Supreme Court Hearing Case On Drug-Sniffing Dog "Fishing Expeditions"

sgunhouse writes "Wired is running an article on a Supreme Court challenge (well, actually two of them) to the use of drug-sniffing dogs. The first case discussed involved Florida police using a drug-sniffing dog as a basis for searching a suspected drug dealer's home. The court in Florida excluded the evidence obtained from the search, saying a warrant should be required for that sort of use of a dog. Personally, I agree — police have no right to parade a dog around on private property on a 'fishing expedition', same as they need a warrant to use a thermal imaging device to search for grow houses. I have no use for recreational drugs, but they had better have a warrant if they want to bring a dog onto my property."

Comments

Re:As good as lie detectors?

[sincewhen]

Exactly.

Dogs with a human handler are too open to abuse. The handler may intentionally or unintentionally signal the dog, so it then indicates, and they then have permission to do a search. If a dog cannot be calibrated, and the accuracy known, it should not be used for law enforcement.