TexasCHLforum.com

Daisy Cutter wrote: Its sad that the law-abiding have to resort to video to try to preserve their rights.

What's sad is that we have police departments that object to making changes that would protect good officers from bad circumstances, decrease the use of force (liability), and decrease the number of complaints that come from the public.

Probably true. I probably should have waited a few minutes in to see if they'd actually make that call. That guy was quite sure he had something, the full range of what he tried included:
1) I already have probable cause to search the vehicle. Please sign this consent form.
2) I know I'm going to find something. If you show me where it is, I'll just write you a ticket and you can be on your way. If I find it, you're going to jail on upgraded charges.
3) We'll call the dog and it WILL alert, then we'll search. And during that search, we're going to make sure we search all of it - the hood, the roof, the trunk....
4) He started to search my packaged mail (in the car) before a supervisor stopped him.

My guess is that whole game show probably nets some bad guys. We're taught to shut up, not answer questions, and exercise our rights. They're taught how to be effective police officers by using "creative" ways to motivate people into doing what they want. Is searching one innocent good guy justification enough if it actually catches 10 bad guys? If it wasn't effective, they wouldn't be doing it.

He was polite enough.. And again, probably felt bad as he didn't even issue a ticket.

And before people think I'm a complete push-over, I'm willing to be VERY assertive about it, but I won't do it without a camera or recording device. I'm either that smart or that paranoid - you pick which one.


I only had something like that happen one other time about 25 year ago. As a college kid, I was driving home on I-35. Stopped for speeding 7 over (ugh?) - asked to step out and the car searched without being asked for consent. When I asked why he had permission to search, he told me that I was on a "known drug route" on I-35.... Ugh-huh...


I'm a big fan of body cameras..

mojo84 wrote:I've had cops tell me people usually consent to a search when they tell people it could take 30-45 minutes to get a dog there to sniff the car. People usually give in and consent to the officer search thinking it will save time.

I had it happen to me locally. Allow us to search or we wait for the dog, ETA 30min or so.
Waiting for the dog didn't bother me. When they told me that the dog would search "all over" the car - including the hood, trunk, I caved.

They found nothing. Upside: Didn't issue a ticket. I considered it a wash, but installed recording equipment soon after.

Glad this ruling is out there. Next time we wait for the dog.. :-)


Makes me wonder how many of those huge stops where they find 30KG of cocaine and the driver "agreed" to be searched were actually agreed to...