Replies

Not too bad, TKD, except for the reason cops concentrate on drugs.

Forfeiture is an incentive, of course. But the real reason cops work so hard at drug enforcement is because they believe the country, to quote some experts, is "awash in drugs".

Cops don't like to be losing that (or any) battle. Enforcement is their sworn duty! Change the law and see if cops care anymore. But since that isn't happening, they are constantly trying new techniques and approaches to become more effective in the drug war, and that's why I think there's a concentration on drug enforcement by law enforcement. They have to keep trying harder.

You are right. Legislatures keep passing tougher laws, and drug enforcement keeps receiving more money. What other results can you expect? It's a formula for violating our rights, especially considering the advent of wall-piercing imaging and remote listening devices.

Sadly, the WoD still trumps most rational arguments, even when fundamental Constitutional Rights are at stake.

My position on drugs: If the drug is fairly innocuous, leave it alone, not a problem. If it's a killer drug, like meth or heroin, let the junkies choose their own destruction. When opium and cocaine were available at the local pharmacy, we had a dramatically lower addiction rate. Tougher and tougher laws against crack cocaine, yet the area I live in is awash in the stuff. Black tar heroin is being sold to teenyboppers in many cities for $10 a hit. The WoD is wildly counterproductive, but this truth is also counterintuitive to so many 'right thinking' Americans.

I understand what you are saying but the issue we were talking about is whether the dogs police use on the highway are there for sniffing out bombs and things like that as well as drugs. The answer is that in most all of the cases these dogs are drug dogs who only detect drugs. I suggest that the main reason why there are many more drug dogs than bomb dogs is that the money for law enforcement is in drugs.

Our local law enforcement seize incredible amounts of cash, vehicles, and other assets in their drug enforcement efforts. Most of this money is split between the prosecutors and the law enforcement agencies aiding in the arrests. Over a certain amount, a small portion goes to the state. The money law enforcement and prosecutors take in these efforts has become very important to them. At least here our prosecutors and law enforcement already have state and county budgets along with state and federal grants. The only stipulation with the forfeiture funds is that they spend it for law enforcement or prosecutorial purposes, and in real life this can mean a lot. I know all of our prosecutors drive "company cars" that were either seized or paid for by seized assets, their cell phones and memberships to the gym are paid for out of these funds, their lavish all expense paid continuing legal education trips are paid for out of these funds, and so on. It also pays for a lot of fancy equipment. It pays for expert witnesses and other witnesses to be flown in from all over the country and put up in hotels. It is used for bonuses and in a round about way for salary increases because the prosecutors can negotiate deals with the county where their people all get raises in exchange for not increasing their budget in some other area where they can just use the drug money to cover their needs. And in fact, the county employees at the prosecutors office where I live are paid more than the other county employees with similar jobs and time in service.

Overall these asset forfeiture funds are extremely important to them and the main way they keep the money rolling in is to stay out in numbers pulling people over from out of state and running drug dogs around their cars. The drug dogs make them a fortune. Bomb dogs wouldn't do that for them, so I wouldn't expect them to go out of their way purchasing, training, and keeping these dogs on hand. There's no money in it for them. Asset forfeiture is not the only reason for working so hard at drug enforcement, but in a place like where I live where small town police and prosecutors will generally do at least several hundred thousand or better than a million a year in asset forfeitures total, it's a huge incentive.

One thing I didn't point out before in explaining why the dogs aren't trained to smell explosives as well as drugs is that besides the fact that you can't expect a dog to learn to detect more than a few items well, you would also run into probable cause problems if the drug dogs would also alert to explosives. For instance, if the drug dog would alert to gun powder or gun powder residue, when the dog alerts the offer could assume there is a good chance there are either drugs or firearms in the car. Since it is not illegal to carry an unloaded firearm that may have burnt powder residue on it or even a loaded firearm while on a journey, at least in my state, I would think an officer would not then have probable cause search the vehicle for illegal contraband, because the dogs could have just as easily been alerting to something perfectly legal. They'd need separate dogs for those separate purposes.