There have already been court cases which demonstrate yuge—completely unacceptable—error rates for these dogs, and the courts thus far have said that it doesn't even matter. A dog can have a 75% "false positive" rate and it's utterly irrelevant.
So this is another example of courts "interpreting" the Constitution in such a way that State power is effectively unlimited. It makes a total mockery of the concept of probable cause—animals are being used to trample the rights of people.
In theory, we live in a free country, but in practice—where the rubber hits the road—it's about as de facto totalitarian as you can get...
Yes, we live in a country where courts allow dogs to issue search warrants
From the definition of “probable”, if a dog has more than 50% false positives, then it should be decertified.
The side of my BMW was all gouged up from a K9. The kind, honorable hero police officer pointed at the side of my car, and next thing I knew there was a Belgian Malinois on it like I spilled steak juice from the grill all over it.
There was no cause, no drugs and no odor. The dog got down and no one said a thing about it. Well, except my friends, family, mechanic and everyone I told the story too.
Not a scratch on it except the canine-digital ASSAULT that was bravely bestowed upon it.
I’m told be many that I should be honored to carry such a badge, and that the dog was sure to receive the same award that a human would have received for saving 100 lives.