Guns found in cars of two Clear Creek-Amana students

[Pinehawk]

To me it matters if it is public or private property. Can cops randomly search on public property? I guess so, they do at airports and random vehicle stops.
But, they shouldn't be allowed to do so on private property, unless they are invited in, which was the case here with the school permission.

 

[joelbc1]

We both know the “exercise” excuse was just a ruse. It is pheasant season and they wanted an excuse to check for guns in the parking lot. This is how the gestapo works.

Hard to argue with logic like this, Boyz!
Sill wins again.....damn he is just tooooo quick for most of us. More answers than we have questions.

 

[hawki4ever]

In Iowa you have to be 21 years old to carry a handgun. So these juveniles were not only not supposed to be in possession of the handguns they also took them on school property. Any law abiding gun owner knows these laws.They need to enforce the gun laws on the books and charge these idiots accordingly. If the parents knowingly let these kids be in possession of these handguns they should have their right to own guns revoked. The part of the story about the search also raises questions as to getting a search warrant to search the vehicles which I assume are private property of the students. I know they don't need one for locations in the school but outside in a vehicle would be different I would think.

 

[beanerhawk]

You think police should be able to just roam around in public letting drug dogs sniff at random cars? That doesn’t seem right to me.

Yes they should, and they should do it more often.

 

[Joes Place]

Because it is reminiscent of a police state. Personally, I don’t think police should be allowed to use drug dogs without some level of suspicion of wrongdoing (not even necessarily of drug related crimes). Allowing them to roam around public sniffing anything and everything is multiple bridges too far for me.

FUNFACT: It's not illegal to have a gun locked in your trunk "in public". It IS illegal to do so in areas (e.g. school grounds, certain government facilities) where it is explicitly restricted, and by parking in those areas you affirmatively give up your right to "no searches".

Allowing them to 'sniff around' on school property is just fine. Don't park there if you have contraband or guns in your vehicle. Easy peasy.

 

[hawkbirch]

Because it is reminiscent of a police state. Personally, I don’t think police should be allowed to use drug dogs without some level of suspicion of wrongdoing (not even necessarily of drug related crimes). Allowing them to roam around public sniffing anything and everything is multiple bridges too far for me.

do you feel the same about dogs that smell for explosives rather than drugs?

 

[seminole97]

Um, the whole thing started as a K-9 exercise. They found drugs in a couple of cars, and found the guns in the process. How is this trampling on their rights?

There was a time that the 4th amendment protected us from illegal searches.
Then we declared war on drugs and the Bill of Rights just got in the crossfire.

 

[IAHawk2011]

FUNFACT: It's not illegal to have a gun locked in your trunk "in public". It IS illegal to do so in areas (e.g. school grounds, certain government facilities) where it is explicitly restricted, and by parking in those areas you affirmatively give up your right to "no searches".

Allowing them to 'sniff around' on school property is just fine. Don't park there if you have contraband or guns in your vehicle. Easy peasy.

I’m not really arguing that. People have a reduced expectation of privacy in places like schools, airports, border crossings, etc. I’m fine with dog searches there. What I’m not okay with is police roaming around public with police dogs and allowing them to “search” anything and everything they can smell. I’m not claiming that is what happened in this instance, but am pointing out that this is something I think is NOT okay - and apparently several posters disagree.

 

[joelbc1]

There was a time that the 4th amendment protected us from illegal searches.
Then we declared war on drugs and the Bill of Rights just got in the crossfire.

It would seem to me that if you are not violating “ the law” you would have nothing to worry about...or something you couldn’t easily explain with the truth.

 

[IAHawk2011]

do you feel the same about dogs that smell for explosives rather than drugs?

Yes. See my post above - I am fine with dog searches in places where we already have a reduced expectation of privacy like schools, airports, border crossings, etc. I understand we also have a reduced expectation of privacy in vehicles, but I don’t think police should be able to allow dogs to just roam around sniffing vehicles in public places with zero suspicion of wrongdoing.

 

[IAHawk2011]

It would seem to me that if you are not violating “ the law” you would have nothing to worry about...or something you couldn’t easily explain with the truth.

This is the same logic that would be used to justify warrantless searches, FWIW.

 

[joelbc1]

This is the same logic that would be used to justify warrantless searches, FWIW.

In this case.....or do you need to wait until more school kids get killed? In today’s world one never knows...and I’d rather error on the side of caution. What needs to understood here is that the police need strict oversight...there procedures need to be purer than driven snow.
But dammit....how friggin’ stupid/ignorant can kids and their parents be? Underaged, with handguns on school property? Some folks walk around self-centered thinking their shit doesn’t smell. The kids and the parents should be ashamed of themselves....but knowing how the world spins today, I can see them lawyering up and claiming their 2nd Amendment rights are being trampled upon....and some politician jumping to their defense.

 

[sober_teacher]

There was a time that the 4th amendment protected us from illegal searches.
Then we declared war on drugs and the Bill of Rights just got in the crossfire.

I guess I don't consider this an illegal search. The cops had permission from the school district to conduct the exercise. No cars were searched without the student's presence (cops don't break into cars barring exigent circumstances, so they'd have needed keys).

Even if you disagree with the cops here, do you agree that these sophomore/juniors shouldn't have had drugs/handguns in their cars?

I get the concern about protecting rights, truly. And if more information comes out that shows the cops crossed the line, i reserve the right to change my mind. Based on the article posted, I'm assuming the K-9 unit was walking through the parking lot, passing all the cars. When the dogs smelled drugs near a couple of cars, the students/principal would have been summoned at that point. It sounds like the guns were stored in the door areas, so they probably were within plain view, no idea where the drugs were kept. We also don't know if these were in sedans/suvs/trucks, which would affect the other things.

I've never seen K-9 units in action, so I have no idea what their SOP is. That's just what I'm assuming happened based on what I know. What about that would constitute an illegal search?

 

[torbee]

This is what I wonder. Car should be locked. Make the police get a warrant, even if you don't have a handgun in your car.

This would work in your garage, driveway or even in front of your house.

Not in the parking lot of a public school where administrators have given permission to officers.

 

[Im4Iowa]

The solution here is simple. We need to build a wall around Tiffin.

 

[EasyHawk]

Many Iowa high schools bring in drug sniffing dogs right into the school to do locker searches now. It never fails to turn up some drugs. It is right in the school handbook that is a possibility. I assume most schools also have included in their handbooks that guns are not allowed anywhere including in vehicles. That is in our employee handbook at work. No guns whether in the trunk or gun rack or in sight or not, nowhere on company property including parking lots.

 

[Old_wrestling_fan]

Curious...What was the story on the gun found in the car without drugs? In other words, were the dogs searching for drugs only or any contraband they could find?

 

[Finance85]

FUNFACT: It's not illegal to have a gun locked in your trunk "in public". It IS illegal to do so in areas (e.g. school grounds, certain government facilities) where it is explicitly restricted, and by parking in those areas you affirmatively give up your right to "no searches".

Allowing them to 'sniff around' on school property is just fine. Don't park there if you have contraband or guns in your vehicle. Easy peasy.

You are correct except you DO NOT give up your right to no searches. Searches still require probable cause.

 

[Joes Place]

You are correct except you DO NOT give up your right to no searches. Searches still require probable cause.

Nope. If the law says you can be searched by parking here, you can be searched w/o cause.

No different than TSA at an airport: they have no "probable cause" to search you there, either.

In public, sure. On school or government property - they have the right to search with some restrictions. Here, none of those restrictions apply.

 

[seminole97]

What about that would constitute an illegal search?

The 4th amendment was instituted to preclude the government fishing for ‘crimes’.
That’s what this is.

Cops didn’t articulate a reasonable suspicion of a specific crime in a specific place involving a specific person and get a magistrate to agree and let them search for the evidence. They’re just fishing.

 

[hawkbirch]

The 4th amendment was instituted to preclude the government fishing for ‘crimes’.
That’s what this is.

Cops didn’t articulate a reasonable suspicion of a specific crime in a specific place involving a specific person and get a magistrate to agree and let them search for the evidence. They’re just fishing.

The drug dog isn't a search. It's not fishing for anything. Drugs give off an odor which the dog can detect from the outside without touching a thing. To the extent that the dog is "searching" for anything, it is searching for an odor that it is trained to detect. You can't reasonably argue that you have an expectation of privacy in the odor given off by your person or items. Really? Ever walked by a group of people and immediately known that one or more of them recently smoked pot?

 

[Rifler]

Revolver? Did you hit anything? We used a .22 rifle, but we had a .22 revolver we took with us when we checked our traps. Raccoons would often get caught in our muskrat traps and they were not easy to drown.

Yeah, used to get a lot of them,... Walk slowly, scare one up, let them make their normal 20-30 foot initial run and then wait for them to freeze,... Ruger Single Six with a 5.5" barrel, still have it.

 

[seminole97]

The drug dog isn't a search.

Perhaps you’ve convinced yourself of that, but the dog and his handlers know they’re actually searching for something.

It's not fishing for anything.

Willful ignorance, or gross naivety?
I can’t decide.

 

[ping72]

why? It's not a search so why can't officers walk drug dogs through a parking lot?

You think police should be able to just roam around in public letting drug dogs sniff at random cars? That doesn’t seem right to me.

They weren’t in public. They were in a lot owned by the school, and the school gave permission.

In a high school near me they bring the dogs into school every so often. You leave all your stuff in the classroom and go into the hall. They sniff the kids, then go through the room. They also sniff all lockers and go through the parking lot.

 

[Rudolph]

Has @Herkmeister made a peanut butter joke yet?

 

[hawkbirch]

Perhaps you’ve convinced yourself of that, but the dog and his handlers know they’re actually searching for something.



Willful ignorance, or gross naivety?
I can’t decide.

The Supreme Court and appellate courts in Iowa say not a search. With all due respect to your opinion, I think I'll go ahead and go with their rulings on the subject.

 

[seminole97]

The Supreme Court and appellate courts in Iowa say not a search.

No argument from me that the courts have gutted the 4th amendment in favor of the drug war.
But I can’t get onboard with the Orwellian newspeak that a dog searching for drugs isn’t actually searching.

If the Supreme Court told you a tail was a leg, how many legs would a cow have?

 

[Rifler]

I suspect that this is one of those deals where as a requirement of enrollment, the student had to acknowledge that the school reserved the right to search vehicles, lockers etc. on school property, at their discretion...

 

[hawkbirch]

No argument from me that the courts have gutted the 4th amendment in favor of the drug war.
But I can’t get onboard with the Orwellian newspeak that a dog searching for drugs isn’t actually searching.

If the Supreme Court told you a tail was a leg, how many legs would a cow have?

How is it gutting the 4th Amendment to walk past a car and smell? Have you never walked past a group of people and immediately recognized the scent of marijuana? Are you claiming that I'm searching when I'm walking down the street and smell a scent that I recognize?

Just curious if trash rips by police bother you, too?

 

[Finance85]

Nope. If the law says you can be searched by parking here, you can be searched w/o cause.

No different than TSA at an airport: they have no "probable cause" to search you there, either.

In public, sure. On school or government property - they have the right to search with some restrictions. Here, none of those restrictions apply.

You are wrong. Parking in a public place is no different than driving on a public road. See "Terry v Ohio" for auto searches.

If I go to a public school to pick up my child, or for a meeting, or to attend a ball game, I haven't given up my right to not have my car searched.

See Tinker v Des Moines

TSA at the airport is slightly different. You don't have to consent to a search. But you also won't fly that day.

https://flyingwithfish.boardingarea...tsa-legally-circumvents-the-fourth-amendment/

 

[sober_teacher]

You are wrong. Parking in a public place is no different than driving on a public road. See "Terry v Ohio" for auto searches.

If I go to a public school to pick up my child, or for a meeting, or to attend a ball game, I haven't given up my right to not have my car searched.

See Tinker v Des Moines

TSA at the airport is slightly different. You don't have to consent to a search. But you also won't fly that day.

https://flyingwithfish.boardingarea...tsa-legally-circumvents-the-fourth-amendment/

My understanding is that unless something is in plain sight, or can be smelled, cops can't force you to let them search your trunk (that's a lot harder to abuse in real life than TV makes it look). If a civilian persistently refuses to not open a trunk for example, barring exigent circumstances, the cop cannot open it up.

 

[MitchLL]

The solution here is simple. We need to build a wall around Tiffin.

We gotta have someone from Tiffin that posts here?

What's the story... in detail?

 

[seminole97]

How is it gutting the 4th Amendment to walk past a car and smell?

I guess I wasn’t clear: the 4th amendment was intended to prevent these types of fishing expeditions.

Training a canine to search for and identify drugs and then randomly searching cars without a warrant contravenes the intentions of the 4th amendment.

I can’t even conceive the mental gymnastics required to conclude otherwise.

 

[HawkeyeShawn]

They have dogs that can sniff out firearms now? That’s how they will come for all the guns!!

 

[seminole97]

My understanding is that unless something is in plain sight, or can be smelled, cops can't force you to let them search your trunk (that's a lot harder to abuse in real life than TV makes it look). If a civilian persistently refuses to not open a trunk for example, barring exigent circumstances, the cop cannot open it up.

If the cop wants to search you’re car they’re going to search your car. The dog is the fig leaf that lets them do it.
A friend of mine is a deputy in Okaloosa county. If you refuse to let a cop search your car when he asks he can call a canine unit. My friend told me if they want the dog to alert the dog will alert. Turns out dogs like pleasing their masters. Then they’ll turn your car inside out on the side of the road and leave you to have a good day.

 

[HawkeyeShawn]

I should have used the google machine before posting. Dogs can sniff for guns.

They have dogs that can sniff out firearms now? That’s how they will come for all the guns!!

 

[seminole97]

They have dogs that can sniff out firearms now? That’s how they will come for all the guns!!

They’re trained on the smell of gunpowder, but the answer to your question is, yes.

 

[seminole97]

Just curious if trash rips by police bother you, too?

I think if police suspect a crime they should be able to articulate that and convince an impartial magistrate to approve a warrant before searching.

I recognize there are roughly a bajillion things against the law, I just think there is enough actual crime to fight without cops digging through people’s trash trying to find crimes.

 

[sober_teacher]

I guess I wasn’t clear: the 4th amendment was intended to prevent these types of fishing expeditions.

Training a canine to search for and identify drugs and then randomly searching cars without a warrant contravenes the intentions of the 4th amendment.

I can’t even conceive the mental gymnastics required to conclude otherwise.

I guess it boils down to for me, that you have a much broader definition of what constitutes a fishing expedition than I do. Over time, people have gotten increasingly creative at finding ways to hide/smuggle drugs and other illicit substance. Drug dogs to me, are an acceptable counter from law enforcement to find at least some of those things.

It feels like if we followed your train of thought, we could consider most investigations to be fishing expeditions. Considering most criminals normally aren't polite enough to commit a crime in plain view of everyone, to some extent, most investigations start as a fishing expedition on some level.

I'm critical of police in many ways, particularly how they manage to justify many police shootings. This doesn't seem out of line to me.

 

[seminole97]

I guess it boils down to for me, that you have a much broader definition of what constitutes a fishing expeditionthan I do.

Searching random cars in a parking lot with no articulable suspicion regarding a specific person, place, thing or crime meets my definition.
When they can’t check ANY of those boxes what else do you call it?