Pubdate: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 Source: Bucks County Courier Times (PA) Copyright: 2002 Calkins Newspapers. Inc. Contact: http://www.phillyburbs.com/feedback/content_cti.shtml Website: http://www.phillyburbs.com/couriertimes/index.shtml Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1026 Author: Redford Givens THE NOSE DOESN'T KNOW ALL Being wrong seven times for every correct "sniff" is hardly probable cause for a valid search. Before rushing to validate dog searches people should consider the track record of drug dogs. The public has an exaggerated notion of how accurate drug dogs really are. Most folks will be astonished to learn that when the Lake City High School and Couer d'Alene High School (Idaho) were searched by drug dogs the dogs "hit" on 65 vehicles as "suspicious" resulting in all of them being searched. Of these 65 "hits" drugs were only found nine times (8 misdemeanors and 1 possible felony). In other words, drug dogs are wrong seven times more often than they are right. Being wrong seven times for every correct "sniff" is hardly probable cause for a valid search and this no doubt is the source of Hope Cunningham's wrath about dog searches. A drug detection program that is wrong almost all of the time is not something to brag about. Drug dogs are extremely unreliable because dogs quickly lose interest in playing the "drug game" and respond in an extremely random manner with no regard for drugs. It is widely known that bomb sniffing dogs can only be used for a very short time before they tire of the "sniffing game" and quit responding whether they detect explosives or not. The purpose of the Fourth Amendment is to prevent searches based on guesswork whether the guess is done by a man or a dog looking for a treat. Permitting searches based on a dog's untrustworthy sniffer is an evasion of our constitutional rights to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. Lastly what great good is served by destroying a kid's future over a marijuana cigarette? Redford Givens San Francisco, Ca. - --- MAP posted-by: Beth