Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NPR)   The latest rights in jeopardy at the Supreme Court: whether police can take a trained drug-detection dog up to a house to smell for drugs inside, and if the dog alerts, use that to justify a search of the home   (npr.org) divider line 340
    More: Scary, Florida Supreme Court, detection dog, Justice Antonin Scalia, skateboarding dog, Alan Diaz, supreme court rules, dogs, U.S. Supreme Court  
•       •       •

7324 clicks; posted to Main » on 31 Oct 2012 at 2:38 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



340 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-31 02:40:55 PM  
Um... no? Does "no" work for you?
 
2012-10-31 02:40:59 PM  
This should get the terrifying tag, if one existed
 
2012-10-31 02:41:09 PM  
"Ve have vays of making you talk ... old ... man"
 
2012-10-31 02:41:22 PM  
They'll rule 5-4 in favor of cops.
 
2012-10-31 02:41:29 PM  
Well, no. If a policeman does not have a search warrant, it would be illegal for him even to enter the property (assuming there is a yard / fence).

Apartment / condo owners may be SOL tho.
 
2012-10-31 02:41:58 PM  
Legal Loophole:

www.signswithanattitude.com
 
2012-10-31 02:42:50 PM  
I'm fine with this, but only if the dogs are capable of clearly saying "I am indeed barking because I smell drugs and not because you are telling me to."
 
2012-10-31 02:43:32 PM  

umad: I'm fine with this, but only if the dogs are capable of clearly saying "I am indeed barking because I smell drugs and not because you are telling me to."


Thank you for your support, citizen.
 
2012-10-31 02:43:44 PM  
Replace drug-sniffing dog with fiber-optic camera...

Is there still room for debate?
 
2012-10-31 02:44:03 PM  
FTA: Police would be free "to walk up and down suburban neighborhoods, go up to each door, and see if the dog alerts to contraband." And they could do the same thing in apartment houses, checking out each apartment door "based on nothing, or on an anonymous tip, or because that's what they want to do that day."

That's just not a realistic scenario, according to the state. "They have far too many things to do than to waste their time with that sort of indiscriminate searching," says Garre.


So "Please let us have this power and we PROMISE we'll be good and NEVER, EVER abuse it" is a convincing argument now, is it?
 
2012-10-31 02:44:21 PM  
FAt what point does your property begin? Say I have a 100ft driveway with no gate, does an LEO have the right to drive up that without a warrant to get to my house?
 
2012-10-31 02:45:06 PM  

Burr: FAt what point does your property begin?


*sigh*
 
2012-10-31 02:45:30 PM  
The police were doing nothing more than the postman or the trick-or-treater, says lawyer Gregory Garre, representing Florida. The police "did the same thing that millions of Americans will do on Halloween night, which is walk up to the front steps, knock on the door, and while they were there, they took in the air and the dog alerted to the smell of illegal narcotics."

That is odd, the UPS Guy, FedEx Guy, UPSP Guy, and Trick or Treaters I get, never have drug dogs with them.
 
2012-10-31 02:45:39 PM  
I must say, as a conservative, it's quite sad that it's hard to think of any of amendments 1 to 10 in the bill of rights that haven't been seriously compromised by failed attempts to sacrifice them in a futile attempt to win the "war on drugs". Maybe we should just give up "cruel and unusual punishment" when dealing with drug dealers. Actually, if you're a capitalist, it's hard to blame the dealer. I'm shifting to the libertarian view: Don't confiscate anybody else's (tax) money to pay for drug user's care, and just legalize the whole thing. Let the drug users kill themselves off. That tends to be what happens, ultimate, anyway, isn't it?
 
2012-10-31 02:45:49 PM  
I think it was on Fark where someone posted some stats on how accurate a dog's nose is and then basically noted the disparity of a drug sniffing dog's accuracy in some article, where the dog had around a 35% detection rate.

Basically, in so many words, he summed it up that the police officer will make the dog report a false alert and use that as an excuse.

I say ban drug sniffing dogs entirely. Bomb sniffing dogs I am okay with.
 
2012-10-31 02:46:28 PM  
Here comes big brother and he wants your drugs.

/war on drugs my ass
//we did better in 'nam
 
2012-10-31 02:46:43 PM  

King Something: They'll rule 5-4 in favor of cops.


Scalia will write the majority opinion.

/book it done
 
2012-10-31 02:47:01 PM  

Lord_Dubu: Replace drug-sniffing dog with fiber-optic camera...

Is there still room for debate?


Replace fiber optic camera with some sort of small remote control surveillance helicopter that can detect smells.....
 
2012-10-31 02:47:23 PM  

ciberido: FTA: Police would be free "to walk up and down suburban neighborhoods, go up to each door, and see if the dog alerts to contraband." And they could do the same thing in apartment houses, checking out each apartment door "based on nothing, or on an anonymous tip, or because that's what they want to do that day."

That's just not a realistic scenario, according to the state. "They have far too many things to do than to waste their time with that sort of indiscriminate searching," says Garre.

So "Please let us have this power and we PROMISE we'll be good and NEVER, EVER abuse it" is a convincing argument now, is it?


It's not even that. It's "Let us have this power, we won't have time to abuse it anyway!"
 
2012-10-31 02:47:28 PM  
private property is a myth. get it?
 
2012-10-31 02:47:45 PM  

busy chillin': umad: I'm fine with this, but only if the dogs are capable of clearly saying "I am indeed barking because I smell drugs and not because you are telling me to."

Thank you for your support, citizen.


You either misread my post or I want a dog like yours.
 
2012-10-31 02:47:46 PM  
I hope this falls in line with Kyllo v. United States, but I have my doubts.
 
2012-10-31 02:47:46 PM  

gregscott: I must say, as a conservative, it's quite sad that it's hard to think of any of amendments 1 to 10 in the bill of rights that haven't been seriously compromised by failed attempts to sacrifice them in a futile attempt to win the "war on drugs". Maybe we should just give up "cruel and unusual punishment" when dealing with drug dealers. Actually, if you're a capitalist, it's hard to blame the dealer. I'm shifting to the libertarian view: Don't confiscate anybody else's (tax) money to pay for drug user's care, and just legalize the whole thing. Let the drug users kill themselves off. That tends to be what happens, ultimate, anyway, isn't it?


Until the drug user gets sent to the ER and the county/hospital have to eat the cost of care since he probably doesn't have insurance.
 
2012-10-31 02:48:09 PM  
I am pretty sure "The dog told me to" was used by the Son of Sam also
 
2012-10-31 02:48:39 PM  

Robo Beat: King Something: They'll rule 5-4 in favor of cops.

Scalia will write the majority opinion.

/book it done


I thought Roberts was the douche of the bunch.
 
2012-10-31 02:48:46 PM  
This indeed is scary. So easy to manipulate. Reminds me of V for Vendetta, driving down the street listening to everyone's conversations.
 
2012-10-31 02:49:20 PM  
This will really cut down on paperwork. Now any time cops want to search a house for any reason, they don't have to make shiat up to tell to a judge for a warrant. They just have to tell Rover to go bark at it. How convenient.
 
2012-10-31 02:49:31 PM  

Altman: Well, no. If a policeman does not have a search warrant, it would be illegal for him even to enter the property (assuming there is a yard / fence).

Apartment / condo owners may be SOL tho.


House, apartment, or condo, rented or owned, it makes no difference. Your private residence is your private residence. A policeman may only enter a residence and search it without a warrant if he has sufficient cause to believe that a crime is currently being committed. I agree with others that it is probable that the Court will come down 5-4 in the cops' favor on this one. The conservative Justices don't seem to care much for any of the Bill of Rights but the second amendment. Personal liberties are for pussies.
 
2012-10-31 02:50:12 PM  

redmid17: gregscott: I must say, as a conservative, it's quite sad that it's hard to think of any of amendments 1 to 10 in the bill of rights that haven't been seriously compromised by failed attempts to sacrifice them in a futile attempt to win the "war on drugs". Maybe we should just give up "cruel and unusual punishment" when dealing with drug dealers. Actually, if you're a capitalist, it's hard to blame the dealer. I'm shifting to the libertarian view: Don't confiscate anybody else's (tax) money to pay for drug user's care, and just legalize the whole thing. Let the drug users kill themselves off. That tends to be what happens, ultimate, anyway, isn't it?

Until the drug user gets sent to the ER and the county/hospital have to eat the cost of care since he probably doesn't have insurance.


Illegal search and seizure are ok so long as you don't have to pay for anything, huh? Nevermind the cost of frivolous law enforcement escapades.
 
2012-10-31 02:50:20 PM  
On our way back from the most recent trip to Jamaica, our bags came back to us sealed with plastic zipper locks that had tags marked "K-9" on them. That was pretty funny.

/It was a false positive
 
2012-10-31 02:50:22 PM  
Ya know, its astounding how far we have slid backwards into the shiatter in the last 30 years.

People are farking stupid for putting up with this.
 
2012-10-31 02:50:28 PM  

umad: busy chillin': umad: I'm fine with this, but only if the dogs are capable of clearly saying "I am indeed barking because I smell drugs and not because you are telling me to."

Thank you for your support, citizen.

You either misread my post or I want a dog like yours.


okay...I did read it wrong..

I get it....dogs can't talk.

----
Like, some guy on the internet says you can't talk clearly, Scoob.
Ruh roh, Shaggy.

I guess he has a point.

/I have no idea why
//zoinks
 
2012-10-31 02:50:34 PM  
Wow...this is scary. It will depend if the dog is considered equipment or an officer. As an officer it can't just rollup on a house and poke around, but if they have a reason to be there they can use plain view to search if they detect something with their senses.

If equipment the officer would need to have probable cause to use it.

Either way I don't like this.
 
2012-10-31 02:50:37 PM  
FARK that!


Too easy to MAKE the dog give a false alert.

This shiat should be thrown the fark out with extreme prejudice.
 
2012-10-31 02:50:47 PM  
Sorry about that massive band of Red Devil lye I spread around my house officer. It's to keep the bugs out.
 
2012-10-31 02:51:01 PM  
So let me get this straight:

Florida contends, however, that using drug-detection dogs is not analogous to technology because there is no constitutional right to possess contraband

That's just not a realistic scenario, according to the state. "They have far too many things to do than to waste their time with that sort of indiscriminate searching," says Garre.

Florida asserts that there is a fundamental difference between a dog and a technological device. "We recognize that there are limits to one's God-given senses,"


Dogs are less accurate, the constitution does not say "its okay to have contraband" and if we allow this, don't worry, we're too busy to abuse it. Seems legit.
 
2012-10-31 02:51:09 PM  

Robo Beat: King Something: They'll rule 5-4 in favor of cops.

Scalia will write the majority opinion.

/book it done


Scalia delivered the majority opinion in a case like this that took the side of the defendant.

Kyllo v. United States
 
2012-10-31 02:51:27 PM  

gregscott: Let the drug users kill themselves off. That tends to be what happens, ultimate, anyway, isn't it?


Right, just like most people who use alcohol eventually kill themselves off.
 
2012-10-31 02:51:39 PM  
What if they replaced "drug sniffing dog" with "nude lady?"
 
2012-10-31 02:51:39 PM  
Why not just repeal the Bill of Rights and be done with it?
 
2012-10-31 02:51:45 PM  

elffster: Ya know, its astounding how far we have slid backwards into the shiatter in the last 30 years.

People are farking stupid for putting up with this.


Freedom is scary.
 
2012-10-31 02:52:14 PM  
1. I don't see where a dog is any different than any other tool or scanner. A drug dog is trained to alert on drug smells. A metal detector is programmed to beep when it finds metal. A thermal scanner is programmed to detect heat. I fail to see the difference. If a thermal scan is a violation of the expectation of privacy, why isn't a dog?

SpaceButler: It's not even that. It's "Let us have this power, we won't have time to abuse it anyway!"


2. That. The government shouldn't be given power that they just double pinky-swear not to ever use. They'll get around to it.
 
2012-10-31 02:52:21 PM  

doyner: redmid17: gregscott: I must say, as a conservative, it's quite sad that it's hard to think of any of amendments 1 to 10 in the bill of rights that haven't been seriously compromised by failed attempts to sacrifice them in a futile attempt to win the "war on drugs". Maybe we should just give up "cruel and unusual punishment" when dealing with drug dealers. Actually, if you're a capitalist, it's hard to blame the dealer. I'm shifting to the libertarian view: Don't confiscate anybody else's (tax) money to pay for drug user's care, and just legalize the whole thing. Let the drug users kill themselves off. That tends to be what happens, ultimate, anyway, isn't it?

Until the drug user gets sent to the ER and the county/hospital have to eat the cost of care since he probably doesn't have insurance.

Illegal search and seizure are ok so long as you don't have to pay for anything, huh? Nevermind the cost of frivolous law enforcement escapades.


That's not what I said. If I had my druthers, the War on Drugs wouldn't exist in any recognizable shape or form.
 
2012-10-31 02:52:33 PM  

umad: I'm fine with this, but only if the dogs are capable of clearly saying "I am indeed barking because I smell drugs and not because you are telling me to."


That's my biggest issue... Who is holding the handlers accountable for their track record? It's easy to give a dog a cue to signal a false alert. In fact, these dogs are so trained to play this game that they can learn to read your UNCONSCIOUS cues that you want them to indicate a hit.

So who is going to track the effectiveness of those teams and hold them accountable for poor performance?
 
2012-10-31 02:52:48 PM  
gossip-girl-forum.3151444.n2.nabble.com

/witty add-ons elude me, must go back to work
 
2012-10-31 02:53:11 PM  
There are at least two issues: entrance onto the property without PC or even reasonable suspicion; and two, proof of what the dog is alerting to before entry. What is the reasonable expectation of privacy? The court has previously ruled that the police could not not use infrared imaging, but simple viewing from a public street or the air - here come the drones - is permissible.

Scalia will be for it and so to will Thomas; I don't think you can predict the others.
 
2012-10-31 02:53:41 PM  

redmid17: Until the drug user gets sent to the ER and the county/hospital have to eat the cost of care since he probably doesn't have insurance.


Which costs more, treating someone for O.D.ing (which may occur multiple times, but won't very many times) or long term care for someone as they grow old?
 
2012-10-31 02:53:56 PM  

Altman: Well, no. If a policeman does not have a search warrant, it would be illegal for him even to enter the property (assuming there is a yard / fence).

Apartment / condo owners may be SOL tho.


the case is about using the dog's to alert the cops that drugs are inside in order to establish the probable cause necessary to get a warrant. they brought the dog to the front of the house, after receiving a tip that drugs were inside. then the dog indicated that it noticed drugs. then cops got a warrant.

in this case, they had a search warrant. the issue is whether it was properly granted. 

FTA:

A month later, police officers took Franky to the house and walked him up to the front porch. When the dog alerted for drugs, the police got a warrant, found marijuana growing inside and arrested Jardines.
 
2012-10-31 02:53:59 PM  
It's astonishing that people have a problem with this. Don't have illegal drugs in your house, and the dog won't ID on them, and the police won't come in. For fark's sake, the way people biatch about new ways cops come up with to catch criminals, I must be the only one on the planet who isn't selling drugs, producing child porn, and stealing cars.
 
2012-10-31 02:54:16 PM  
*buys a bag of shiat weed*
*starts throwing it in all the neighbors yards*
 
Displayed 50 of 340 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report