Home Main Category Second Amendment/Politics

Would the witness please raise its right paw and repeat. . . .

In today's world of the perpetual encroachment of our constitutional rights, it now seems that K9's are somehow "deputized" and upon their "hit" on a vehicle, the occupants must then submit to a search of personal property and effects based upon what is now considered "probable cause" to conduct a search without warrant. Makes me wonder if the K9's in question took an Oath to become police officers or if the K9's can answer questions in a court of law - or, if their "testimony" (woof - woof) is valid as evidence. I would argue that K9's could "hit" a billfold of money that, unbeknownst to the now accused occupant, was previously used as drug money in prior transactions. I have much respect for these dogs and their handlers in SAR or finding possible IED's in a battlefield but here in the USA against citizens . . .? What say you?
«1345

Replies

  • DanoobieDanoobie Member Posts: 95 Member
    It DOES seem an awfully convenient way to circumvent legal process, does
    it not? How do you know the K-9 handler isn't lying, when he claims the dog
    alerted on your vehicle? The trouble is, they have an awfully high success record.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    The K9's are really good at finding what their handler just dropped. The flight line guard dogs at most USAF bases were trained to lift a leg and pee whenever the handler said the word "Lifer". Dogs can be trained to do a lot of things, so why shouldn't a fake "alert" on cue be one of their talents?
    Jerry
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 16,756 Senior Member
    In today's world of the perpetual encroachment of our constitutional rights, it now seems that K9's are somehow "deputized" and upon their "hit" on a vehicle, the occupants must then submit to a search of personal property and effects based upon what is now considered "probable cause" to conduct a search without warrant. Makes me wonder if the K9's in question took an Oath to become police officers or if the K9's can answer questions in a court of law - or, if their "testimony" (woof - woof) is valid as evidence. I would argue that K9's could "hit" a billfold of money that, unbeknownst to the now accused occupant, was previously used as drug money in prior transactions. I have much respect for these dogs and their handlers in SAR or finding possible IED's in a battlefield but here in the USA against citizens . . .? What say you?

    Did you just become aware of this? It's been the case for at least 30 years.......
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 11,624 Senior Member
    I used to be a dog handler for a drug dog. The dogs are very well trained to hit on drugs and their reliability is well documented and I mean recorded and documented and I mean historically with training program which is extremely well recorded and subjected to physical records. They do not hit on the handler, they hit on scent. They are trained only to hit on scent and the handler has no influence on the actions of the dog's "hitting" on drugs any more than a bird dog hitting on a covey. There is no way for the handler to force a false hit. I and we wore rubber gloves in training to prevent false alerts based on the handler. The dog's training and records are documented and their accuracy is subjected to court examinations. If the scent is there they'll alert, if not they won't. There is absolutely no way to influence a dog since they have nothing to gain from giving a false positive. I can't think of a single example of a drug seizure based on a false alert.

    There is a lot of SCOTUS and state court decisions relating to both dogs and to vehicle searches, which are subject to mobility issues (you can look it up.) I went through a lot of credibility of dog reliability and have testified under oath on such things. I would not nor never have falsified testimony.

    No cops I know or have known want to search a car if a dog doesn't hit, too many things to do othewise, and a LEO has better things to do than search a car when a dog doesn't hit on it and to manufacture probable cause. Dogs hit on scent. If there is no scent, there is no reason to search.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • 6EQUJ5 - WOW!6EQUJ5 - WOW! Banned Posts: 482 Member
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    Did you just become aware of this? It's been the case for at least 30 years.......

    And gun control laws have been around for decades, your point?
  • 6EQUJ5 - WOW!6EQUJ5 - WOW! Banned Posts: 482 Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    I used to be a dog handler for a drug dog. The dogs are very well trained to hit on drugs and their reliability is well documented and I mean recorded and documented and I mean historically with training program which is extremely well recorded and subjected to physical records. They do not hit on the handler, they hit on scent. They are trained only to hit on scent and the handler has no influence on the actions of the dog's "hitting" on drugs any more than a bird dog hitting on a covey. There is no way for the handler to force a false hit. I and we wore rubber gloves in training to prevent false alerts based on the handler. The dog's training and records are documented and their accuracy is subjected to court examinations. If the scent is there they'll alert, if not they won't. There is absolutely no way to influence a dog since they have nothing to gain from giving a false positive. I can't think of a single example of a drug seizure based on a false alert.

    There is a lot of SCOTUS and state court decisions relating to both dogs and to vehicle searches, which are subject to mobility issues (you can look it up.) I went through a lot of credibility of dog reliability and have testified under oath on such things. I would not nor never have falsified testimony.

    No cops I know or have known want to search a car if a dog doesn't hit, too many things to do othewise, and a LEO has better things to do than search a car when a dog doesn't hit on it and to manufacture probable cause. Dogs hit on scent. If there is no scent, there is no reason to search.

    It's not the dogs I have issues with. It's the cop who over steps his authority and claims a "hit" to bypass Fourth Amendment rights. We both know that a cop who wants to search a vehicle without warrant can and will claim a "hit" on a suspects vehicle to bypass the "inconvenience" of obtaining a proper warrant. As for probable cause, most people wouldn't even know what a "hit" is and it ends up being the cops word against the suspect in question - and we all know who's going to win that argument. In closing, I have no issue with dogs being used to find drugs after a warrant has been issued or in the event of an actual crime taking place. My issue is with corrupt cops who use these dogs to search persons and their effects during petty traffic stops or other such circumstances as a means to bypass our constitutional rights.
  • john9001john9001 Senior Member Posts: 668 Senior Member
    If the dogs can be trained to hit on drugs they can be trained to hit on "command".
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 16,756 Senior Member
    And gun control laws have been around for decades, your point?

    The "tone" of your post sounds as if it's something you just became aware of.....
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 11,624 Senior Member
    john9001 wrote: »
    If the dogs can be trained to hit on drugs they can be trained to hit on "command".

    A dog can be trained to do almost anything, but not everything. Training a dog takes a long time and that training makes a point to dog independence...you have to eliminate the handler's scent in order to avoid a false alert. Plus, the dog's reliability is recorded. You can't command a dog to hit without the source of his training being there any more than you can train a bird dog to point on command.

    BTW, if you have a search warrant, you don't necessarily need a dog.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • Dr. dbDr. db Senior Member Posts: 1,541 Senior Member
    Hmmm. It would seem to me that I could devastate K9 testimony. Bring a dog in that has been trained to hit on perfume or whatever. The dog can't say, "I wasn't trained that way." So it come down to officer credibility. A few cases of mis handling or demonstrations from an expert witness on how to get the dog to hit on what you want and the search is thrown out. That's my theory.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 27,288 Senior Member
    I might trust the dog operating without the handler being in close proximity, but I wouldn't trust the handler as far as I could throw him/her with an ICMB booster rocket stage. Any time I see film of the dog handler touching the vehicle, I just naturally assume the handler put some scent on the vehicle for the dog to hit on. If the scent is there, the dog will find it without 'prompting' from the handler.
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 11,624 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    I might trust the dog operating without the handler being in close proximity, but I wouldn't trust the handler as far as I could throw him/her with an ICMB booster rocket stage. Any time I see film of the dog handler touching the vehicle, I just naturally assume the handler put some scent on the vehicle for the dog to hit on. If the scent is there, the dog will find it without 'prompting' from the handler.

    You're making a wrong assumption. The dog has to be indicated where he is to search or he would wander around aimlessly but that doesn't mean the handler is planting evidence. Also, usually when a dog hits on a vehicle, there are drugs in that vehicle. At least there is scent in that vehicle of drugs. If the dog hit exactly on the spot the handler "touched" then I would be suspicious, too, but fact is I've never seen this. The dog searches usually beginning at the rear wheel well and goes forward around the car, paying special attention to where there is any kind of scent, like the doors. If he doesn't detect anything, he will go back in his crate. At least that's the way I did it.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • NCFUBARNCFUBAR Senior Member Posts: 4,324 Senior Member
    While it can happen I think if a K9 officer were to repeatedly do this the team's (officer & K9 both) recordvwould reflect "mistakes" or abuse and then the handler would have to answer for it.

    Handlers do have some input as to what is an "alert" and can abuse it but I just can't see it anymore than any other LEO abusing their authority.

    Side note maybe a week or so after 9/11 I was heading through a check point in Fayettenam and when I saw the dog I immediately told the first MP that I had been involved in range work and cleaning the previous day and while I had nothing in the vehicle there was a chance the dog would alert so we can just skip to the search. I handed him my paperwork and he said just sit tight and everything would be clear. They walked the dog around twice and he handed me back my paperwork. I told him glad we didn't have to go thru a search because I know the rear cargo area had major range exposure. He paused a second, leaned and said if "that" dog alerted we had bigger problems than any firearm. Turns out the EOD K9s had been run so hard that they had to rest them and that dog, while still a K9, was a cadaver dog and if he alerted I would have had way more explaining to do. He chuckled, said keep that close and have a nice day.
    “The further a society drifts from truth ... the more it will hate those who speak it."
    - George Orwell
  • 6EQUJ5 - WOW!6EQUJ5 - WOW! Banned Posts: 482 Member
    NCFUBAR wrote: »
    . . . while still a K9, was a cadaver dog and if he alerted I would have had way more explaining to do. He chuckled, said keep that close and have a nice day.

    Just imagine if you were a mortician or county coroners assistant who just got off work!? Ha!! Btw, . . ."Fayettenam." Haven't heard that term in awhile! Airborne?
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 11,624 Senior Member
    When I worked drugs, it was a common belief by dopers that Narcs used drugs. They couldn't understand why no one I knew ever used drugs. Point being, the dopers were making judgements on us based on their set of standards. If they had been narcs, they would without question have used drugs. They couldn't understand why, because the lure of the drug was so strong. In their environment, drug use was an ordinary act.

    Same thing here. A few people believe a cop would plant drugs to search a vehicle. This doesn't reflect at all on the cops but on those who believe cops doing something they might entertain themselves if they were a cop. Can't imagine an honest cop.

    My rule of thumb is this question: "If you were a cop, would YOU plant drugs to get PC for a vehicle search?" If the answer is yes, then you have a problem with honesty. If no, then why do you hold yourself as morally superior to someone you don't eve know?

    I'm quite sure some cops have planted evidence, and totally sure a lot of drug smugglers don't get caught. I never thought ALL citizens or even the majority were potential drug violators.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 5,486 Senior Member
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


  • horselipshorselips Senior Member Posts: 3,628 Senior Member
    I'm with the dog. If Officer K9 busts you, you're busted. Obey or get bit.
    Animals have often been given high honors and great responsibility. Roman Emperor Caligula contemplated nominating his favorite horse, Incitatus, to be an Imperial Consul, A USMC horse named Reckless earned 2 Purple Hearts and numerous decorations for her service during the Korean War, eventually reaching the rank of Staff Sergeant. The drum horses of the mounted bands of the Royal Horse Guards (The Life Guards and the Blues & Royals) are commissioned officers with the rank of Major in the British Army. Yes, they are saluted.

    And my little dog, Juliet, is an undeniable, irrefutable, proof of God.
  • 6EQUJ5 - WOW!6EQUJ5 - WOW! Banned Posts: 482 Member
    CaliFFL wrote: »

    Disgusting, absolutely disgusting. And people wonder why I distrust cops anymore.
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 11,624 Senior Member
    Disgusting, absolutely disgusting. And people wonder why I distrust cops anymore.

    I don't wonder why you don't trust cops any more. I figure it's pretty self-evident.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • 6EQUJ5 - WOW!6EQUJ5 - WOW! Banned Posts: 482 Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    I don't wonder why you don't trust cops any more. I figure it's pretty self-evident.

    And to that, I will agree.
  • shushshush Senior Member Posts: 6,259 Senior Member
    Disgusting............ And people wonder why I distrust cops anymore.

    English?
  • john9001john9001 Senior Member Posts: 668 Senior Member
    cobb county, when I went to Atlanta on business I was warned about cobb county cops.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 27,288 Senior Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    You're making a wrong assumption. The dog has to be indicated where he is to search or he would wander around aimlessly but that doesn't mean the handler is planting evidence. Also, usually when a dog hits on a vehicle, there are drugs in that vehicle. At least there is scent in that vehicle of drugs. If the dog hit exactly on the spot the handler "touched" then I would be suspicious, too, but fact is I've never seen this. The dog searches usually beginning at the rear wheel well and goes forward around the car, paying special attention to where there is any kind of scent, like the doors. If he doesn't detect anything, he will go back in his crate. At least that's the way I did it.

    City near me used to call the K-9 doper dog every time someone was pulled over...........for any reason or no reason at all. They had, and still have, a ticket quota system. They had two K-9 officers. Both were fired when it was found they were causing their dogs to alert on command, and the command was pretty hard to catch. The county K-9 officer was fired, too. He was sitting on the side of I-75 and got out of the car and shot through his own windshield. When the THP showed up to investigate, the K-9 officer learned the importance of 'policing up' one's fired brass! :roll2: He got busted for a false report and fired. They also found out that his K-9 couldn't smell a fresh pork chop tied around its neck.
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    Gene's buddies take their K-9's for a walk every morning- - - - -they just have to watch out for speeding bass boats so they don't get run over!
    :jester:
    Jerry
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 11,624 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    City near me used to call the K-9 doper dog every time someone was pulled over...........for any reason or no reason at all. They had, and still have, a ticket quota system. They had two K-9 officers. Both were fired when it was found they were causing their dogs to alert on command, and the command was pretty hard to catch. The county K-9 officer was fired, too. He was sitting on the side of I-75 and got out of the car and shot through his own windshield. When the THP showed up to investigate, the K-9 officer learned the importance of 'policing up' one's fired brass! :roll2: He got busted for a false report and fired. They also found out that his K-9 couldn't smell a fresh pork chop tied around its neck.

    Where did this happen? It should have made national news.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • 6EQUJ5 - WOW!6EQUJ5 - WOW! Banned Posts: 482 Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    Where did this happen? It should have made national news.

    "Should have made national news"??? Reminds me of an old movie where the protagonist, wounded and bleeding, rushes to the news station at the very last minute and delivers the damming conspiracy evidence to a lowly "journalist" to air on prime time later that night. Ha! (chuckle) Heh, heh. . . . (I can't stop laughing. . .sorry)

    Do you honestly believe the news would air such a story? Come on Gene.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 27,288 Senior Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    Where did this happen? It should have made national news.

    Why would it make national news? It's a small town and they keep the lid on such shenanigans. They're also Democrat majority and can clamp a lid on that kind of stuff, and do with regularity.

    The county mounty that shot his own car DID make the news in Chattanooga, but only because the THP was involved. They couldn't squelch the THP.
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 11,624 Senior Member
    Where did this happen with the two K-9 dogs giving false alerts? Name of the town, please. A small town with two K-9s is a bit unusual. And Democrats are far more hostile to LEOs.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 5,486 Senior Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    Where did this happen? It should have made national news.

    Police misdeeds are so rampant nation wide, only questionable killings make the national news.

    You simply refuse to believe it when I post the links here. Your typical comment is "one bad apple" even when it's an entire department, along with DAs and judges.

    A couple examples that didn't make national news:

    The Houston cop that molested a 14 year old on campus and received probation and doesn't have to register as a sex offender. Example of systemic failure.

    Up to a dozen Oakland cops passing around an underage girl. Example of the whole damn barrel.

    They get fired, but rarely prosecuted.
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 11,624 Senior Member
    The reason it would make news is because every historical case made by these two officers would have been thrown out.

    It wouldn't lead, if true, but it would be on the news.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
This discussion has been closed.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement