Only guilty people consent

Discussion in 'General' started by Sir Stoner, Dec 27, 2012.

  1. Think about this, a cop pulls you over when you have weed, most people would say no you cant, and the cop would reply " oh thats suspicious imma get a warrant" well here it goes


    Ask any non smoker or non criminal what they would do if a cop tried to search them or their vehicle and they would decline the search, so denying a search is not suspicious and a cop cannot get a warrant just for that,

    Some of you have been fear tripped into consenting to searches and saying "hey i have nothing to hide" but 99% of the time the people who say that are guilty and police know it

    I asked around and 100% of the people i asked said that they would not consent to any searches even though they do nothing illegal, so remember guys declining a search is the best thing to do, and its not suspicious, dont let cops bully you. Except for TedWiggins, i love that guy
     
  2. Tedwiggins would be one of the cops to fuck with you :laughing:
     
  3. Haha ted is a funny guy
     
  4. I don't consent to searches because I don't like people taking my personal freedoms and rights away from me. Especially not from LEO.

    Never consent to searches. Never waive any of your rights to the police, they will lie and cheat the system just to fuck you over. If they don't succeed, they move on their way with your asshole gaping. If they fidn a way to fuck you over, like my buddy who consented and a roach his buddy was smoking in his car the day before (he doesn't smoke in his car, his friend borrowed it and smoked) was found in the back under the front seat, the j prob flew back in the window when it was ditched.

    He's on probo for a year now.

    Point being, don't waive your rights to the mighty fuckin police. It's just not smart, it NEVER will be advantageous to you. Only a hinderance. No matter whatever lies and promises they give you by making you waive your rights. (Police are LEGALLY ALLOWED TO LIE, LEGAL, IE GOOD IN COURT).

    Scott Morgan: 5 Reasons You Should Never Agree to a Police Search (Even if You Have Nothing to Hide)

    Read more here on just consent, or watch this video to learn some good life lessons with police encounters. (well worth the time to wach, it's the length of a tv show).

    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4nQ_mFJV4I]10 Rules for Dealing with Police (Full-Length) - YouTube[/ame]

    Has nothing to do with being guilty,like people want to believe
     
  5. #5 x1134x, Dec 27, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 27, 2012
    Officer Barry Cooper in "never get busted" says that when a person refuses, the cop goes back to the car, and puts out a call on the radio "I have a refusal". Then 10 cops converge on you looking for any and all probable causes, they bring a drug dog, cause it to indicate even if it doesn't on its own, then they have the probable cause, and you're toast. He recommends following his stash hiding instructions, then consenting to the search because according to him, innocent people almost always consent. In my 3 times being pulled while 'riding dirty' I've consented to the search, and have been released within a couple minutes. YMMV.

    He also claims the main criteria for how HARD you are searched is WHAT YOU LOOK LIKE. If you look like a hippy stoner, you're gonna get scrutiny. If you have a pot leaf keychain, etc you're gonna get scrutiny. If you look like a normal "stormin mormon" tax-paying citizen, they aren't suspicious of you.
     
  6. Most innocent people deny searches cause its a waste of time, ask your mom or dad or any non law breaking friends
     
  7. #7 x1134x, Dec 27, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 28, 2012


    Not sure if I have such a thing. {:)


    Officer Barry Cooper quote: "If you've hidden your stash in a hard to find location -- like taught earlier in this DVD -- give the officer permission to search if he asks. Here's why: One hundred times out of one hundred, when somebody refused consent to search to me, they always had something in their vehicle they did not want me to find. It was usually drugs. Sometimes it might be a Playboy magazine or something of that nature. But there was always something they did not want me to see. Law enforcement officers know this. Upon refusing consent, that officer automatically knows now you have something to hide. If you simply say "Go ahead and search my car," he's probably going to make a quick cursory search, and then you'll be on your way. If you refuse consent, he can do a weapons pat-down search of your vehicle without your permission, and upon patting the interior of the vehicle down for weapons, if he finds a marijuana seed or a marijuana pipe or something of that nature or if he smells marijuana, then he's going to search your car without your permission. If you refuse consent to search, he's liable to get a narcotics detector dog to walk around the outside of your vehicle. If that dog fails to alert -- as you learned in the K-9 section -- he could quite possibly cause that dog to false alert. Then you have no choice.."

    I think the thing that is not stressed NEAR enough is not only the fact that they cop has no right to search you without your consent, he also has NO RIGHT to DETAIN you long enough for the drug dog to be brought in. The tactic they use is simply an in terrorem use of detention. "he never asked to leave, so he was detaining himself voluntarily, all I said was 'I'm bringing in a dog', not 'you HAVE to stay here'".

    So if you DO refuse consent, the DON'T Detain yourself! Ask repeatedly "Am I free to go?" Make them say "no you can't leave".

    Still risky because there's no saying he can't detain you for a quote-unquote "reasonable" time for the "crime" he DID pull you over for (tail light out, speeding, etc). he can call in the dog, and just take his sweet time ticketing you while it arrives. Until you get that ticket, you are NOT free to go, you've just commited an "infraction" they can detain you long enoug to ticket you for.

    The officer arriving with the dog will start the K9 walk-around, not the officer ticketing you. He'll say in court he was just doing "regular police work, searching a car on the side of the road", as soon as the dog marks, or he makes it false alert, then they have probable cause, and you're toast.

    Its not the cops' first rodeo. They've probably both lost and won quite a few of these, and they know the "legal" method of obtaining probable cause on ANYONE. The fact that officer one called officer 2 on a "refusal to search" will NEVER come up in court.

    I work for the county. I've seen how the sheriff's office bypasses public information blocks. They use their personal cell phones to conduct business if they don't want it a matter of public record. Refusing consent would be good if the cops also played by the rules, but THEY DON'T.
     
  8. #8 TheDankDude, Dec 27, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 27, 2012
    I would never consent to a search, because i know my rights. Watch this video, this is actually from the first post i ever saw on GC, originally what got me into the sight.

    http://youtu.be/yqMjMPlXzdA

    cant get link to work properly, fugg it
     
  9. Lol the frame width is 420
     

  10. It's a gamble either way.

    If you consent, you're gambling on whether the cop will actually find your stash. If you don't consent, you're gambling on whether they'll call a K-9 unit and whether one is close enough to respond.

    I think for most people, not consenting is a matter of principle.
     
  11. Well everytime they call in k-9 theyre risking their reputation or career, remember, a cop wil only call k-9 unless hes 99% sure or your car smells like weed
     
  12. This. And if I don't consent and they search me anyway, which is likely, I will be much easier to have the evidence thrown out in court.

    I would never consent to a search. I don't have anything illegal in my car, and never do since I no longer drive and smoke.

    But I gain nothing from it. I only put myself at risk. Just like I would not say something to incriminate myself. I have rights Damnit. I'm not letting them be waived just to get myself fucked over.

    Not consenting to a search is not an admittance of guilt, just like choosing to remain silent with the police. And it's fucking dirty and based on pure speculation for a LEO to use it as leverage to prove I'm somehow guilty.
     

  13. Where do you get that information? :confused:

    Seems to me they'll call the K-9 for any suspicion of drugs if someone doesn't consent to the search. The issue for them is that sometimes there isn't an available or close enough K-9 unit, and they can't detain you for an unreasonable amount of time.

    I don't see how calling a K-9 unit and not finding anything would do any serious damage to their reputation or career... this is basically what K-9 units are for in this case.
     
  14. jail aint shit anyway put some money on my books let me get some soups and coffee couple white tees and some phone time . . . .

    5-6 trays deep a day, hustling cards and drawing designs for tattoos

    see you when I get home boo boo
     
  15. #15 Sir Stoner, Dec 28, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 28, 2012
    My uncle, ex military and ex narcotics, he got his mmj card for getting wounded, after he left the force, but he said, the cops who always called in the k-9 or tried to search vehicles were the first to be fired and sued, he said most cops showed restraint and only called in k-9 when they were absolutely sure, an when its a BIG bust, like no normal cop would call in the dogs if you look like a small user, just keep your car in good shape and dont violate laws, like dont run a red light if you have weed, obviously. But he said he would only call in the dogs if
    1. They were extremely suspicious
    2. They were rude and disrespectful when declining a search
    3. They had broken headlights
    4. They looked tweaked out
    So basically just be mormon around cops, dont be rude, dont cuss at them, be polite,

    My uncle used to drive drunk people home because "theres no point in creating more criminals", he just wanted to prevent accidents and death, but first of all, declining a search doesnt mean automatically guilty, my uncle knows i smoke so he taught me some of the trade, and basically denying a search isnt suspicious, and the cop cannot get a warrant, cause my uncle has been search denied like 97% of the time and those who consented had illegalsubstances, but the ones who denied mostly just had sexual items or personal items, trust me denying a search isnt suspicious, even if the officer youre pulled over by says it is, they only write warrants for serious crimes, so dont worry, haha i smoked with a cop, :) any more questions? Feel free to PM me
     
  16. Follow up: I asked 12 people today. 12 out of 12 said they'd allow the search. Don't know about your friends, SIR STONER, but they're probably closet smokers. {:)
     
  17. I'm riding a bicycle, plenty of stash spots, shitty when it rains

    call the K9 man pocket full of dog treats in one, mexibrick in the other
     
  18. Is it reasonable to records cops? With smartphones and shit everywhere. It's like the most accessible protection.

    I would have a cam in the car too.
    So I can secret cam the booty.
     



  19. Might only apply to his particular precinct, though... I don't think cops around here would hesitate to call a K-9 even just out of curiosity if someone declines a search.

    Granted a lot of times, it's just an empty threat.
     
  20. Recording a police officer is a felon, punishable by up to 15 years
     
Loading...

Share This Page