You trained a Labrador Retriever to eagerly sniff out the aroma of dried cum on a plastic keyboard.

I guess it takes a perv to catch a perv?

#2 Didn't bother reading the article, did we?

@1: I think you mean Geoge Nader.

@4

Seriously, not worth engaging it. Out of curiosity I looked at its comment history. It literally has never said anything of any value going back as far as I could stomach. There might once have been thought in its now empty head. Who kboqs? But engaging it now is like talking to flatulence.

@5

What the hell is wrong with you? If a story about a dog makes you think of semen you should be worried.

What, youre not into puppy play?

And whatever remained of the 4th amendment is eroded further at the intersection of our love for cute dogs and bad science:

https://reason.com/blog/2017/09/13/what-…

"Jacob Sullum reported in 2013, dogs trained to sniff out contraband (in most cases, drugs) are wildly inaccurate and often poorly trained at all. Those reports you read about dogs being able to magically sniff out this or that substance are pharmaceutical-grade bunkum. In a 2005 case involving drug-sniffing dogs, writes Sullum"

It's amazing how many K 9 cops carry a little yellow ball hidden their pocket, (for totally different reasons of course. Some of the best tennis players in the world are cops and they need that little yellow ball in case a criminal suddenly challenges them to game!) but I'm sure flashing that little yellow ball at fido has nothing to do with the fact the these same color blind dogs have a nasty habit of targeting minorities and the marginalized for more police pat downs and intrusive searches.

It's all good though. Don't blame bad police training. It's the dog!

@9 While I agree drug sniffing dogs are a complete fiction, they simply use them to provide probable cause to search anyone they want, I don't see the same erosion of rights here.

These dogs probably don't work either, the cop is doing the searching and confirmation bias makes them think the dog was pointing it's nose in the right direction when they find something.

But, since thumb drives and cards aren't illegal they don't raise the same legal questions. The police are already searching. They aren't using these dogs as justification for racial profiling at the airport.

@10
You make some good points and I would agree if we were not dealing with human who already have extra-constitutional powers, but my experience with police is that they honor the 4th amendment to the extend they are forced to, or are allowed to find excuses to disregard it all together. Their incentive structure is based on arrests, not honoring the rights of citizens. The only time I have ever heard a Policeman show respect for the 4th amendment is when the are the person charged with a crime.

Setting aside the ridiculous notion that a dog could identify a hard drive, If the police trained a dog to identify unicorns and snipes, every situation that offered a chance for easy civil forfeiture, or rooting around for "well there must be a felony here some where!" would become an endless search for unicorns on thumb drives. "Well we didn't find a Unicorn/sex crime, but we just happen to run across X (fill in the blank).

Citizens regularly grant the police additional powers on the assumption that they operate in some objective alter universe without a huge incentive aimed at civil forfeiture and finding a felony to get a pat in the head and a quick promotion.

The police need clear rules to limit their power, not additional means to skirt the Constitution, or additional money to invent new crimes.