LOL - Now you just prove yourself to be unreliable; "probable cause" is perhaps THE most misused phrase/idea in LEOdom/Judiciarydom. The Constitution requires that WARRANTS [for search or seizure], and not arrests, be based on 'probable cause'... IOW, a straight reading of the 4th amendment makes a huge portion of what the police do suspect, if not outright invalid.
Even though he's talking about the 5th here, there is some overlap to the 4th: Why You Should Never Talk to the Cops
Oh, by the way, this guy DOES have one of those JDs you sou vaunt.
Perhaps you should be more concentrated on eliminating the "us vs. them" mentality that cops have for us mere civilians/peons. It is actually quite ironic that the police were AGAINST having to enforce traffic laws; why? "Because it will fundamentally change the relationship between the officer and the citizen to that of an adversar[ial relationship]."
You are just rambling now. The 4th Amendment requires the same standard for both arrests and warrants. You are simply twisting the Amendment now into something that is unrecognizable and incomprehensible. You think you are a law unto yourself. You think you can make up the rules as you go along. You think you that rules don't apply to you. Of course, we both know what you are doing is nothing more than internet bluster, so it really doesn't matter anyway.