Something depressing...

[JustinTime]

An employee of mine, a good man Ive worked with for years, went to a club this past weekend with his wife. The club's security was searching people as they entered, and a small group ahead of them got out of line and started to leave.

As they got in their car, local cops surrounded them proceeded to search them, the car, and eventually arrested all four. We dont know what they were arrested for, but it seems certain there was some type of sting operation nabbing people who didnt submit to searches by club staff.

To him, it was totally justfied, by refusing to be searched upon entering the club, it created probable cause for police to search them.

To me, refusing to be searched isnt probable cause, it makes a catch 22 out of our 4th amendment protections.

I was sad that this good and otherwise sensible man thought so, but I was absolutely depressed when the three other people present at the conversation took his side!

[Danke]

Everybody should have turned around and left. Never to go there again.

[Yukon Cornelius]

That sucks man and it is depressing.

It happens to me all the time. Just yesterday I got into a conversation about Abe Lincoln and three of my co-workers were aghast at what I was saying. They teamed up on me and started calling me a Communist...LOL a communist :D. Right there I knew it was hopeless.

[SamuraisWisdom]

Knowing the club business pretty well (I worked at one for a couple years) 99% of the time when people leave the club instead of being searched by security it's because they have something that they shouldn't. The police most certainly had probably cause in this case.

[RonPaulGetsIt]

Knowing the club business pretty well (I worked at one for a couple years) 99% of the time when people leave the club instead of being searched by security it's because they have something that they shouldn't. The police most certainly had probably cause in this case.


Not in a free country they don't. Maybe they just don't like the idea of being searched. Let me guess you think the porno scanners at the airport are a great idea as well.

[acptulsa]

Knowing the club business pretty well (I worked at one for a couple years) 99% of the time when people leave the club instead of being searched by security it's because they have something that they shouldn't. The police most certainly had probably cause in this case.

Absolutely not.

Invoking the Fifth Amendment can be done by innocent people, and they should invoke it far more often than they do. Refusing to be searched is something, these days, innocent people may do more often than guilty people because the guilty have faith in their hiding places, and figure refusing 'makes them look guilty'.

First, I doubt the 99%. Either the number is wrong, or I am one of only one percent of the population that is principled. Second, even if it were 99%, 99% is not probable cause. Following the person into a place and searching it after an eyewitness tells you, 'That's the one who did it', is probable cause. An assumption of 99% of anything with no firm basis is a way to violate the Constitution.

[BlackSand]

I was in 8th grade when I learned about this Catch 22. It didnt make much sense to me then. If an 8th grader can figure out that this isnt constitutional, then why the heck are judges allowing it?

[acptulsa]

I was in 8th grade when I learned about this Catch 22. It didnt make much sense to me then. If an 8th grader can figure out that this isnt constitutional, then why the heck are judges allowing it?

Perhaps it is because when some 85% of America watches Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader, they don't get good news at the end.

Did anyone else in your class get it? And more importantly, did the teacher even allow discussion on the topic? If so, kudos to that outstanding educator!

[Rocket80]

I'm pretty sure the SCOTUS has ruled that declining a request for a search is NOT probably cause to justify a search. Actually I think I read it in one of Napolitano's books. Just imagine getting pulled over by a cop who says "Mind if I take a look in the trunk?" and what, you say yes I do mind and all of a sudden he says "well, that's suspicious behavior and is probably cause for me to search it, open up!"

In this club situation I would just keep repeating 'I do not consent to any search' first to the bouncers, then to the cops.. if they do it anyway, well...then I'd really have to read up on that law

[acptulsa]

In this club situation I would just keep repeating 'I do not consent to any search' first to the bouncers, then to the cops.. if they do it anyway, well...then I'd really have to read up on that law...

...and find a lawyer who isn't afraid to sue city hall.

[BlackSand]

As far as I can remember he just explained the catch 22 and joked a bit about it. But I really dont remember. It was 5-6 years ago. But its one of the things that I learned in the class that stuck out to me. So he must have put enough emphasis on it.

[JustinTime]

I'm pretty sure the SCOTUS has ruled that declining a request for a search is NOT probably cause to justify a search.

I hope so, I dont know all the facts, I just know it looked like people were being searched for refusing to consent to a search. Perhaps the police had another reason, maybe they had been watching these people. I certainly hope so.

Whats more troubling to me than that this might actually happen, is that people seem OK with it. I feel like Im the only one who thinks "This is crazy!"

[JustinTime]

Everybody should have turned around and left. Never to go there again.

I hope not! This was in the office of my small business. Two of the people,
including the man who told the story, were employees. We were all having coffee and chit chatting with a client and the guy who runs a business out of the suite next door.

[JasonC]

Well, the bouncers (club owner/management) has every right to search people before they come on their property. You guys should know that....

The cop sting is BS, though.

[Danke]

I hope not! This was in the office of my small business. Two of the people,
including the man who told the story, were employees. We were all having coffee and chit chatting with a client and the guy who runs a business out of the suite next door.

:confused:

They had no idea of the sting?

[Matt Collins]

A good friend of mine was a bouncer at a major dance club in Orlando for a while. Basically when they found small quantities of drugs they just threw them away and let the people into the club. However when they found what they considered to be "dealer quantities" they would push the individual out into the street where the cops were hired on-duty cops were waiting to take them. The club wanted to keep the cops happy and didn't want the cops raiding the club at 2am looking for dealers like they had in the past.

[JustinTime]

:confused:

They had no idea of the sting?

No, one of my employees was telling us about what happened at a club he went to over the weekend.

I dont know if it was a sting, or just random searches.

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

I never consent to searches, just as how I never consent to drug tests. I'll go/work somewhere else.

[JustinTime]

A good friend of mine was a bouncer at a major dance club in Orlando for a while. Basically when they found small quantities of drugs they just threw them away and let the people into the club. However when they found what they considered to be "dealer quantities" they would push the individual out into the street where the cops were hired on-duty cops were waiting to take them. The club wanted to keep the cops happy and didn't want the cops raiding the club at 2am looking for dealers like they had in the past.

I have no problem with the clubs actions, if you want to use their property, you have to submit to their policy, if they want to search people upon entry, thats fine with me.

My problem is when police search people who chose not to submit to a search by bouncers amd tried to leave.

[specsaregood]

I'm pretty sure the SCOTUS has ruled that declining a request for a search is NOT probably cause to justify a search.

I think you are right but, if the cops followed them to their car with a dog, that then alerted on the people and the car they might have had probable cause. I wonder if they happened to have a dog with them.

[JustinTime]

I never consent to searches, just as how I never consent to drug tests. I'll go/work somewhere else.

Thats fine, but if the police grab you and search you for refusing to submit, then you have no right not to be searched, your 4th amendment protections have been stripped away.

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

Thats fine, but if the police grab you and search you for refusing to submit, then you have no right not to be searched, your 4th amendment protections have been stripped away.

Then the cop will just dig himself a hole when I take him to court because he would 1) find nothing and 2) have broken the law

[erowe1]

Knowing the club business pretty well (I worked at one for a couple years) 99% of the time when people leave the club instead of being searched by security it's because they have something that they shouldn't. The police most certainly had probably cause in this case.

Absolutely not. Refusing to be searched cannot possibly be probable cause.

If it were, then all limits on police searches would be lifted de facto. They could search everybody they want with no reason at all. The ones who refuse to submit to the search then give the police probable cause, so now the police can force them to be searched anyway, and the ones who do submit to it, it won't matter if they didn't give probable cause because they already get searched anyway.

[TC95]

This is depressing. People are so willing to give up their freedom because they've "got nothing to hide." Well, I've got nothing to hide either, but I don't think I should have to submit to random searches just to make sure I'm not guilty of something. Way to assume I'm guilty until I'm proven innocent! These brain-dead sheep are making it harder for the rest of us to just live our lives in peace.

[KCIndy]

I was sad that this good and otherwise sensible man thought so, but I was absolutely depressed when the three other people present at the conversation took his side!


I'm curious. Were the ones siding with the club/police sting fairly young people? Say, under 35?

I've noticed a really alarming trend over the past few years. Many younger people have grown up in the "police state" mentality where random searches, random drug/urine tests and other intrusions by the state are not only considered acceptable, but expected. Anyone who resists and tries to exercise one's Constitutional rights is automatically suspect and considered to be "weird" at best and a criminal at worst.

Am I wrong? Or has the government become so intrusive and overreaching that what would have been considered unthinkable thirty or forty years ago become the accepted standard today?

Please note: I'll make a huge exception for the younger generation here on RPF. I've been heartened to see the number of high school and college age persons here who understand the Constitution and have a great reluctance to be pushed around by an overreaching State. Congratulations! Your grandparents and great grandparents wouldn't have stood still while being stripped of their rights either.

[crazyfacedjenkins]

Knowing the club business pretty well (I worked at one for a couple years) 99% of the time when people leave the club instead of being searched by security it's because they have something that they shouldn't. The police most certainly had probably cause in this case.

Very warped view of the law. First off the "probable cause" is hearsay, because the bouncer is not a cop. Even if that were not the case, it's still clearly violates the 4th amendment.