Poll: Would you consent to a search during a routine traffic stop?

[Gary Brommeland]

Great posts Gary! The tyranny word is starting to be more prevalent in the forums that I read. People are starting to wake up. I believe you are a man of wisdom, Gary, how far do we go in our insistance that our rights be respected? (Yes, I am stirring it!)

Oh...I voted "No" as well.

Well, I believe that everyone has to decide that one for themselves. My personal belief is that while our court system is hopelessly corrupt, it is still operational to some extent. Using the question at hand regarding a traffic stop/consent to search, here's how I would play it.

Officer: May I search your vehicle?
Me: No sir.

Officer: Why - do you have something to hide?
Me: No sir. I am simply exercising my 4th Amendment rights against unreasonable searches.

Officer: Well, if you want to do it the hard way, I can get a warrant.
Me: Please do, sir.

Officer: It's gonna be a long night.
Me: Yes sir, it is. Would you please call your shift superviser. I'd like to speak with him/her regarding your detaining me without cause.

Depending upon how it goes from there, I may retain counsel and file suit.

I am a law abiding citizen and am VERY supportive of my local Leo's. However, at the same time I see my rights being regarded by the government as "privileges", and that is totally unacceptable to me. If I am forced to file a suit in order to be treated as a citizen rather than a subject, then that's what I'll do.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[purple88yj]

I had answered the poll NO some time ago, but didn't have time to answer.

I did have a situation occur to me and a friend several years ago. We had been at his house putting a tire on its wheel. Once it was on, we took it to the corner gas station to get it seated on the bead.

We had just finished with it and was putting it in the trunk of my car when I felt two people walking up behind me. I told my buddy who looked and addressed the officers, one male, one female.

We had been speaking for a few minutes when one of them told us about a robbery that had taken place a block away. The robbers had sped away on a motorcycle. The male cop started looking in to my car using his flashlight. I asked him if I could help him with something and he asked if I owned a motorcycle to which I replied "no", and asked what he was looking for. He gave me no answer and kept looking in my car. I had locked the car when we had originally got out, so the doors were still locked. He reached for the door handle and learned this.

He ordered me to open the door. I asked why. He said something about looking for the money that was stolen from the restaurant and asked what was in the cooler in my backseat. I answered "My half-eaten lunch,...you hungry (yes, I was an arrogant kid)."

Again he ordered me to open the doors and trunk. To which I said "I don't think so. You didn't ask nicely." (Again the arrogance.)

The female pulled him off to the side and after a couple of minutes she approached me and apologized for her partners attitude and asked if she could look through the car...just to make him happy. I consented to her (had nothing in the car more than a tire and a half-eaten lunch, so I knew she would find nothing. Besides, she was cute.

As she started looking through the trunk, he started to open the driver door. I told him to step away, that I had given her the permission, not him, and the best I was going to allow him to do was admire the faded baby poo green paint. He gave me a very angered look, but stepped away from my car.

A couple of minutes later she was satisfied and thanked me for my time. He on the other hand gave me the glare equal to the bird. To which I smiled, waved, and left.

It only took the morning for this story to get around work to which I had many armchair lawyers tell me how stupid it was of me to refuse to let the officer search my car. Being all of 19 at the time, I had no more understanding of the law than most other 19 year olds, I was just being a punk. This time it worked out in my favor.

Moral of the story is: Parents need to know the laws, and teach their children I have/had great parents, but they are/were ignorant of the laws and their rights. They know the ones that pertain to average everyday life, but the finer points evade them.

Because of my devotion to firearms, I have learned quite a bit from people like the ones found here and through other means, and not just about gun laws.

[symbiont7]

Curious...

Could one say "no" to a search, yet open the trunk for the officer to look and only look into?

They can look into your vehicle as is, but is opening the trunk giving them permission or not?

[Bob The Great]

Curious...

Could one say "no" to a search, yet open the trunk for the officer to look and only look into?

They can look into your vehicle as is, but is opening the trunk giving them permission or not?

why would you? It seems like saying "ok, you can search, but only right here, don't look in the glove box, ok?" would be more suspicious than just refusing the search altogether. It's certainly not going to pacify the officer's desire to search.

[SIXTO]

Curious...

Could one say "no" to a search, yet open the trunk for the officer to look and only look into?

They can look into your vehicle as is, but is opening the trunk giving them permission or not?

Sure you can. Lets use the example that the officers are looking for a person. You get stopped, and there is nobody but you in the car. The officer can see nobody but you in plain sight. The only other place a body could be is in the trunk... so the officer asks to look in your trunk. You say sure, and the officer looks, of course no body in the trunk. The officer has no reasonable suspicion to look in your glove box, under your seat on in the console, so why would he? A body cant fit in those places.

[symbiont7]

SIXTO's scenario was the exact scenario I was thinking about (I think someone mentioned it earlier), or maybe one where they are looking for a large bag of money/drugs.

After reading this thread I have rethought my previous "sure, go ahead, I have nothing to hide" answer. But I also don't want to impede a true search such as for a person.

I guess what I'm getting at is while I now have decided my answer will be "no", I also don't see harm in opening the trunk.

But, does that allow the officer to search further? Even though I may have satisfied their immediate reasons, could they go further for some fishing?

"No you may not search my vehicle, but if you happen to glance in my trunk while I put this, um, pocket change back there..."

[briansmech]

i dunno

telling the officer no isnt suspicious, really. its a normal reaction.

telling the officer sure isnt suspicious either. another normal response.

"No you may not search my vehicle, but if you happen to glance in my trunk while I put this, um, pocket change back there..." is a little weird. its all black and white to the black-and-white's. this may trigger some suspicion.

[pgrass101]

I would say no.

There would be exceptions that would depend on the officer and the stop.

If the officer just asked "Mind if I look in you car", I'd say no

If the officer said that a vehicle matching yours is suspected in a kidnapping, robbery etc. Basically gives me a reason that to me indicates that they are not just fishing then, yeah I will probably consent to a search.

If not then I will protect my rights.

[symbiont7]

i dunno

telling the officer no isnt suspicious, really. its a normal reaction.

telling the officer sure isnt suspicious either. another normal response.

"No you may not search my vehicle, but if you happen to glance in my trunk while I put this, um, pocket change back there..." is a little weird. its all black and white to the black-and-white's. this may trigger some suspicion.

It may be a little weird, but I'm trying to come up with a way of letting the officer look into a needed area without consenting to a search.

[ptmmatssc]

No . Same goes for me and my house .

[SIXTO]

Maybe its the type of person on this board, but I have to mention that I have only been turned down for a consent search once. You guys almost all would say no. I'm suprised at that myself, and I only ask for one if I think theres a good chance that there are drugs in the car but cant smell or see anything. I would say the overall success rate is about 90% in finding drugs on a consent search.

[sojourner]

sixto - no offense, but the only time I would say "yes" is there was an amber alert / missing child alert and the LEO were checking every car. Otherwise, I'll politely decline the request and let the wheels of justice spin.

[SIXTO]

sixto - no offense, but the only time I would say "yes" is there was an amber alert / missing child alert and the LEO were checking every car. Otherwise, I'll politely decline the request and let the wheels of justice spin.

No offense taken at all. I said I would say no too. Sure, it would make my job a lot easier to trample all over people rights to get the job done, but thats not what its all about.

[Gary Brommeland]

BTW, I need to correct something on one of my previous posts. My information regarding the signers of the Declaration of Independence was incorrect. Many of them actually survived the persecution by the British with their property and families intact. Please accept my apologies for failing to vet my sources better.

Thanks to Rod for the link to their bios.

[Obiwan]

Nope... call the dogs.