[Joe 6-pack]

WOOOF!

The Doggie Ping list is for FReepers who would like to be notified of threads relating to all things canid. If you would like to join the Doggie Ping Pack (or be unleashed from it), FReemail me.

[headstamp 2]

Who gets to say the dog is in fact “alerting”?

[Kevmo]

Yuh, huh... in a previous SCOTUS case they said it was okay that these dogs only get it right 1/4 of the time.

[Revel]

The supreme is constantly becoming more and more proficient at destroying the US constitution. I have ZERO Respect for them.

[DesertRhino]

The problem aint the dog and its ability. It’s that the cop can say “the dog indicated,,,”. The cop can say that anytime, and nobody can prove differently. The dog can’t argue the point.

This is garbage law.

[philman_36]

Oh, good! Now everyone gets to go through a search because our money has been contaminated with cocaine and dogs alert on it!

Somebody alert the canine unit the next time Kagan goes out with cash on her person.

[varyouga]

How do you even know it's the same dog? Unless identifying marks are seen on video during the search, there's no way.

The cops could just take an uncertified mutt that is known to make false alerts and plant a package. Claim that the certified dog was used. Then the state can seize the victim's property.

It also wouldn't be hard to teach a certified dog to alert whenever a certain hand gesture or sound is made.

Dogs are pretty much our servants. They are NOT objective witnesses by any standard.

[Epsdude]

“Spot, speak”, he whispered to his dog.

The dog complied and barked viciously at the door.

“M’am, we’re going to have to search your house; our warrent has been issued by Spot.”

The cop whispered to Spot, “Good dog” as they tore apart the house.

And that is the story of how the fourth amendment became of non-effect.

[Tau Food]

Maybe the courts should decide that the search is illegal only in those cases where the dog refuses to clearly testify as to how he determined what he determined.