# The Slim Jim Study



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Here you go, another report on a poorly designed study that shows the police have it in for drug addicts ;-)

http://www.erowid.org/freedom/police/police_article1.shtml


----------



## Stephanie Johnson (Dec 10, 2011)

Are you being facetious? 
This article is dead on.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

One has to consider the source of the information. For example, where Justice Souter dissented, he was only questioning infallibility in detector dogs, which I've said in the past is at best, fiction. The standard of probable cause is such that "proof positive" is not required. The Illinois v. Cabella case was a landmark case IN FAVOR of law enforcement. The slant this particular organization has is a tad on the liberal side. 

DFrost


----------



## Stephanie Johnson (Dec 10, 2011)

Mr. Frost,
I should much rather examine the points put forward in the article than speculate on the political slant of the organization. Besides, isn't political discussion taboo on this board?

That said:
I believe the current selection and training process of detection dogs in the US as a whole (both for police and military use) is so woefully incompetent that it is putting innocent people in jail and endangering the lives of our service men and women. 
Do you agree or disagree?

I believe that a disproportionate percentage of minorities are detained, arrested, and convicted for drug related charges (particularly in regards to marijuana) as compared to the using population as a whole.
Do you agree or disagree?


----------



## will fernandez (May 17, 2006)

Let me use my city as an example: Savannah. In 2011 we had 28 murders. Of those murders 24 were directly related to the drug trade. Of the drug related murders 95 percent happened in areas with very high minority population. Most of our dept's assets are deployed in those areas. Most of the contact made is with minorities leading to a majority of the drug arrests being minorities.

I am sure it is the same across the country in areas where there is high percentage of poverty whether they are populated by minorities or not


----------



## Jessica Kromer (Nov 12, 2009)

Stephanie Johnson said:


> I believe the current selection and training process of detection dogs in the US as a whole (both for police and military use) is so woefully incompetent that it is putting innocent people in jail and endangering the lives of our service men and women.
> Do you agree or disagree?


Disagree. 

You are not arrested for having a dog indicate. 

If a dogs hits on your car, and nothing illegal is found, you are not arrested and don't go to jail. Now if the dog hits, and you have illegal stuff in your car, then sorry about your bad luck!  Don't have illegal shit in your car. 



Stephanie Johnson said:


> I believe that a disproportionate percentage of minorities are detained, arrested, and convicted for drug related charges (particularly in regards to marijuana) as compared to the using population as a whole.
> Do you agree or disagree?


Disagree. 

Don't smoke, and you won't get arrested for doing so, minority or not. Smoke and take that risk.

When a disproportionate percentage of the drug using population happens to be a minority, it can not be blamed on the dogs, the cops or the legal system. Society or culture maybe but the job of the cops is to arrest those committing illegal acts. Do do them and you are cool. Pretty easy right?

But no politics right?


----------



## catherine hardigan (Oct 12, 2009)

First, this is not a study.

Second, the sources cited, with exception of the Chicago Tribune, are all either peer reviewed publications, court cases, or the New South Wales ombudsman. The Tribune was cited since they analyzed police data showing that only 44% of alerts resulted in illegal material being found. The NSW data is particularly interesting as the sample pool was 10,000 alerts over the course of two years.

I am curious why these numbers/sources aren't credible. What is credible in your eyes? Or, in your opinion, is a publication only good if it agrees with your preconceived notions and doggy biases?


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Stephanie Johnson said:


> I believe the current selection and training process of detection dogs in the US as a whole (both for police and military use) is so woefully incompetent that it is putting innocent people in jail and endangering the lives of our service men and women.
> Do you agree or disagree?
> 
> I believe that a disproportionate percentage of minorities are detained, arrested, and convicted for drug related charges (particularly in regards to marijuana) as compared to the using population as a whole.
> Do you agree or disagree?



I disagree. 

DFrost


----------



## Brett Bowen (May 2, 2011)

Stephanie Johnson said:


> Mr. Frost,
> I should much rather examine the points put forward in the article than speculate on the political slant of the organization. Besides, isn't political discussion taboo on this board?
> 
> That said:
> ...


I know you aren't asking me, but just to give another perspective. 

I also disagree. First, "Innocent people" is a loaded term. Innocent meaning that they did not commit any crime whatsoever and are wrongfully convicted. Are there currently "innocent people" in our prison system, yes unfortunately. Just recently here in Dallas man convicted of sexual assault was released from prison, he spent 31 years in prison. Many years ago Dallas DA would convict a shoe of sexual assault, that guy is just another name in a long list from Dallas County. I have the view that there are very few "innocent people" in our prisons, but they do exist. "Not guilty" is probably a better term. In the terms of drug cases, the arrestee either had possession or they didn't and the search was lawful or it wasn't (aka not guilty). Which is where a lot of the discussion comes in because of one word in the 4th amendment of the constitution "unreasonable". What's viewed as unreasonable changes over time and from person to person. I spank my kids for certain behavior issues, that's reasonable to me, but it may not be to you, same thing when it comes to law. Everyone views what's unreasonable differently. 

In regards to the article. I'm reminded of my statistics professor. He had a lecture where he talked about how to different people with opposite views can take the same data and prove their point with the numbers which we actually did in the class. So whenever I see percentages I always want to know how they processed that number and how the data was collected. That percentage can either be accurate or it can a number they set out to prove. The right statistician can prove anything they want to prove by crunching the numbers using the various stat formulas out there.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Brett Bowen said:


> In regards to the article. I'm reminded of my statistics professor. He had a lecture where he talked about how to different people with opposite views can take the same data and prove their point with the numbers which we actually did in the class. So whenever I see percentages I always want to know how they processed that number and how the data was collected. That percentage can either be accurate or it can a number they set out to prove. The right statistician can prove anything they want to prove by crunching the numbers using the various stat formulas out there.


Brett,

It's like the old saying, "There are three kinds of Lies
Lies.....Damn Lies.......and Statistics"


----------



## Brett Bowen (May 2, 2011)

Thomas Barriano said:


> Brett,
> 
> It's like the old saying, "There are three kinds of Lies
> Lies.....Damn Lies.......and Statistics"


That ain't no lie......:-D


----------



## Christopher Jones (Feb 17, 2009)

will fernandez said:


> Let me use my city as an example: Savannah. In 2011 we had 28 murders. Of those murders 24 were directly related to the drug trade. Of the drug related murders 95 percent happened in areas with very high minority population. Most of our dept's assets are deployed in those areas. Most of the contact made is with minorities leading to a majority of the drug arrests being minorities.
> 
> I am sure it is the same across the country in areas where there is high percentage of poverty whether they are populated by minorities or not


 And if you legalised drugs then the criminal element goes away. The Mexican drug cartles are now null and void. Los Zetas need to find new jobs. 
I really dont know the answers to the drug problem, but our current war on drugs hasnt, and wont work. If people are stupid enough to kill themselfs over dosing then thats their responsibility. Crime will never go away. Murder is illegal and always has been. The US has the death penality, Australia doesnt yet this massive deterant doesnt stop the USA having five times the murder rate than Australia. The incarseration rate of the US is 5-6 times that of Australia yet we have less crime. This isnt bashing the US this is just showing how the Zero tollerance, tough laws and heavy inforcement doesnt appear to work. 
Like I said, I dont know the answers, but its an issue that will always go on. Maybe we need to try different things such as legalising drugs to see if it does have an effect of crime and murder rates. I dont know if it will work.


----------



## Stephanie Johnson (Dec 10, 2011)

Here's some more lying stats:

"However, when you compare that pie chart to this one — the adults in America who have ever used marijuana, we find that white folks are consuming marijuana in larger proportions compared to their population. Over three-fourths of all marijuana consuming adults are white (76%), while only two-fifths (20%) are Hispanics or African-American. This is an interesting fact to note when compared to the proportions of white, black, and Latino people arrested, convicted, and incarcerated for marijuana. (Hint: those brown pie slices get a whole lot bigger.)"

http://stash.norml.org/who-are-you-us-government-statistics-on-adult-marijuana-users

Re the dog part: How many evaluation programs now select dogs trained to pass a test, and is this selection process not weighted toward handler
"interactivity" for want of a better word, and does this not lend itself to creative interpretation of indications?


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

I think cops arrest whoever is committing crimes, and that police concentrate on areas where the most in volume, and most serious crimes are being committed.

I have lived in very bad (high crime) areas..several times "in the hood" so to speak..When I lived in South Bend, it was rated as being in the top 4% UNSAFE cities to live in. The relative safety, and rates of serious crime, was very dependent on the what area of the city you looked at, the most unsafe were the low income areas, populated mostly by minorities, with high drug activity...period...

This leads me to say that what some consider a *minority*, on a national scale, is NOT a minority is certain areas...

Of course in very populated areas, big cities, etc. There are areas with concentrations of various races, and unfortunately the areas (in my experiences) that are mostly populated with what some may call minorities, are usually the higher crime areas, resulting in the highest concentrations of violent, and serious crimes..and although I do not have facts and figures to back up this statement, I believe a very high percentage of these crimes are related to what I call serious drugs, either committed by dealers, or users.

This tells me that there is NO conspiracy as to why more minorities are getting arrested. There are higher crime rates, more serious crimes, much more drug dealing and gang activities in the inner city areas and low income areas, which are mostly populated by the so-called minorities. Therefore there are more police there, and more arrests.

Abuses and profiling do occur for sure, but is hard to accuse someone of profiling if the area they work in is 95%+ minority population, and guilty is guilty...pc is pc....again I do realize there is profiling going on, I am not stupid...

I got profiled myself a couple times, because I was a white guy that stood out in an almost all black area...

If you go out into the rural areas of Indiana, you see a higher population of white people getting arrested, and that is because of the METH trend there for the most part...In the cities it is crack, heroin, coke, and Meth. Same goes in the rural areas, but the METH is way higher in those areas, that is were they make it...

anyhow I think when talking about races and "minorities" and motivations of police and profiling, there is a lot to consider...depending on where you are talking about...

I live in Waukegan IL
30% White
20% Black
45% Hispanic.

Take a look at Chicago IL
33% White
33% Black
27% Hispanic

So the term minority to me is relative to what area you are looking at.
In MY neighborhood, there are seriously under 10 white people, probably 20-30 black people, and the rest are all Hispanic, so I would imagine since no one in my house hold of 4 people have been arrested for anything, almost all of the arrests are of minorities. 

I have probably seen every episode of BAIT CAR...watch it some time, it is entertaining and actually disturbing how quickly and readily some criminals will steal a car..

Of course the shows are filmed in high crime areas, because they are looking for arrests. and they get them...I have seen 100's of these car thieves on that show and only remember seeing a handful of white people on there...

I also watch a show called the First 48...another awesome show...same story, very few whites, mostly minorities, because of the areas they are in, the high crime, high murder rate areas...and I would guess that at least 80-90% of the murders are drug related in some form...

It is well studied that black males from 18-30 are 7 times more likely to have prison records, and that murders are committed 7 times as often by blacks over whites...this cannot be based on "profiling" or based on false imprisonment or whatever...

I know this is off topic, but most serious and violent crimes are somehow drug related and most, unfortunately are committed by minorities..

The contributing factors such as education, and income levels can be debated for sure, but the facts are the facts....

I am NOT a racist...just to be clear here...it is a sad state of affairs all the way around...


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

I moved this thread to the Lounge. It really isn't about detector dog training. 

DFrost


----------



## catherine hardigan (Oct 12, 2009)

Joby Becker said:


> I think cops arrest whoever is committing crimes, and that police concentrate on areas where the most in volume, and most serious crimes are being committed.


You've never hung out with rich white people have you? In my experience, and the experience of almost all of my white friends, cops show up, take your shit, and leave. End of story. At most you'll get a diversion program, or probation, community service etc. I was present several years ago when cops arrived at my boyfriend's house and found his roommate's young plants growing in the basement. Any problems? Nope. Cops left with the plants. But then, the guys living in the house were white dudes in graduate school or medical school.

I contrast this with the experiences of my friends of various minority groups: they pretty much always get ****ed by the long dick of the law. Remember that prisons have become a for-profit industry in this country, and not a method of reforming behavior, so somebody needs to be filling those cells. Besides, many poor people can't afford the really good shit you get from the pharmacy with a prescription.

And while I agree that stats can be presented in a way that supports a certain position, I disagree with people who deny hard numbers as illustrating facts. I see far too many people ignoring facts because the reality doesn't fit within their narrow world view.


----------



## Jessica Kromer (Nov 12, 2009)

catherine hardigan said:


> You've never hung out with rich white people have you? In my experience, and the experience of almost all of my white friends, cops show up, take your shit, and leave. End of story. At most you'll get a diversion program, or probation, community service etc. I was present several years ago when cops arrived at my boyfriend's house and found his roommate's young plants growing in the basement. Any problems? Nope. Cops left with the plants. But then, the guys living in the house were white dudes in graduate school or medical school.


And the "rich white dudes" I know who get busted, get, well, busted.... "Rich white boy" who's parents own half the town, and vacation in Europe three months out of the year, just got 10 years for trafficking. 



catherine hardigan said:


> Remember that prisons have become a for-profit industry in this country, and not a method of reforming behavior, so somebody needs to be filling those cells.


Huh, and around here we let them out left and right... Over crowding... Want some of ours? :lol: Hell, unless it is a felony, Monday through Thursday you get a ticket as they wave you on your way. No room. 



catherine hardigan said:


> I see far too many people ignoring facts because the reality doesn't fit within their narrow world view.


 Pot, meet kettle...


----------



## catherine hardigan (Oct 12, 2009)

Jessica Kromer said:


> And the "rich white dudes" I know who get busted, get, well, busted.... "Rich white boy" who's parents own half the town, and vacation in Europe three months out of the year, just got 10 years for trafficking.
> 
> 
> Huh, and around here we let them out left and right... Over crowding... Want some of ours? :lol: Hell, unless it is a felony, Monday through Thursday you get a ticket as they wave you on your way. No room.
> ...


I never said trafficking, and drug trafficking was not the subject of the article... which you apparently did not read. That or you read it but did not understand it. If you are going to refer to my posts then at least stay on topic.

And if you don't trust the numbers and sources cited in the article, then please enlighten everyone with your own unquestionably correct research... replete with academic, government, and police sources, of course. Truly, I would enjoy reading your nuanced and unbiased analysis.


----------



## Jim Engel (Nov 14, 2007)

Catherine, usually when someone pops up I am not familiar with, I 
have a look at the information in the Member Bio section, but
you do not seem to have posted this information.

In general I tend to the point of view that our drug laws are much
too invasive and our jails have too many people that do not really
need to be there. 

But the police officers must deal with the existing laws, and 
naturally look for crime where the most crime takes place.

This is not discrimination, but just reasonable, logical operational
policy.

Just as an example, I read an article which claimed NBA black
players had a slightly higher rate of fouls than white players.

The conclusion was that this was discrimination, and that 
something needed to be done about it.

But looking at it logically, it is just as possible that white
players on average are slightly more timid, and thus actually
commit fewer infractions.

Not "profiling" has become the be all and end all of political
correctness, but I am comfortable with the idea of shifty
eyed Saudi Arabian young men being searched in the airport
at a much higher rate in airports than the general population.

Just sayin...


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Oddly enough, that lack of Bio had just been mentioned in the mod forum. 

Catherine, would you take care of that, please, before posting again?

Thanks!

http://www.workingdogforum.com/vBulletin/f20/


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

catherine hardigan said:


> You've never hung out with rich white people have you? In my experience, and the experience of almost all of my white friends, cops show up, take your shit, and leave. End of story. At most you'll get a diversion program, or probation, community service etc.
> 
> I contrast this with the experiences of my friends of various minority groups: they pretty much always get ****ed by the long dick of the law. Remember that prisons have become a for-profit industry in this country, and not a method of reforming behavior, so somebody needs to be filling those cells. Besides, many poor people can't afford the really good shit you get from the pharmacy with a prescription.


pretty simple..

do not commit crimes, you will most likely not be arrested, regardless of who you are...

I have gone to court as entertainment, there is one right around the corner from where I live...I have not noticed anyone getting preferential treatment because of race..first time offenders, usually do get let off easy.

people who have a history of offenses, or cannot make it through being on "paper" without messing up, and committing crimes, are sometimes still given more chances...sometimes not...judges have that discretion...

I have been going to courts to watch proceedings for years, it is interesting, and amazing how much crime is committed and how lenient the courts actually are...you should go watch some court proceedings sometime..

I got profiled...LOL a white guy in a nice car...

I got pulled over after my sister's wedding a looong time ago.
I was dropping my cousin off, who lived adjacent to a very bad area. The street I took to get back to the highway was a high crime street, crack dealers, prostitutes etc...on a friday night at about 2 AM...

On that little trip I was accosted by a prositute at a stop sign, she actually tried to force her way into my car...LOL.

a couple corners later, a guy tried to sell me some drugs as I stopped at another stop sign...

I got pulled over...at the next stop sign..I believe I WAS profiled, I was a white guy in a nice car, deep in the hood at 2 AM on a friday night.

The police asked me what I was doing I told them I was on my way home, and that I just came from a wedding...

I was asked out of the car, and was given a sobriety test, and was questioned pretty harshly, and asked if I would consent to a search of my vehicle. I declined...

The officer(s) were not happy with that, made me wait about 40 minutes for a county K9 to show up...vehicle sniff...no hit on vehicle.

I was warned to stay away from that area, and given a stern talking too about the crime in that area...and questioned about what took place with the 2 people that came up to my car...

When I asked why I got pulled over, I was told I was driving erratically, which I was not...

Sure I was pissed, but what should I expect in that situation. Police saw me in the area, late at night, actually saw me talk to a prostitute and a guy run up to my window, probably a crack dealer..

point is I was not committing any crimes and was not arrested.. I am pretty sure the cops probably thought I either was trying to buy drugs, or that I DID buy drugs, because of my refusal to consent to search, based on principle....

i have a few police officer friends that have since told me they will find a reason to pull over certain types of white people that are in certain areas, so it cuts both ways...

If I had let the prostitute in my vehicle, and bought a bag of crack, and then got pulled over, I doubt I would blame the police for it...even though I didnt agree with the supposed reason for the stop...that I was driving erratically..I would of course refused a vehicle search, and the dog would have hit, and then I would have been busted...I would not cry illegal search...

point is...dont break the law, you wont get arrested...most likely.. 

watch COPS...tons of white people getting into trouble, mostly all caused from drug use or being drunk...trust me on this, you get caught with hard drugs like crack, heroin, cocaine, meth, pills, etc...you are gonna get arrested these days, regardless of race...they do not cut many breaks for weed either anymore...from what I can tell...

I see all sides of it..it is not a perfect system, but laws are laws...ideological ideals are not realistic in most applications of anything...such is the world...you say prisons are not for rehabilitation, I can agree with that...I say they are for punishment...if that doesnt work, and people keep comitting crimes, then people are just habitual criminals...and if they are dumb enough to keep getting caught, then they deserve the punishment, MOST OF THE TIME....IMO

I see valid points for decriminalization of lots of things...but just because i think something should be made legal, does not mean I have the right to do something that is illegal...laws are laws...


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

catherine hardigan said:


> I was present several years ago when cops arrived at my boyfriend's house and found his roommate's young plants growing in the basement. Any problems? Nope. Cops left with the plants. But then, the guys living in the house were white dudes in graduate school or medical school.
> .


 The majority of citizens have no idea how the law is correctly applied and what it takes to gain enough PC to arrest someone. Just because your perception is that rich white dudes get away with crime I'll bet the officers would have loved nothing more than to lock up some snotty, bratty rich kid.....I know I enjoy it sometimes.

MJ plants in a cellar doesn't neccessarily create enough PC to take someone to jail FYI. It could have been a poor investigation. It could have been at the end of the officers' shift. It could have been a lazy cop. It could have been a lot of things. Just because someone didn't go to jail in that circumstance don't mean squat. How would you have liked it if they locked everyone up, including you? Bet you'd be singing a different tune.


----------



## Brett Bowen (May 2, 2011)

Howard Knauf said:


> The majority of citizens have no idea how the law is correctly applied and what it takes to gain enough PC to arrest someone. Just because your perception is that rich white dudes get away with crime I'll bet the officers would have loved nothing more than to lock up some snotty, bratty rich kid.....I know I enjoy it sometimes.
> 
> MJ plants in a cellar doesn't neccessarily create enough PC to take someone to jail FYI. It could have been a poor investigation. It could have been at the end of the officers' shift. It could have been a lazy cop. It could have been a lot of things. Just because someone didn't go to jail in that circumstance don't mean squat. How would you have liked it if they locked everyone up, including you? Bet you'd be singing a different tune.


and just because you can arrest someone, doesn't mean you always do. Here in TX there is only one circumstance where I absolutely, no questions, must arrest. The narc guys are always playing "lets make a deal", just watch any of the dope cop shows and you'll see it. That may have been what happened here.


----------



## Jessica Kromer (Nov 12, 2009)

catherine hardigan said:


> I never said trafficking, and drug trafficking was not the subject of the article... which you apparently did not read. That or you read it but did not understand it. If you are going to refer to my posts then at least stay on topic.


:grin: I read it. But I am impressed that my comments elicited such a defensive response that you felt the need to question my intelligence, comprehension and motives. Do we know each other? :lol:

I was responding to your comments about the "rich white kids" not getting in trouble with the cops. This has not been my experience at all, that of my friends. Pretty much right "on topic" when commenting to your post. ;-) 



catherine hardigan said:


> And if you don't trust the numbers and sources cited in the article, then please enlighten everyone with your own unquestionably correct research... replete with academic, government, and police sources, of course. Truly, I would enjoy reading yournuanced and unbiased analysis.


Since I was not quoting any statistics I don't know what you want me to cite. ;-) I mean, if you want, I can give you newspaper articles to document the arrests of "rich white" kids, and maybe e-mails from the captain about the arrest policy of our department (you know, the only things I stated as facts...). 

But while we are on the topic of research and facts, why don't you give us your nuanced and unbiased analysis, replete with academic, government, and police sources on the motives of our prison system and the real impact of drugs and the accompanying criminal activity on our society. 

Out of curiosity, where did you get you get all your info about the arrest policies of police when dealing with drug users/dealers? I mean, all you have mentioned so far with regard to sources are your drug using/growing friends. That does seem unbiased... ;-)

I stand by my earlier statement; narc dogs are a tool. They are there as a way to help the police and are not a threat to the law abiding citizen. Don't be doing illegal shit, and you won't have to worry about it. Smile and say "thank you officer" and go about your day knowing that they are being just as diligent about stopping the real bad guys.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> Here you go, another report on a poorly designed study that shows the police have it in for drug addicts ;-)
> 
> http://www.erowid.org/freedom/police/police_article1.shtml



This is the only part if the articles I was referring to

**************************************************
False Positives
A provocative research paper published in January 2011 showed that, rather than being neutral, police detection dogs alert where their handlers think they should. This research is one of only a handful of scientific attempts to test the validity of law enforcement claims of reliable detection.

The study by Lit, Schweitzer, and Oberbauer caused a stir because, in their experiments to test detection dogs and their handlers, the researchers did not use any explosive or drug scents. Instead, they created a course inside a building and placed red paper markers on various objects to fool handlers into believing that marked locations contained scents and "Slim Jim" meat sticks as decoys to fool the dogs. Even with no legitimate targets present in the experiment, 85% of searches resulted in at least one alert by the handler-led detection dog. Only 21 out of the 144 police dog walk-throughs correctly reported no alerts by the dog, while 123 searches resulted in a combined total of 225 false alerts.

Even with no legitimate targets present in the experiment, 85% of searches resulted in at least one alert by the handler-led detection dog.
The red targets designed to trick human handlers resulted in the vast majority of false alerts and were twice as likely to cause false alerts as unwrapped Slim Jims not marked with red paper. The researchers concluded that "handler beliefs affect working dog outcomes, and human indication of scent location affects [...] alerts more than dog interest in a particular location."1

Lit et al. compared the results of their experiment to the "Clever Hans" effect. Clever Hans was a horse in the early 20th century who was said to know how to count, but was later confirmed to be reacting to subtle cues from his handler and the audience. Lit et al. write, "The 'Clever Hans' effect has become a widely accepted example not only of the involuntary nature of cues provided by onlookers [...], but of the ability of animals to recognize and respond to subtle cues provided by those around them. However, an additional important consideration was the willingness of onlookers to assign a biased interpretation of what they saw according to their expectations."1 Issues of influence, expectation, and human interpretation of animal behavior become extremely problematic when Clever Hans is providing legal evidence used by law enforcement. To complicate matters, an actual alert isn't even required as an unethical handler can simply report an alert that didn't happen.
**************************************************

You deliberately place bright red signs that you hope will confuse the handlers. You have meat treats (slim jims) that any K9 is likely to show interest in. A bull shit "study" designed to arrive at a predetermined conclusion. 

When I get stopped (not as much since I got old  I cooperate I don't cop an attitude. If I'm asked if they can search my vehicle? I say fuk yes and I'm on my way. When I was carrying something I wasn't supposed to. I stayed out of bad neighborhoods. I didn't speed, I made sure all my lights were working. When I got a ticket, I deserved it. I didn't
whine that the PoPo had it in for me !


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Jessica Kromer said:


> Out of curiosity, where did you get you get all your info about the arrest policies of police when dealing with drug users/dealers? I mean, all you have mentioned so far with regard to sources are your drug using/growing friends. That does seem unbiased... ;-)


I have known many drug dealers and users...
they know the rules, and decide to break them at their own risks. sometimes very foolishly.....

hell the last time I bought weed scared me shitless...(of being arrested)

he had me meet him at a liquor store parking lot, that was closed..at midnight...had my scared senseless

I got in the back seat of the car, there were 3 guys in it...guns on the seat, tobacco all over the car from breaking up cigars, a big bag of weed that they were rolling up, a sack of crack about the size of a baseball in the cup holder, and a bottle and glasses of liquor in the car...and that was just what I saw from a cursory glance...

I was thinking what a fukking bunch of idiots they were...as was I for even following through with the BS meeting setup...threw my money at the guy and took off....

Then they started their car and pulled off with no seatbelts on, WITH NO TAILLIGHTS....LOL.

...I went to a gas station (after I put the 1/4 ounce of MJ in my trunk)...and on my way home I saw their car pulled over, with them all on the ground...felony stop style...

he called me when he bailed out, trying to "hook me up" and even told me his friends were trying to convince him to rob me...that night...

he went to jail. for surely prison, from what I saw in the car that night...sure he was nice to me...but WTF...guy was a hardcore criminal, and DUMB on top of it..

for sure I was dumb, but I have to think those guys were dumber...coulda done the deal in a bathroom of a fast food restaurant or something..

and came in a clean car, legal car, with the small amount of MJ I bought from him...ONLY...

he probably thinks HE got screwed by the system too, cause he was a minority...I say he was very stupid...period...


----------



## Jessica Kromer (Nov 12, 2009)

Hahaha!!! I just might have left a mess on the seat. Talk about scared straight. 

My ex asked me to stop visiting my high school friends soon after we met. I was super offended until he took me on a ride-along that weekend and I saw them get busted (he wasn't in narc, so didn't know it was happening until he was called for back up). Being with a cop for seven years sure did change my views on a lot of things when compared to being in high school and college. Don't get me wrong. I still do stupid shit, but I try to stay away from the stupid shit that will put me in jail.


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

> and just because you can arrest someone, doesn't mean you always do.


Depends on if you got a seasoned officer with some sense or a PITA rookie. They always arrested me when I was young. Never cut me any slack. Usually got thrown on the ground right after they told me I better STFU....... but, I have mellowed a lot. :grin: Thank god they didn't have tasers then.


----------



## Stephanie Johnson (Dec 10, 2011)

"You deliberately place bright red signs that you hope will confuse the handlers. You have meat treats (slim jims) that any K9 is likely to show interest in. A bull shit "study" designed to arrive at a predetermined conclusion."

More like an attempt to confirm suspicion of incompetence. Why should the presence or absence of bright red signs affect the canine's search, unless the handler is cueing the dog because of them?
Why are dogs being selected and trained and utilized who are finding the presence of food distracting enough to effect their work? 

"When I get stopped (not as much since I got old I cooperate I don't cop an attitude. If I'm asked if they can search my vehicle? I say fuk yes and I'm on my way. When I was carrying something I wasn't supposed to. I stayed out of bad neighborhoods. I didn't speed, I made sure all my lights were working. When I got a ticket, I deserved it. I didn't
whine that the PoPo had it in for me !"

This is simplistic. Compliance with the law is a given. Grey areas concerning legal application need to be examined. I have no desire to live in a police state Thomas and am disturbed with your willingness to let the law invade your privacy and nullify your property rights. Anyone wishing to search my car better have a legal right to because otherwise they get a big, fat "NO" from me.
I am even more disturbed that there are parts of America that resemble a third world country, and the implication that it is primarily a matter of personal choice to reside in them.

Isn't it true that there are government incentives for departments to increase their drug-related arrests?


----------



## will fernandez (May 17, 2006)

That is a huge negative. it costs the city close to seventy dollars a day to house a prisoner. once sentenced they are supposed to go to the state but that seldom happens and we continue to pay.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Brett Bowen said:


> and just because you can arrest someone, doesn't mean you always do. Here in TX there is only one circumstance where I absolutely, no questions, must arrest. The narc guys are always playing "lets make a deal", just watch any of the dope cop shows and you'll see it. That may have been what happened here.


Ha ha, one of my favorite lines; Do you know how to play tag? Well guess what, you're it -- now what?

DFrost


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Stephanie Johnson said:


> This is simplistic. Compliance with the law is a given. Grey areas concerning legal application need to be examined. I have no desire to live in a police state Thomas and am disturbed with your willingness to let the law invade your privacy and nullify your property rights. Anyone wishing to search my car better have a legal right to because otherwise they get a big, fat "NO" from me.
> I am even more disturbed that there are parts of America that resemble a third world country, and the implication that it is primarily a matter of personal choice to reside in them.
> 
> Isn't it true that there are government incentives for departments to increase their drug-related arrests?


I've got better things to do with my time then wait for the K9 to show up especially if I know there is nothing in my car. 
Any Civil Rights activists can freeze their dumb asses off on the side of the road to prove a point.


----------



## Jessica Kromer (Nov 12, 2009)

Stephanie Johnson said:


> Isn't it true that there are government incentives for departments to increase their drug-related arrests?


And toasters for meeting traffic stop quotas.... ;-):lol::lol:


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Jessica Kromer said:


> And toasters for meeting traffic stop quotas.... ;-):lol::lol:


We no longer have quotas. We are now allowed to stop as many as we want.

DFrost


----------



## Christopher Jones (Feb 17, 2009)

Thomas Barriano said:


> I've got better things to do with my time then wait for the K9 to show up especially if I know there is nothing in my car.
> Any Civil Rights activists can freeze their dumb asses off on the side of the road to prove a point.


And thats all good, you can wave your rights "when YOU want to", not have them waved by someone else if you dont want them waved.
So is there a limit where you would envoke your rights? What if the pol pol knocked at your house and asked to just do a random search of your house and possesions just to make sure you didnt have anything illegal in your house? What if there was a spate of internal concealment and they just wanted to do a quick cavity search and then you could be on your way?
There is a point at which you will claim your rights, and some people will claim all their rights and other wont. So long as you willingly make that decision to wave them, thats all cool.


----------



## Christopher Jones (Feb 17, 2009)

David Frost said:


> We no longer have quotas. We are now allowed to stop as many as we want.
> 
> DFrost


 The police here got caught issuing quotas for arrests and then said the offfical email was a "mistake" lol
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/leake...eet-arrest-quota/story-e6frea6u-1226199485326


----------



## Stephanie Johnson (Dec 10, 2011)

http://attorneygeneral.state.wy.us/dci/grants.html

So how does a department go about getting itself one of these?


----------



## Jessica Kromer (Nov 12, 2009)

Never mind


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Christopher Jones said:


> The police here got caught issuing quotas for arrests and then said the offfical email was a "mistake" lol
> http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/leake...eet-arrest-quota/story-e6frea6u-1226199485326



You gotta quit applying your faux pas' to the U.S. I'm sure if you look hard enough you'll find an article from the states to put in our face.

The term "Quota" has been replaced with "Minimum Performance". It's used primarily to determine if an officer is doing their job or not. Also used sometimes in determining if an officer should be promoted or given a specialty position. Most agencies won't admit to it though unless high productivity is explicitly mentioned in the job description applied for.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

I have never given up any rights, have refused 3 vehicle searches, and also have been in 3 other peoples cars that refused to be searched.

no arrests made on those stops.. just a hassle, but to me it was worth it...just like fighting a bogus parking ticket, or bogus citation for "illegally training pitbulls" (dogs were not pitbulls, and no such law existed anyway)

I also refused a search of my home one time, when I had a renter make a deal" with the narc unit, and backed out of it...they were not happy at all, came to my house when he was not home, tried to search it...I refused...even threatened to come back and kill my dogs...said they would be back with a warrant, and they never came back.

and also refused entry of an officer that wanted to come in my apartment for no apparent reason one time...

laws are laws, and rights are rights... I am not an activist by any means, but I think it is important to try to keep the lines clear if possible...

I am always respectful, and non-confrontational and cooperative, unless it involves giving up my rights, and for the most part have always been treated with respect and treated fairly in my dealings with police, even had a few guys give me warnings on traffic stops that I did not deserve in my opinion, but I did not argue with them...

one guy gave me a warning, said I had so many points at that time, if he did write the ticket, I woulda lost my license..I was very freindly and cooperative with him...

on the other hand I have a friend that is a total AZZHOLE to every cop he encounters, he seems to get hassled more, and ticketed more...even got a ticket for a seatbelt violation as a passenger, when I got a warning, because he was an azzhole to the cop, I would have tazed him if it was me


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Joby Becker said:


> on the other hand I have a friend that is a total AZZHOLE to every cop he encounters, he seems to get hassled more, and ticketed more...even got a ticket for a seatbelt violation as a passenger, when I got a warning, because he was an azzhole to the cop, I would have tazed him if it was me


People who don't know how to STFU better be squeaky clean. LOL You'd be amazed at the statutes a cop can enforce when they're in a ZT (zero tolerance) mindset. Most cops aren't but all it takes is one azzhole with a big mouth who thinks he's safe to bring up a case of the ZTs.:grin:


----------



## Christopher Jones (Feb 17, 2009)

Howard Knauf said:


> You gotta quit applying your faux pas' to the U.S. I'm sure if you look hard enough you'll find an article from the states to put in our face.
> 
> The term "Quota" has been replaced with "Minimum Performance". It's used primarily to determine if an officer is doing their job or not. Also used sometimes in determining if an officer should be promoted or given a specialty position. Most agencies won't admit to it though unless high productivity is explicitly mentioned in the job description applied for.


The world doesnt revolve around the US no matter how much you might think it does


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Howard Knauf said:


> People who don't know how to STFU better be squeaky clean. LOL You'd be amazed at the statutes a cop can enforce when they're in a ZT (zero tolerance) mindset. Most cops aren't but all it takes is one azzhole with a big mouth who thinks he's safe to bring up a case of the ZTs.:grin:


he swears they have him in the computer to hassle him...he swears it..

guy is a total computer nerd too, never drank alchohol, never did any drugs, long hair, metal/hair band nerd type.....but is really just a dick to cops...he is kind of a real whacko libertarian type though too...

claims they did a "felony" stop on him not too long ago for no reason, so maybe he is "in the system" to be harrassed...who knows for sure 

he's an oxymoron...about 6'5 300 lbs. real long hair...heavy metal type guy, that is actually just a computer geek...with a bad attitude towards police...

When his dad died, I had to drive 50 miles to Chicago, because he found a GUN in his dads drawer, and he was afraid to touch it, told me I could have it if I wanted it...drove out there...it was a a freaking pellet gun...one of those .45 co2 guns, super old, didnt even work...I was pretty pissed off....

I will say this, he is also pretty paranoid about anything that he thinks "might" get him in trouble...to an extreme irrational level...


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Christopher Jones said:


> The world doesnt revolve around the US no matter how much you might think it does


 I don't think that at all. I do think that the vast majority of the membership are U.S based and that those people responding to this thread and others could care less what happens in another country because it doesn't directly affect their life. Sad, but true.


----------



## Christopher Jones (Feb 17, 2009)

Howard Knauf said:


> I don't think that at all. I do think that the vast majority of the membership are U.S based and that those people responding to this thread and others could care less what happens in another country because it doesn't directly affect their life. Sad, but true.


Thats okay. I still like you.


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Christopher Jones said:


> Thats okay. I still like you.


Likewise.


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

I do think there is some value in people questioning the methods used to enforce the laws. If there is a flaw it needs to be known. If using a K9 to conduct a search is flawed...which dogs can make mistakes that needs to be open information. The idea of K9 police dog by many of my non dog friends is they are in fact infaliable. That all K9 police dogs are so highly trained none of them ever make a mistake. We know this is not true. This needs to be known for 2 reasons. One denying it will never lead to training that is better...the old status quo will remain in effect. And the other for peoples rights in a court case... An indication by a dog provides sufficent reason to search. Now if there is nothing in the car... the whole oh well excuse for me is not sufficient enough for me to get my right to privacy violated. I will be pissed. 

Also, the police need and should welcome a highly level scruitny. They are the ****ers with the guns and the power. And we all know that as well as the dogs being subject to error...humans are also. 

Not all Liberals that question the authority of methods used believe it or not are not trying to protect thier own illegal activity. Some of them actually give a shit that things are being done correctly.


----------



## Ariel Peldunas (Oct 18, 2008)

Stephanie Johnson said:


> I believe the current selection and training process of detection dogs in the US as a whole (both for police and military use) is so woefully incompetent that it is putting innocent people in jail and endangering the lives of our service men and women.


Stephanie,

I don't know you and I'm not sure what your background is with detection dogs, but Kudos to you. I agree with that statement 100% wholeheartedly. In my experience, more often than not, detection dogs working in an operational capacity have no business being there. Excluding handlers/trainers who intentionally train their dogs to respond to subtle, non-verbal cues, the root of the issue lies in dogs that are not properly trained to ignore handler cues and distractor odors. I have less sympathy for those who feel their rights were violated because a search that was performed incorrectly resulted in the discovery of contraband. If the contraband wasn't there, there would be (hopefully) no grounds for arrest. However, I cannot apply the same reasoning to detection dogs utilized to search for devices that may be harmful to the handler and others. It's simply not acceptable for those dogs to be deficient or unreliable.


----------



## Christopher Jones (Feb 17, 2009)

Ariel Peldunas said:


> Stephanie,
> 
> I don't know you and I'm not sure what your background is with detection dogs, but Kudos to you. I agree with that statement 100% wholeheartedly. In my experience, more often than not, detection dogs working in an operational capacity have no business being there. Excluding handlers/trainers who intentionally train their dogs to respond to subtle, non-verbal cues, the root of the issue lies in dogs that are not properly trained to ignore handler cues and distractor odors. I have less sympathy for those who feel their rights were violated because a search that was performed incorrectly resulted in the discovery of contraband. If the contraband wasn't there, there would be (hopefully) no grounds for arrest. However, I cannot apply the same reasoning to detection dogs utilized to search for devices that may be harmful to the handler and others. It's simply not acceptable for those dogs to be deficient or unreliable.


 What scares me even more is private compaines who get a rank average dog, throw around a towel scented with gun powder and then offer their services as bomb dog detection. Theres one such company over here that does it and they wouldnt have a clue what they are doing. But its amazing what a fancy website and some colour flyers will do.


----------



## Jim Duncan (Jan 19, 2009)

Boy, I love these types of threads. I was anxiously waiting to hear some new techniques for testing, selecting and training detection dogs from some of the obvious experts.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Jim Duncan said:


> Boy, I love these types of threads. I was anxiously waiting to hear some new techniques for testing, selecting and training detection dogs from some of the obvious experts.


chuckle, chuckle, me too. 

DFrost


----------



## Jim Cook (Mar 17, 2010)

Damn...one more thing to proof my dog off of....


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

I would submit the new way to do it, but it will be included in my book. I haven't advertised my book in a couple of years perhaps now is a good time. There will only be one copy, hand typed and printed on my handy dandy cheapest printer I could buy. Price is only one million dollars for this one-of-a-kind. I'll tell all in this exciting journal of mystery, smoke and mirrors and scientific proven principles (research not included). It's shred every thought you might have had on the correct way to train a detector dog.

DFrost


----------



## will fernandez (May 17, 2006)

shred......very funny

Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

DAvid

You're not going to be able to get $million unless your method is
100% reliable/never fail ;-)


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> DAvid
> 
> You're not going to be able to get $million unless your method is
> 100% reliable/never fail ;-)



And have a chapter on shredding! :-o :-# 8-[


----------



## Tim Lynam (Jun 12, 2009)

From what I read on the internet rumor mill Thomas, it's worth more than 1 million. As I understand it, the last page is written in scent for the dog to read. It explains how to stand up on hind legs and slap the sh#t out of the handler every time they are being stupid. Immediate 100% improvement in performance guaranteed!!


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> DAvid
> 
> You're not going to be able to get $million unless your method is
> 100% reliable/never fail ;-)


Oh but it is guaranteed to produce 100% reliable/never fail dogs. If it fails to produce as advertised you didn't do it correctly. Even understanding that you failed to follow directions, I'll take the book back and refund your shipping costs. 
I can neither confirm nor deny the rumor about the "scented" chapter.
DFrost


----------



## Jim Duncan (Jan 19, 2009)

David Frost said:


> I would submit the new way to do it, but it will be included in my book. I haven't advertised my book in a couple of years perhaps now is a good time. There will only be one copy, hand typed and printed on my handy dandy cheapest printer I could buy. Price is only one million dollars for this one-of-a-kind. I'll tell all in this exciting journal of mystery, smoke and mirrors and scientific proven principles (research not included). It's shred every thought you might have had on the correct way to train a detector dog.
> 
> DFrost


LOL. That sounds like a great book. However, I think some of the people commenting here think they have already read your book and they have the statistics to back up there claims.


Jim


----------



## Skip Morgart (Dec 19, 2008)

Thomas Barriano said:


> DAvid
> 
> You're not going to be able to get $million unless your method is
> 100% reliable/never fail ;-)



It's like the guy on the street corner selling pencils.

Potential buyer: "Hey, how much are your pencils? I just lost mine."

The seller: "Well, they are a million bucks apiece."

Potential buyer: "Wow, isn't that a ridiculous price for one pencil?"

The seller: "All I have to do is sell one".


----------



## Tim Lynam (Jun 12, 2009)

David,

Throw us a bone here! Is the rumor your ghost writer was Skooby Do true? Sheer genius!


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Tim Lynam said:


> David,
> 
> Throw us a bone here! Is the rumor your ghost writer was Skooby Do true? Sheer genius!


Once again, I'll have to check my security. I can't give away too much about my sources of information, but true experts in respective field. When it comes to the use of electronics, people will marvel and say ---- (pick your favorite electronics mentor) Who??????

I should stop though, soon they'll be wanting me to pay for a ad or I might have to moderate my own posts.

I have no comment about who might be ghost writing.

DFrost


----------

