Sunday, November 18, 2012
Dogs Violating Fourth Amendment?
Recently, there has been many class discussions about civil liberties. A recent controversy has sparked much debate if dogs are violating the 4th amendment of rightful searches and seizures. Many DEA and police officers walk around with dogs trained to detect drugs. The U.S. Supreme Court has faced two cases in the state of Florida involving police sniffing dogs. According to the New American, "Each dealt with the question of whether the use of drug-detecting canines to obtain probable cause for a subsequent search is itself an unreasonable search and a violation of the Fourth Amendment".To Read More, Click Here.
If a dog smells drugs, wouldn't that create probable cause to search someone's house, car, or suitcase? What do you think? Do drug enforcing canines violate the fourth amendment?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think that using dogs to sniff out drugs is ok and not a violation of the 4th ammendment. As you said earlier, it does create probable cause to search people's property, and once you have the probable cause you can get a search warrant, which would be following the 4th ammendment.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Alexis, if a dog can smell drugs than I would consider that probable clause to search someone's property. A search dog would not just search something for the sake of it, that is not what they are trained to do, they will search something if they actually smell drugs. As such, they will always have probable cause, and not violate the 4th amendment.
ReplyDeleteWhat if they are at an airport and having the dogs walk around and sniffing random people's bags. Do you think that is too far?
ReplyDelete