Posted on 07/06/2004 11:41:28 AM PDT by Wolfie
Drug-Search Law Worries Some Officers
Private Dog Handlers Will Be Able To Sniff Out Drugs For Businesses
FAYETTEVILLE -- Some North Carolina police officers say they're concerned about a new state law that allows private dog handlers to conduct drug searches for businesses.
The law, which the legislature approved last year and takes effect in October, lets private dog handlers register with the state and establish a commercial detection service.
Supporters of the new law say that the private services can help employers maintain a drug-free workplace, but critics say that only sworn officers should be allowed to search for drugs because of legal issues.
"This is a bad idea," said Eldon Presnell, the president of the United States Canine Association for North and South Carolina. Presnell, a dog handler with the Greensboro Police Department, said that his association wants the law repealed.
Police are concerned, Presnell said, because the law was designed for people other than law-enforcement officers and could jeopardize the chain of custody by eliminating police from drug searches.
State officials have been developing requirements for private dog handlers. Proposed rules require those who apply to be dog handlers to show that they are competent in drug-detection training and handling, including basic obedience, dog safety, and the legality of searches and identifying illegal drugs.
The handlers must be certified by a state-approved association and registered with the Drug Enforcement Administration. Criminal-background and fingerprint checks will be done. The applicant must also register to handle drugs for training.
Richard Rogers, a retired police officer and a police-dog trainer who lives in Harnett County, said that the law could infringe on people's rights.
Police must have probable cause to conduct searches, but the law would let private companies and individuals to do what officers could not.
"We have got to adhere to the Fourth Amendment," said Sgt. Tim Loughman of the Cumberland County Sheriff's Office police-dog unit. "There are certain things that we as police officers must obey."
Loughman said that some dog-training associations will certify handlers only if they are police officers. He said that dog handlers must understand the details of search and seizure to eliminate problems if a case goes to court.
Other officers have taken a neutral stance.
"I don't know whether it will be good or not," said Herman Dunn, an investigator and dog handler for the Bladen County Sheriff's Office. "I guess we would have to see after a trial how it would go."
Citizens Arrest! Citizens Arrest!!
The police union wants to maintain their monopoly on the War on (Some) Drugs.
"Police must have probable cause to conduct searches, but the law would let private companies and individuals to do what officers could not.....
BUT:
"Loughman said that some dog-training associations will certify handlers only if they are police officers....
So if these companies actually hired off-duty police officers, would they need probable cause to conduct searches or not?
In order to avoid a big mess and years of litigation, I suggest rethinking the whole idea.
Very simple; either don't take drugs to work, or don't work in a place where they check for them.
The cops don't want to give up their chance to take their cut before the drugs are turned in as evidence.
A business OWNER (belongs to him - not to the state) can legally do what is necessary to maintain his business's style and reputation.
If you do not like it - don't work there.
The police are USELESS in preventing crime - that isn't their job and they gladly tell you that.
Just like smoking - it is none of the gestapo's concern if a business wants to allow smoking - if you don't like smoke, stay the hell away. bars & restauranvces - ditto. you don't like it - DO NOT GO!
"Police are concerned, Presnell said, because the law was designed for people other than law-enforcement officers and could jeopardize the chain of custody by eliminating police from drug searches."
Man these guys just don't want any of their power taken away or threatened. Perhaps the companies that might employ these handlers don't want the police involved. Perhaps they just want to keep a drug free work place but are not interested in prosecuted people. So if that is the case there is no chain of custody issues to deal with.
That's what the police really can't stand. Could cause their numbers, and their opportunities at forfeiture, go down.
Exactly.
Exactly! If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. The government is only here to help! (/sarcasm off)
Who said anythng about the government?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.