Security versus Rights

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2012/1030/Supreme-Court-to-consider-how-and-when-police-can-use-drug-sniffing-dogs

I’m all for using drug sniffing dogs, to detect drugs, and I don’t think police did anything wrong. Before they brought the dog up to the man’s font porch they already had enough evidence to be considered probable cause, which is enough to obtain a search warrant. Though they probably should have received a search warrant, and they wouldn’t be in the predicament that they’re in. But I see nothing wrong with it. They can be on the porch the same as anybody else, like a delivery man for example. As for the man with the truck, he was in public property, so I see nothing wrong with it. They don’t actually search their house or vehicle without the dog signaling that it smells drugs. They defiantly shouldn’t be using old dogs, or ones that can longer do their job. The dogs should be regularly tested. While dogs don’t always make accurate decisions, there is no error free way, and the dogs are as close to prefect as it’s going to get. As long as they test the dogs, then I see nothing wrong with it. If I had to guess the outcome, I think that Florida v. Jardines case will not pass. Florida v. Harris has a better shot of passing though they did use an “expired” dog which will make it more difficult.