs of the animal if the animal is disabled or killed.

What is bad is that it is not a defense if you were wrongly attacked.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Having been a successful explosive detection canine handler, I can tell you that the science is there. The relationship between a detector dog and it's handler is completely different than that of a normal dog owner.

And as for the the test they performed in KKKalifornia? It was rigged from the get-go. A real test NEVER tells any idicators to the handler for just that reason. A real search is not perfomed that way (there are no red papers to give it away) and the test was set-up for failure.

The article talks about explosive detention canines. It even say that they are very accurate in Iraq. But with explosive dogs if you cue them wrong you can die. Drug dogs are a bit of a different story. Dogs do have amazing noses, but they are pack animals and aim to please.

And yes the test was rigged, it was rigged to find out if the handlers had any input on if the dogs triggered. Whats the difference between a red piece of paper and a certain look, or stereotype? What I want to know is how many of the perfect runs were done by explosive dogs. There were 3 solely explosive K-9s that did 24 runs, there were 21 perfect runs. How many of those were by the explosive ones? If I were a betting man, I'd say most of them.

 

[rambone]

The prosecution would like to call its witness to the stand...

 

[mrjarrell]

Here's a related story from a well known blogger who got stopped in Tejas for no good reason and had a drug dog "alert" on nothing, (well, maybe on his leftover breakfast). Just goes to show that handlers can gin up any excuse to violate your 4th amendment rights, when they desire to.

Rad Geek People’s Daily 2011-03-03 – In which I perform a public service

 

[Kirk Freeman]

That's where your wrong, Mr. J.

The dogs are NEVER wrong. This will be counted as a "success" as the drugs were there at one point.