But this is exactly what they say about Ferguson.
This is why these must be scrutinized on a case by case basis. Sometimes the cops are right. Sometimes they are thugs. If I’m a twenty something in a beat up car and I smoke pot on a fairly regular basis, I should not be surprised if the cops seem suspicious and may want to pursue some search. If I’m a middle aged guy going home from a white or gray collar job in my mid-life crisis Camaro, it would be ridiculously improbable that the cops weould insist on a search. If I look nervous it’s because I gotta explain to my wife/girlfriend why I’m late.
“The fact is, most of the time the cops actually do have reasonable doubt. How many of that gob of money was taken from people that WERE involved in drugs?”
This comment reveals a common misunderstanding of the concept of probable cause (which is what you really mean by “reasonable doubt”, I think). Probable cause is not reasonable if it is not specific to the case at hand. Saying that “many people who carry lots of cash are drugs dealers, and you are carrying lots of cash” just doesn’t meet the definition, because it is too non-specific.
Now, if the cop knew that $18,275 in five dollar bills had recently been robbed from a bank nearby, and he stopped a car that was carrying $18,275 in five dollar bills, that would be probable cause, as it could be reasonably viewed as evidence linked to a specific criminal act. Just a random large amount of money could come from any number of sources, and therefore can’t be evidence for any specific criminal act.
Yep.
But then the forced political correct irrationality comes forth and we end up with old ladies searched at airports but not young male Muslims because it must all be balanced and equal and random.