EP

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 1 ноя 2024

Комментарии • 9

  • @SuperSailorOutlawGeorgeIshaq
    @SuperSailorOutlawGeorgeIshaq 3 месяца назад +1

    What a legal Dynamic Duo 😊

  • @b1llygo4t
    @b1llygo4t 3 месяца назад +1

    No. Because the dog hit on the car, not the occupant.
    9th district.

  • @texknight67
    @texknight67 3 месяца назад

    Wouldn't that at least allow for a Terry Search? If the dog alerts on the car twice and they remove the occupants and find nothing then there's probable cause to believe the occupants are comminting a crime by having drugs on their person.

    • @jxtq27
      @jxtq27 3 месяца назад

      What a ridiculous idea. 1) Dogs are unreliable and more frequently than not they alert because their handler signaled for them to. I know the corrupt police and the corrupt courts in the United States don't often admit this. 2) You don't get to search everyone in the car because one person *might* have drugs.

  • @valkyrie1066
    @valkyrie1066 3 месяца назад

    Splitting hairs. If the dog alerts on the car; alerts on THE PERSON; they get searched for drugs. They've been doing it at concerts for YEARS.

    • @Rashnak66
      @Rashnak66 3 месяца назад +1

      " They've been doing it at concerts for YEARS."
      i've been to many dozens of concerts big and small. Never once saw a dog search. Pretty sure that would be unconstitutional as well since warrantless searches of everybody in a venue is kinda the whole point of the 4th.

    • @jxtq27
      @jxtq27 3 месяца назад

      What a shock, the police have been violating peoples' rights for years? Next you're going to tell me that the police are corrupt! Of course they're corrupt, they're police. Duh