and it was reasonable to hold the motorist because the officer suspected they may be carrying drugs.
It makes sense. I assumed what they were saying was that a cop can’t decide, simply because he has you, that you are going to be checked out by a dog. I’m confused.
I was stopped in Chicago last Thanksgiving eve at 11:30 pm on the last half hour of a drive from central KY. I had my metrosexual multipoo in the car and was surprising my wife who was with the grandkids. I was driving in a way that caused the cop to ask, “Why are you driving like a maniac.” I was also in my Scion FR-S.
Anyway, when they saw it was some 61 year old surprising his wife on thanksgiving and, truth be told, I wasn’t driving all that bad, they let me off with a warning - but not until the K-9 unit showed up to give me a good sniffing. He had been called before the cop even walked up to the car.
The only probable cause was the lateness of the hour, the driving and the car. That should not have been reasonable suspicion.
I don’t know what a “metrosexual multipoo” is, but hey this is America. I am not judging you.
Until municipalities pay a price for infringing on basic rights, these kinds of impositions and police state actions will continue.