Creative Answers to "May I search your ..."
- Thread starter Jeff Thomas
- Start date
Jeff White/Jeff Thomas...
Thanks to you both - in these times, it is important that when I give advice (grandson, in this case), I do it from a reasonably knowing perspective. It's unfortunate that we can't be all-knowing today - more things to keep up with than ever - but that's the power of the Internet... more "voice of experience " available to those who seek it.
I truly appreciate your replies. Thanks.
-Andy
Thanks to you both - in these times, it is important that when I give advice (grandson, in this case), I do it from a reasonably knowing perspective. It's unfortunate that we can't be all-knowing today - more things to keep up with than ever - but that's the power of the Internet... more "voice of experience " available to those who seek it.
I truly appreciate your replies. Thanks.
-Andy
MrMisanthrope
New member
Peh. Since it can be mathmatically proven that NO-ONE exists, the last reason is specious.... 
And the next-to-last one is rediculous considering what I HAVE brought into secure areas under the nose of security when "testing" Mall Ninjas at airports for the FAA... :barf:
OTOH to buy beer ... now THAT's a good reason!
And the next-to-last one is rediculous considering what I HAVE brought into secure areas under the nose of security when "testing" Mall Ninjas at airports for the FAA... :barf:
OTOH to buy beer ... now THAT's a good reason!
See my gray hair.
Don't write cheques.
Actually, it's a violation (in almost all cases) of the merchant deposit agreement that businesses sign with their banks for credit card service to ask for ID when purchasing goods with a credit card.
Innocent until proven guilty.
Am I not standing before you?
Justin Moore,
I'm going to have to search for the cite, but the U.S. Supreme Court did find roadside DUI/DWI checkpoints passed Constitutional muster. It must have required some tortured logic to find that a random stop without any PC gave sufficient grounds to haul someone from his vehicle and give him the choice of (a) a field sobriety test/breathalyzer, or (b) the better part of a night in jail for refusing.
Oh, and things are getting better. If you've had a beer and are stopped by the police, you'd better slide your licence between the glass and the weatherstripping. If you roll down your window, you may find the cop thrusting a strange looking device into your face: a "passive" alcohol sensor. This device won't tell him how much you've had to drink, or even whether it's you or someone else in your car who has been drinking. It will tell him someone was drinking something, and allow him to run you through the wringer.
Join your local chapter of Drunk Drivers Against Mothers (DDAM) today!!!
I'm going to have to search for the cite, but the U.S. Supreme Court did find roadside DUI/DWI checkpoints passed Constitutional muster. It must have required some tortured logic to find that a random stop without any PC gave sufficient grounds to haul someone from his vehicle and give him the choice of (a) a field sobriety test/breathalyzer, or (b) the better part of a night in jail for refusing.
Oh, and things are getting better. If you've had a beer and are stopped by the police, you'd better slide your licence between the glass and the weatherstripping. If you roll down your window, you may find the cop thrusting a strange looking device into your face: a "passive" alcohol sensor. This device won't tell him how much you've had to drink, or even whether it's you or someone else in your car who has been drinking. It will tell him someone was drinking something, and allow him to run you through the wringer.
Join your local chapter of Drunk Drivers Against Mothers (DDAM) today!!!
Shooter 973
New member
How about saying that you want to search his patrol car if he searches your car. After all you own his patrol car as a tax paying citizen.
Jeff,
Well said. In my state we have similar laws/policies about bringing K9's out. Problem is that in most cases the K9 unit is more than a few minutes away and then as you know it looks more and more like a detention if you don't let the subject go.
For those who would reply to my asking them if I can search their car with some smart a$$ remark, I say you've just given me a lot more reason to look at you harder.
If you don't want to consent to a voluntary vehicle search, don't, just say no in a polite way. Treat the officer as you would want to be treated and all should be well in the world. Act like an Bevis and you'll be treated like one.
FWIW - I encourage everyone to never voluntarily give consent to a search.
Anyway that's my opinion.
B.
Well said. In my state we have similar laws/policies about bringing K9's out. Problem is that in most cases the K9 unit is more than a few minutes away and then as you know it looks more and more like a detention if you don't let the subject go.
For those who would reply to my asking them if I can search their car with some smart a$$ remark, I say you've just given me a lot more reason to look at you harder.
If you don't want to consent to a voluntary vehicle search, don't, just say no in a polite way. Treat the officer as you would want to be treated and all should be well in the world. Act like an Bevis and you'll be treated like one.
FWIW - I encourage everyone to never voluntarily give consent to a search.
Anyway that's my opinion.
B.
may I search?
One of the best I ever heard was a fisherman who was asked by a Coast Guard "person" if he had any weapons on board.
He said, "Why, am I going to need one?"
You all might be just jesting, but I consider this whole search issue to be the exertion of police state policy. Catch me speeding, give me a speeding ticket. Fair enough. BUT THAT'S ALL.
I have seen enough crooked cops doing enough extra-legal stuff that I don't trust any of them. Why should I? If the LEO can't presume my innocence, why should I presume his?
I got the flame proof spam control turned on now, you betcha!
Grizz
PS: I know there must be honest hard working LEOs out there, I just don't know any. If you are straight and using your authority to corral criminals, you have my sincere thanks.
One of the best I ever heard was a fisherman who was asked by a Coast Guard "person" if he had any weapons on board.
He said, "Why, am I going to need one?"
You all might be just jesting, but I consider this whole search issue to be the exertion of police state policy. Catch me speeding, give me a speeding ticket. Fair enough. BUT THAT'S ALL.
I have seen enough crooked cops doing enough extra-legal stuff that I don't trust any of them. Why should I? If the LEO can't presume my innocence, why should I presume his?
I got the flame proof spam control turned on now, you betcha!
Grizz
PS: I know there must be honest hard working LEOs out there, I just don't know any. If you are straight and using your authority to corral criminals, you have my sincere thanks.
Last edited:
No Dice
Sory folks, but this stuff only works with good men serving as officers of the law. However, in my younger years I have run into maybe 3 of these, and atleast 25 total jerks playing cop while satisfying their juvenile longing for power and retrobution for having been bullied on the schoolyard so many years back.
From age 16 i had a shiny Blue Integra on chrome rims, and in just about every town id go to, the assumption was i was a drug dealer. I routinely was pulled over, and pulled out of the car (for standing out in most cases) as my car was searched. Shut up was what most cops said to me, and not much else. Some were discouraged by not finding weapons to the point that they slapped on charges of speeding and such.
Ive had the old "I know you have a gun in here, where is it!" and on more than one ocasion, one officer would open my passenger door and just start rumbling through as the cop at my door is just beginning to ask for ID- they would literally jump into my car looking for the big dope/weapons score.
Worst of it was in Bakersfield. One day i drove my gf to her moms house, and was pulled over 7 or 8 times in less than 4 hours (not all of those hours were spent driving either, which makes the whole thing even worse. The pull over searched the car, and ticketed me for modified exhaust (just a muffler, and not a loud one mind you), the second pullover searched and ticketed me for being too low. It was like a circus from then on, i was pulled over one after another with about 7 minutes between stops. You know all officers hear the traffic of other stops, and they knew i was already hit so many times that day. It was just pure herrassment.
Needless to say, i sold that car, and went to a lower profile one, but still, cops illegally searched me till i was about 22- then they stoped.
But dont get me started on sobriety checkpoints. There are lots of em here and the suck royally. I once was pulled over and sat on a curb for 36 minutes with no charges, just a brutal shove to the floor, bright lights in my face, and police laughter behind the lights. And mind you im not a small or timit guy, but then the hand is on their butt, i do what they tell me.
I am now armed with taperecorder and await the next confrontation. And to think i wanted to be a cop pretty much my entire childhood..., F'n pigs.
Sory folks, but this stuff only works with good men serving as officers of the law. However, in my younger years I have run into maybe 3 of these, and atleast 25 total jerks playing cop while satisfying their juvenile longing for power and retrobution for having been bullied on the schoolyard so many years back.
From age 16 i had a shiny Blue Integra on chrome rims, and in just about every town id go to, the assumption was i was a drug dealer. I routinely was pulled over, and pulled out of the car (for standing out in most cases) as my car was searched. Shut up was what most cops said to me, and not much else. Some were discouraged by not finding weapons to the point that they slapped on charges of speeding and such.
Ive had the old "I know you have a gun in here, where is it!" and on more than one ocasion, one officer would open my passenger door and just start rumbling through as the cop at my door is just beginning to ask for ID- they would literally jump into my car looking for the big dope/weapons score.
Worst of it was in Bakersfield. One day i drove my gf to her moms house, and was pulled over 7 or 8 times in less than 4 hours (not all of those hours were spent driving either, which makes the whole thing even worse. The pull over searched the car, and ticketed me for modified exhaust (just a muffler, and not a loud one mind you), the second pullover searched and ticketed me for being too low. It was like a circus from then on, i was pulled over one after another with about 7 minutes between stops. You know all officers hear the traffic of other stops, and they knew i was already hit so many times that day. It was just pure herrassment.
Needless to say, i sold that car, and went to a lower profile one, but still, cops illegally searched me till i was about 22- then they stoped.
But dont get me started on sobriety checkpoints. There are lots of em here and the suck royally. I once was pulled over and sat on a curb for 36 minutes with no charges, just a brutal shove to the floor, bright lights in my face, and police laughter behind the lights. And mind you im not a small or timit guy, but then the hand is on their butt, i do what they tell me.
I am now armed with taperecorder and await the next confrontation. And to think i wanted to be a cop pretty much my entire childhood..., F'n pigs.
follow up
Since I posted a letter a couple of months ago on this subject, I thought I would follow it up. I wrote about a client of mine who consented to a search while he was outside his truck; he knew he didn't have any drugs in there, so he didn't see any harm in consenting. What he did not know was that one of his passengers was taking the dope out of his pockets, and stashing it around the truck. Passenger #2 told the cops what happened, but they charged my guy anyway with a felony, possession of a controlled substance.
Fortunately for him, the prosecutor interviewed Passenger #2, who had told the cops about the actions of the first passenger. The prosecutor dropped the charge against my client, so it worked out ok for him.
Something I've noticed is that the police officers in this area will say "You're free to leave," even though their vehicles are blocking the drivers in.
They say the magic words, but folks can't actually leave. They look around, there's still an officer (or three or four) standing there, they can't leave, and they figure they should consent to a search. Bingo, consent search.
JUST SAY NO!
Since I posted a letter a couple of months ago on this subject, I thought I would follow it up. I wrote about a client of mine who consented to a search while he was outside his truck; he knew he didn't have any drugs in there, so he didn't see any harm in consenting. What he did not know was that one of his passengers was taking the dope out of his pockets, and stashing it around the truck. Passenger #2 told the cops what happened, but they charged my guy anyway with a felony, possession of a controlled substance.
Fortunately for him, the prosecutor interviewed Passenger #2, who had told the cops about the actions of the first passenger. The prosecutor dropped the charge against my client, so it worked out ok for him.
Something I've noticed is that the police officers in this area will say "You're free to leave," even though their vehicles are blocking the drivers in.
They say the magic words, but folks can't actually leave. They look around, there's still an officer (or three or four) standing there, they can't leave, and they figure they should consent to a search. Bingo, consent search.
JUST SAY NO!
Captain Bligh
New member
I've always liked, "If you have probable cause, you don't need my permission. If you don't have probable cause, you don't need to search."
Justin Moore
New member
Beowulf,
So do I But, I am assuming you are a LEO, correct? If so, WHY are YOU advocating this position? Could you elaborate please
So do I
But, I am assuming you are a LEO, correct? If so, WHY are YOU advocating this position? Could you elaborate please ironballs, the harrasment you experienced is wrong, and should not be condoned or excused by anyone. But your branding of LEOS in general as "Pigs" is also wrong. And childish.
And as for your tickets,
If it was, in fact, illegal, quit bitching about it. You earned the tickets. They are yours, fair and square. If you don't like the laws, quite bitching about the cops for enforcing them. Start bitching at your elected officials for passing them.
BTW, Justin, this very day I listend to a retired policed lieutenant (Dennis Tueller) a current local deputy, a current Colorado deputy (John Farnam) and a local criminal defense lawyer all give exactly the same advice. Just say no.
And as for your tickets,
If it was, in fact, illegal, quit bitching about it. You earned the tickets. They are yours, fair and square. If you don't like the laws, quite bitching about the cops for enforcing them. Start bitching at your elected officials for passing them.
BTW, Justin, this very day I listend to a retired policed lieutenant (Dennis Tueller) a current local deputy, a current Colorado deputy (John Farnam) and a local criminal defense lawyer all give exactly the same advice. Just say no.
Justin Moore
New member
Hoek, thanks
See, it really makes me WONDER, when even LEO's start saying 'don't consent to a search'. Do they know something that we don't, about their fellow officers?
Not flaming, or indicting any of the LEO's here, you all seem like good guys, albiet with varying opinions. It just seems 'odd' that LEO's even seem to be saying this. Is it perhaps because it gets abused a little too much?
See, it really makes me WONDER, when even LEO's start saying 'don't consent to a search'. Do they know something that we don't, about their fellow officers?
Not flaming, or indicting any of the LEO's here, you all seem like good guys, albiet with varying opinions. It just seems 'odd' that LEO's even seem to be saying this. Is it perhaps because it gets abused a little too much?
Hey, even the deputy said that he teaches his KIDS to say no! When Farnam gave the advice, he added, "We're fishing." I don't think he's a statist, jack booted thug. Quite the contrary.
That just shows how far from freedom we have strayed that even GOOD cops think there's nothing wrong with 'fishing'. And I would call Dennis Tueller and John Farnam good cops. Good Constitutionist Americans. Good men. But they've been taught to fish. I have a problem with that.
Of course, with good men like these two, they're not going to continue to hassle you if you just say no. But cops shouldn't be fishing in the first place. Can you say, "probably cause"?
That just shows how far from freedom we have strayed that even GOOD cops think there's nothing wrong with 'fishing'. And I would call Dennis Tueller and John Farnam good cops. Good Constitutionist Americans. Good men. But they've been taught to fish. I have a problem with that.
Of course, with good men like these two, they're not going to continue to hassle you if you just say no. But cops shouldn't be fishing in the first place. Can you say, "probably cause"?
Rob Pincus
New member
From one of my posts in the "Cop Repellant" Thread:
As I went on to explain in the other thread, it is possible that the LEO is giving you a fair chance to cooperate and has already noticed something that grants him PC for a search anyway... like pot seeds on the floorboard or something.
As I went on to explain in the other thread, it is possible that the LEO is giving you a fair chance to cooperate and has already noticed something that grants him PC for a search anyway... like pot seeds on the floorboard or something.