Hacker News Reader

Comment by DanBC | Hacker News Reader

> large yellow signs along Interstate 271 that warned drivers that there was a drug checkpoint ahead, to be prepared to stop and that there was a drug-sniffing police dog in use.

One thing hinted at in the article is the risk of harm to "innocent"[1] drivers from drivers carrying drugs who are distracted by the large scary yellow signs, and thus driving while distracted.

> Peters said the officer asked him what kind of drugs he had in the car, saying it would be much easier to confess before other officers and a drug-sniffing dog arrived. Peters insisted he had no drugs. As promised, other officers and the dog were summoned, and Peters agreed to allow his car to be searched.

I'm not a lawyer, but as I understand it you shouldn't agree to be searched. What's the current best practice for this?

[1] using the words of law enforcement to emphasise the point.

View on HN

The current best practice is that when police ask you to give up your fundamental rights you politely say no. Calmly say, "I don't consent to searches."

There is literally nothing good that can come from giving up your rights if you are innocent (for you personally, for the police, for society).

The problem is this can be more of a hassle for you. I've been pulled over as a teenager and when I said no he decided to search my car anyway. Saying no doesn't always help, in fact sometimes it makes them give you more trouble and search harder.

If you had consented to the search, then anything he found would have been admissible in court; By not giving your consent to the search you made it so anything that was found wouldn't have held up in court. A cop only asks to search your vehicle if he doesn't already have probable cause to do so without your permission.

> Saying no doesn't always help...

No, the police would like for you to think that. But imagine this scenario. You just dropped off a few friends. One may have dropped his prescription pain killer in between the seat cushions. Now, you've consented to the search and they found that dropped pill. You have no recourse, no prescription for a controlled substance and all you can say is it's not mine and you don't know how it got there.

A classic: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PR7nFq9Avtc

Know Your Rights - Don't Talk to Cops Part 1

A (bit.ly) linked article at http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/06/fake_drug_c... quotes an assistant prosecutor: "Vitantonio said that if Peters had not given police permission to search, they would have had to let him go."

That said, it is possible that a trained canine might have alerted from outside the car, generating enough probable cause for a legal search inside of the car without consent of the driver.

This is an area that has seen a lot of litigation in the last 30 years or so, for details google "probable cause" "canine" "Place" "Jardines" "Harris" and "Caballes".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com