Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 35

Thread: Richmond to use dogs to sniff for guns in Shockoe Bottom?

  1. #1
    Founder's Club Member Skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Goochland, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    585

    Question Richmond to use dogs to sniff for guns in Shockoe Bottom?

    I don't have a link on this yet, but I just heard the Mayor's press secretary say they will be using dogs to sniff for drugs and GUNS.

    Sounds like OC only down there now, since if you aren't concealing they should not have to ask if you have a concealed permit. And yet somehow I don't think that is what they were looking for...


    ahh ok just found a link

    http://www.wtvr.com/news/wtvr-is-the...,1064133.story

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member thebigsd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Quarryville, PA
    Posts
    3,543
    What are they going to do if the dog detects a gun? Do they even have the authority to stop people on those grounds? Sound like a fishing expedition to me...
    "When seconds count between living or dying, the police are only minutes away."

  3. #3
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by thebigsd View Post
    What are they going to do if the dog detects a gun? Do they even have the authority to stop people on those grounds? Sound like a fishing expedition to me...
    They probably do. The courts have put a lot of faith in dog hits.

    My guess OC would be greeted with snotty comments and questions.
    A hit by a K9 would prompt a "May I see your CHP"
    A refusal would result in a search and if a Concealed weapon was found, arrest.

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member Skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Goochland, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    585
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    They probably do. The courts have put a lot of faith in dog hits.

    My guess OC would be greeted with snotty comments and questions.
    A hit by a K9 would prompt a "May I see your CHP"
    A refusal would result in a search and if a Concealed weapon was found, arrest.
    Probably right on all counts. Have heard him use the words "Zero Tolerance" in relation to guns lately. I guess he is trying to deflect the recent spate of criticism he has gotten from some quarters for being seemingly absent during the hurricane.

    Whether or not it was fair criticism, looks like he is trying to turn the page, and lo and behold, he turned to page 1 on the Liberal/Progressive Playbook - Blame the Guns.

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Skeptic View Post
    Probably right on all counts. Have heard him use the words "Zero Tolerance" in relation to guns lately. I guess he is trying to deflect the recent spate of criticism he has gotten from some quarters for being seemingly absent during the hurricane.

    Whether or not it was fair criticism, looks like he is trying to turn the page, and lo and behold, he turned to page 1 on the Liberal/Progressive Playbook - Blame the Guns.
    I've not paid much attention to the Bottom area because I don'yt go there (except to drive thru on my way elsewhere) but my understanding is all sorts of folks are upset about folks getting killed there. The "zero tolerance" thing includes staggered "dismissal times" for the various drinking spots1 and some other attempts to control how many drunks are on the streets at any given time.

    stay safe.

    1 - as a business owner I'd be very upset unless "my" dismissal time was the very latest. Anything else would cut into my earning a living. Guess the City Fathers don't see it that way.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  6. #6
    Regular Member doug23838's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , Virginia, USA
    Posts
    302
    Quote Originally Posted by nova View Post
    Most K-9s will only get a hit on a firearm if it was recently fired and not cleaned. I tested this theory earlier this year with an FCPD bomb sniffer while talking with the dog's owner who was EOD.
    Interesting. I always thought the dogs were trained to hit on Hoppe's, or other solvents or lubricants unique to firearms. And the Hoppe's air freshener would be a great diversion if my thinking had been correct.

    I avoid Shockhoe Bottom, esp. after dark. Ayoob said: "Don't go where you're not welcome." Although it might be fun to go to Gutenberg for breakfast.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	hoppes.jpg 
Views:	90 
Size:	9.9 KB 
ID:	7170  

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,182
    Where is Shockoe Bottom? Is that the Cary St area..... near where the Indian is on top of the building?

  8. #8
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    They probably do. The courts have put a lot of faith in dog hits.

    My guess OC would be greeted with snotty comments and questions.
    A hit by a K9 would prompt a "May I see your CHP"
    A refusal would result in a search and if a Concealed weapon was found, arrest.
    I'm not whining "Cite! Cite!", but it would be very interesting to know if the courts have extended that faith in dogs to guns.

    If a dog "hits" on a gun on your person, does that indeed count the same as the officer "knowing" you have a gun well enough to demand to see your CHP? Or is this one of those areas where the ask/demand line is very fuzzy?

    We have discussed in the past that there is a "Catch-22" in the law here, since you are not obligated to inform, but if you are carrying and are asked, you are obligated to display the CHP. How does a dog make this different?

    TFred

  9. #9
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    I'm not whining "Cite! Cite!", but it would be very interesting to know if the courts have extended that faith in dogs to guns.

    If a dog "hits" on a gun on your person, does that indeed count the same as the officer "knowing" you have a gun well enough to demand to see your CHP? Or is this one of those areas where the ask/demand line is very fuzzy?

    We have discussed in the past that there is a "Catch-22" in the law here, since you are not obligated to inform, but if you are carrying and are asked, you are obligated to display the CHP. How does a dog make this different?

    TFred
    Good questions TFred and ones I can't answer. Thus the "Probably"

    My guess would be that the dog would give the Officer the Probable Suspicion he would need, but that's only a guess.
    Up on the reality plane though, we're not talking about these people going before the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals or even a Circuit Court Judge...

    Most would Go before a City of Richmond General District Court Judge who could care less if the K9 made a good hit or his handler observed the proper procedure.

    Ain't Justice Grand?

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    633

    I've been waiting for this thread to come up...,

    but I didn't think it would take this long. I was listening to some of the sound bytes from the mayor's little "pep talk" on one of the local TV channels, and if I remember correctly, in one of them he said "If you have a gun, you will have an encounter with the police."

    He was running off a little list of things that would "cause" an "encounter with the police". Not suggesting to anyone to spend any of your time or tax dollars in "The $hitty of Richmond", "River $hitty", or whatever they want to call that vermin brooder, but if you do go there, it sounds like it would be prudent to have your "magical memory devices" handy and at the ready with fresh batteries, the good kind. Like cousin Eddie says, "Don't go cheap on me, now."

    sidestreet

    Jeremiah 29 vs. 11-13

    we are not equal, we will never be equal, but we must be relentless.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Cmdr_Haggis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Leesburg, VA
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    I'm not whining "Cite! Cite!", but it would be very interesting to know if the courts have extended that faith in dogs to guns.

    If a dog "hits" on a gun on your person, does that indeed count the same as the officer "knowing" you have a gun well enough to demand to see your CHP? Or is this one of those areas where the ask/demand line is very fuzzy?

    We have discussed in the past that there is a "Catch-22" in the law here, since you are not obligated to inform, but if you are carrying and are asked, you are obligated to display the CHP. How does a dog make this different?

    TFred
    I see it the other way around. The report says that they plan to use "dogs to search for drugs and weapons". If a dog hits on a person, I'd imagine the police will assume drugs first and get probable cause on that. Search on.

    Now if I'm carrying a concealed weapon (and have, of course, my ID and CHP on me) the dog would hit on my gun. Since the handler won't know a gun hit or drug hit, he'll just assume drugs and search me. Finding a gun is incidental (and in my case completely within my right), but my innocent behind is still getting searched because Fido wags his tail. Unreasonable search in my view since I'm no druggie or dealer; just a law-abiding citizen. While he's searching me I'm trying to say, "Hey, Officer Snuffy, I have a concealed weapon and my CHP is in my left pocket along with my ID. Please get your dog away from my junk."

    (Do K9s "hit" differently based what their nose detects? Sit for drugs, lie down for guns...)
    Last edited by Cmdr_Haggis; 10-20-2011 at 09:44 AM. Reason: to say I have my CHP in my pocket
    As Steve Lee says, "I like guns," and have no plans to get rid of them. My kids will be taught, as I was, about gun safety.

    Life is good.

  12. #12
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    I think it's time for a new OC Video!

  13. #13
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Cmdr_Haggis View Post
    I see it the other way around. The report says that they plan to use "dogs to search for drugs and weapons". If a dog hits on a person, I'd imagine the police will assume drugs first and get probable cause on that. Search on.

    Now if I'm carrying a concealed weapon (and have, of course, my ID and CHP on me) the dog would hit on my gun. Since the handler won't know a gun hit or drug hit, he'll just assume drugs and search me. Finding a gun is incidental (and in my case completely within my right), but my innocent behind is still getting searched because Fido wags his tail. Unreasonable search in my view since I'm no druggie or dealer; just a law-abiding citizen. While he's searching me I'm trying to say, "Hey, Officer Snuffy, I have a concealed weapon and my CHP is in my left pocket along with my ID. Please get your dog away from my junk."

    (Do K9s "hit" differently based what their nose detects? Sit for drugs, lie down for guns...)
    I do not know the answer, and I would like to know the answer, but when I wrote my post, I was assuming that yes, the dog would be able to indicate to the handler whether they detected drugs or guns.

    Again, I don't know, but I wouldn't be particularly surprised if they had "drug dogs" and "gun dogs".

    We need more information!

    TFred

    ETA: PS, someone with some handy cites in their pocket might ought to write the mayor and tell him that the courts have declared that mere possession of a gun is not probable cause for any abnormal police scrutiny! "Mere" being the key word.
    Last edited by TFred; 10-20-2011 at 12:44 PM. Reason: PS

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Cmdr_Haggis View Post
    (Do K9s "hit" differently based what their nose detects? Sit for drugs, lie down for guns...)
    Dogs can be trained to "hit" differently. But even with multiple angles videoing the dog and handler there can be "false hits" based on cues/commands the dog has been trained to respond to. The more the handler interacts with the dog the higher the possibility that there might be a cued response happening. But do you really expect the City PD to let their high-priced mutts run free in violation of the leash law?

    Adding a further complication to the situation - how are the cops going to set up a search zone in such a way that a citizen has the opportunity to avoid it? Currently DUI and seat-belt checkpoints have to have notice and several other requirements must be met. Drug interdiction checkpoints are even more tightly constrained. Look at this for a decent review of both procedural and legal requirements that do not seem to be met by the City's plan: http://www.smartsafeandsober.org/res...0Policy-sm.pdf

    So - anybody got the money to fund a fight in court over being caught in this spider's web of fail? I admit my finger is not the one to use in addressing the issue - perhaps the next one over, and held in a different direction?

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  15. #15
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    -------snip----------- "Mere" being the key word.
    Did someone say "Meer"? Who me?

    In RPD speak that means "come over here."


    Don't anybody move! Keep your paws hands where I can see them!
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 10-20-2011 at 10:00 PM. Reason: addded
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  16. #16
    Regular Member zoom6zoom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Dale City, VA, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,694
    "No, officer.... I have a bacon cheeseburger in my pocket."
    Last edited by zoom6zoom; 10-20-2011 at 09:57 PM.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Baked on Grease's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sterling, Va.
    Posts
    652
    Quote Originally Posted by zoom6zoom View Post
    "No, officer.... I have a bacon cheeseburger in my pocket."
    Hehe... Walk around with a baggy of Beggin' strips. I don't think any dog would turn them down, no matter how well trained.


    On topic, I personaly don't see any difference between a dog giving a cue and police using x-ray goggles to fish for PC for a search. Either way they did not glean this info of their own accord and to me becomes unreasonable. I feel the same way with Sobriety Checkpoints, while the courts have ruled that they are not unconstitutional, you have no obligation to cooperate, and non-compliance does not constitute RAS or PC. I have not tried this yet (only ever even seen 1 in my life) but can't wait to piss them off next time I have the opportunity.

    Sent using tapatalk
    "A Right Un-exercised is a Right Lost"

    "According to the law, [openly carrying] in a vehicle is against the law if the weapon is concealed" -Flamethrower (think about it....)

    Carrying an XDm 9mm with Hornady Critical Defense hollowpoint. Soon to be carrying a Ruger along with it....

  18. #18
    Founder's Club Member Skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Goochland, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    585
    Quote Originally Posted by Baked on Grease View Post
    Hehe... Walk around with a baggy of Beggin' strips. I don't think any dog would turn them down, no matter how well trained.


    On topic, I personaly don't see any difference between a dog giving a cue and police using x-ray goggles to fish for PC for a search. Either way they did not glean this info of their own accord and to me becomes unreasonable. I feel the same way with Sobriety Checkpoints, while the courts have ruled that they are not unconstitutional, you have no obligation to cooperate, and non-compliance does not constitute RAS or PC. I have not tried this yet (only ever even seen 1 in my life) but can't wait to piss them off next time I have the opportunity.
    On your first point - you might be accused of carrying Doggie Crack.

    On the second, I wonder what the courst have to say on this, especially where it regards "expectation of privacy" I know a bit on what they have said about tracking devices on cars, and of course garbage left at the curb.. I wonder if there is a "scent" component to this as well.

  19. #19
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Skeptic View Post
    On your first point - you might be accused of carrying Doggie Crack.

    On the second, I wonder what the courst have to say on this, especially where it regards "expectation of privacy" I know a bit on what they have said about tracking devices on cars, and of course garbage left at the curb.. I wonder if there is a "scent" component to this as well.
    The interesting question would be what would the authors of the Fourth Amendment have thought of this? I guess they probably used dogs for hunting back then, but could they have ever foreseen senses greater than human being used for such things?

    TFred

  20. #20
    Regular Member Cmdr_Haggis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Leesburg, VA
    Posts
    54
    If one is pulled over for a traffic violation and the officer smells an odor of marijuana coming from the car, does this give probable cause or RAS to warrant a search of the vehicle?

    If so, then a K9 (being a police officer itself, yes) using its nose on a pedestrian would be no different than the human officer using his nose during a traffic stop. The pooch just has a much better sense of smell.
    As Steve Lee says, "I like guns," and have no plans to get rid of them. My kids will be taught, as I was, about gun safety.

    Life is good.

  21. #21
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    The interesting question would be what would the authors of the Fourth Amendment have thought of this? I guess they probably used dogs for hunting back then, but could they have ever foreseen senses greater than human being used for such things?

    TFred
    Quote Originally Posted by Cmdr_Haggis View Post
    If one is pulled over for a traffic violation and the officer smells an odor of marijuana coming from the car, does this give probable cause or RAS to warrant a search of the vehicle?

    If so, then a K9 (being a police officer itself, yes) using its nose on a pedestrian would be no different than the human officer using his nose during a traffic stop. The pooch just has a much better sense of smell.
    That's the point of my question. The enhanced sense of smell is exactly the point. Did the authors of the Fourth Amendment intend for it to remain in scope of existing detection methods at the time it was written? Obviously that is the challenge, how to apply it in the modern era where detection far exceeds what was even able to be imagined at the time.

    Of course there are similar points to be made by the anti-gunners as well, but those are usually dispelled by reference to the militia and what is commonly available at this time.

    TFred

  22. #22
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602
    Quote Originally Posted by Cmdr_Haggis View Post
    If one is pulled over for a traffic violation and the officer smells an odor of marijuana coming from the car, does this give probable cause or RAS to warrant a search of the vehicle?

    If so, then a K9 (being a police officer itself, yes) using its nose on a pedestrian would be no different than the human officer using his nose during a traffic stop. The pooch just has a much better sense of smell.
    In this case, how do you cross examine the dog?
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Baked on Grease's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sterling, Va.
    Posts
    652
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    In this case, how do you cross examine the dog?
    Exactly!

    "when did you first realize the defendant might be carrying?" Woof!

    "So you smelled oil and sat down?" Woof!

    "Tell the court what you did next." Whimper, whine, woof!

    Sent using tapatalk
    Last edited by Baked on Grease; 10-22-2011 at 07:35 AM.
    "A Right Un-exercised is a Right Lost"

    "According to the law, [openly carrying] in a vehicle is against the law if the weapon is concealed" -Flamethrower (think about it....)

    Carrying an XDm 9mm with Hornady Critical Defense hollowpoint. Soon to be carrying a Ruger along with it....

  24. #24
    Regular Member Repeater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,519

    For fun ...

    For fun, some wiseacre should invent an aerosol spray filled with GSR.

    Then take it into a parking lot and spray it around liberally.

    Gives the lot that 'Range-y' aroma!

  25. #25
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Repeater View Post
    For fun, some wiseacre should invent an aerosol spray filled with GSR.

    Then take it into a parking lot and spray it around liberally.

    Gives the lot that 'Range-y' aroma!
    Not much to invent... soak and swish your fired brass in some water, put it in a spray bottle...

    TFred

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •