Advocacy & Safety - Would you consent to a bike search if asked?

There seems to be a rash of "got a ticket" threads lately that include the LEO asking for consent to search the bags on the bicycle involved. Some people are suggesting that a cyclist consent to mollify the LEO, possibly avoid a ticket and get on their way. Others would exercise their rights and refuse, despite the scowls and the chance of antagonizing the LEO.

What would you do? Consent, refuse, or consent only if you had nothing to hide?

Assume you are in no particular hurry and that you are being stopped for something very minor where there was virtually no chance of being arrested. Also, assume you are on a normal public road or right-of-way and not on a military base or airport property or something like that. In those situations, you generally don't have the right to refuse a search if you want to actually be granted access to the property. If you're already on the property, they usually have a right to search, and they won't ask you, they'll tell you.

No. I'm perpetually late even without having to wait for a cop to shuffle through my backpack.

I don't have any thing to hide but, no way I would not let them search my house car or bike. They may be able to show probable cause but that will be up to the courts to decide if my rights were violated and if anything in the search was used in court. I value my rights and they are being chipped away a little every day.

I have nothing to hide, but I am very disturbed by the agressive police state mentality of many of our folks in blue today.

I have no interest in seeing our civil liberties further eroded so I will most certainly not agree to let the police search anything of mine.

I would always refuse.

D'pends the the result of the ensuing discussion.
If he's cool and I'm cool, it's cool.
If it feels hinky or he's a dick, f him.

They may be able to show probable cause but that will be up to the courts to decide if my rights were violated and if anything in the search was used in court. I value my rights and they are being chipped away a little every day.

From what I understand the Supreme court just ruled that probable cause or no probable cause, the police need a warrant to search your house or vehicle without your constent. That hasn't always been the case.

I'm squeaky clean, no criminal activity, I don't consciously violate the law, nothing to hide.

And I'm not going to consent to a fishing expedition. If they have probable cause, they don't need my consent. If they don't have probable cause, "move on, there's nothing to see here."

From what I understand the Supreme court just ruled that probable cause or no probable cause, the police need a warrant to search your house or vehicle without your constent. That hasn't always been the case.

Wow, I seriously doubt that but It'd be nice. Got a link?
I do know that they recently ruled that police can't search your car anymore if they already have you detained in their squad car. They used to do that routinely to go fishing while claiming it was for their safety. But the court, correctly IMO, said that a driver poses no risk if he's detained away from the car, so there's no reasonable reason to search it without reasonable suspicion or probable cause.

Of course, they'll just get around it by NOT securing you in their car until they finish the search. They'll just have you stand there, probably cuffed, near your car so they'll have an excuse. If they can find a reason to arrest you for something and they can't manage to trump something up to prevent another passenger from driving your car away, they'll just use the "inventory" excuse when they call a tow truck.

I selected the second one, politley refuse. But just to be a funny guy I might let an officer search if pulled over while I was commuting just to see his or her response to digging through my bags of dirty cloths, underwear included. Especially if it is a pair with skid marks. Not sure if I'd warn them ahead of time, unless they asked what are in my bags. :roflmao2::innocent:

I think if you gve them permission to search your bike, then it opens up doors and the LEO automatically gets rights to do other stuff.

On a public road, I would always refuse a request for a consent to search and I would answer as few questions as possible, mostly limiting information to full name, date of birth and address.

On a military base, I would deal with the situation on a case by case basis, considering if the base entrance had the signs posted about searches or not, and what the stated purpose of a search request from the MP was.

Airports, I let them waste time looking in my bag. When I am carrying environmental samples for work, my checked baggaged seems to always get a visual search, the x-ray check must look really interesting. I always put the environmental samples under my dirty laundry.

Does search your bike include dis assemble it?

My recent experience with an off-duty cop attempting to enforce imaginary laws on me can be found here (http://chipsea.blogspot.com/2009/04/abuse-of-power.html).

In Texas, a cyclist is not required to produce a driver's license. The cyclist must give the officer upon request his real name and current home address. If the officer suspects that you are giving him false information, he may detain you until your information can be verified.

Often, types of ID other than a DL will be sufficient to satisfy this suspicion.

This is all of the information a Texas citizen who is not operating a motor vehicle is required by law to give to a LEO.

Does search your bike include dis assemble it?

Yes, it would.

Look, while you guys run off on tangents looking for West's Law volumes I'm going to hop on my bike and not be harrassed or harangued or paranoid with speculatory furies dancing in my head.

Sorry you have these troubles and best of the day.:rolleyes:

I'd refuse! it's very nice that the Supreme Court of the US has ruled that those kind of things are unconstitutional.

Even though they would find nothing wrong - they don't get to look.

I'm glad so many people are answering "refuse"!

Maybe if I was in a hurry. But definitely not if I've something to hide. I'm just amazed how many people consent to a search on COPS and they get busted for drugs all the time on that show. I can see why LEO goes on fishing expedition when they don't have cause but suspect something fishy.

I'm sure we'll be "safer" if they could search anytime anywhere like at airports for our protection and sadly I can see that coming if a terrorist blows up a bus or use a car/bike bomb in the US.

i'm glad so many people are answering "refuse"!+1

Does search your bike include dis assemble it?

I suppose it could, I didn't think of that contingency. I kind of doubt a cop would do all that work for a fishing expedition. Now if he had probable cause or reasonable suspicion, he might disassemble your bike, but then he wouldn't be asking you for consent to search in the first place. For the sake of the poll though, we're assuming it's just a public road and a regular cop with limited tools.

Maybe if I was in a hurry. But definitely not if I've something to hide. I'm just amazed how many people consent to a search on COPS and they get busted for drugs all the time on that show.I always wonder "what are they thinking," but I guess they're not the brightest bulbs to begin with.

I selected the second one, politley refuse. But just to be a funny guy I might let an officer search if pulled over while I was commuting just to see his or her response to digging through my bags of dirty cloths, underwear included. Especially if it is a pair with skid marks. Not sure if I'd warn them ahead of time, unless they asked what are in my bags. :roflmao2::innocent:

If they asked, you could just say "clothes". No reason to elaborate. They'd find out soon enough. :innocent:

I'm glad so many people are answering "refuse"!

Me too! And frankly I'm kind of surprised. Although I have to wonder how many really would when it came right down to it. Maybe I should have added couple options asking if you have actually refused or granted a consent to search request.

I always wonder "what are they thinking," but I guess they're not the brightest bulbs to begin with.

Imagine what they're thinking when they find out they could have refused a search. Duh!

Does search your bike include dis assemble it?There was the story where the college student had a sticker on his bike advertising the folk-punk band "This Bike Is a Pipe Bomb"
read the news section
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Bike_is_a_Pipe_Bomb


And the Memphis International Airport incident:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/02/16/tenn.bike.bomb/

Refuse, you have nothing to gain even by letting the cop search you, even if you have nothing to hide

I've had sensitive optical equipment damaged by customs during searches. My bike bags hold carefully rolled clothing for my day at work and I don't want them all wrinked up. Although I don't have anything to hide, I don't want people going through my stuff. I'd show him my ACLU card and be on my way.

Maybe if I was in a hurry. But definitely not if I've something to hide. I'm just amazed how many people consent to a search on COPS and they get busted for drugs all the time on that show. I can see why LEO goes on fishing expedition when they don't have cause but suspect something fishy.

I'm sure we'll be "safer" if they could search anytime anywhere like at airports for our protection and sadly I can see that coming if a terrorist blows up a bus or use a car/bike bomb in the US.

That's because all the clips of people who refused a search were cut out. The show is called COPS, not CITIZENS.

That's because all the clips of people who refused a search were cut out. The show is called COPS, not CITIZENS.:lol:

:thumb:

That's because all the clips of people who refused a search were cut out. The show is called COPS, not CITIZENS.

That's still lot of criminals getting busted for complying. :thumb:
Too bad we don't have more of that in the corporate world, SEC search my office and bust me. :)
Instead Madoff type get off stealing billions and I can't believe he confessed and pleaded guilty because of conscience, more likely he couldn't hide the ponzi scheme and decided to protect his family and the ill gotten fortune.

The police may need a warrant to search your home or vehicle but, the problem is, a bicycle is not a vehicle in many states (maybe most states-- it's been a while since I checked). If the cops think they have reason to search your bike, my guess is that they're going to do it. Refuse all you want; I doubt it's going to matter a whole lot.

Me too! And frankly I'm kind of surprised. Although I have to wonder how many really would when it came right down to it. Maybe I should have added couple options asking if you have actually refused or granted a consent to search request.


Several years ago I was stopped in Utah for speeding. The cop asked me if he could search my vehicle I politely refused and asked him for my speeding ticket. He held me at the side of the road for around 40 minutes until a K-9 unit showed up. They walked the dog around my car but the dog never hit on my vehicle so I was issued my ticket an went on my way.

Several years ago I was stopped in Utah for speeding. The cop asked me if he could search my vehicle I politely refused and asked him for my speeding ticket. He held me at the side of the road for around 40 minutes until a K-9 unit showed up. They walked the dog around my car but the dog never hit on my vehicle so I was issued my ticket an went on my way.

They didn't want you that bad...otherwise the dog would have hit on something. ;)
Just because they are cops don't mean they are good guys who obey the law and always do the right thing, sadly. Since the Bush folks made 'ends justify the means' defacto policy, trying to justify torture and all kinds of other nonsense, it has gotten worse. I haven't seen attitudes change much with new leadership. :(

The police may need a warrant to search your home or vehicle but, the problem is, a bicycle is not a vehicle in many states (maybe most states-- it's been a while since I checked). If the cops think they have reason to search your bike, my guess is that they're going to do it. Refuse all you want; I doubt it's going to matter a whole lot.

If the cops think they have a reason to search your bike, they won't ask you, they'll just do it. Otherwise, they have no more right to search your bike than they have to stop you as a pedestrian and search you. This is a constitutional issue and state law can't override your 4th Amendment protections (what little is left of them) by the definition of a bike. In fact, the threshold for a legal, warrantless search is much higher for your home, and much lower for your car.

That's because all the clips of people who refused a search were cut out. The show is called COPS, not CITIZENS.

That's a good point. They don't want it to become general knowledge that if someone refuses they just slink away or stand around for an hour waiting for the dogs. 99% of the time though, they just slink away. Wouldn't want citizens to know that now, would we?

www.justsaynotosearches.org

I would refuse. And my lawyer would probably get a call when I got home.

They didn't want you that bad...otherwise the dog would have hit on something. ;)
Just because they are cops don't mean they are good guys who obey the law and always do the right thing, sadly. (

This is why I couldn't give a simple yes or no answer. If I could assume all LEOs are ethical, I wouldn't hesitate to let them do a search. So I guess it would depend on the LEO asking to do the search. If I get "bad vibes" from him/her, I'll probably say no. Otherwise I would say yes.

Since I have great charisma, and a fantastic personality, I doubt I would ever be asked for a search anyway. :D:rolleyes::D

Me too! And frankly I'm kind of surprised. Although I have to wonder how many really would when it came right down to it. Maybe I should have added couple options asking if you have actually refused or granted a consent to search request.

+1 I think a lot of people get brave in their thinking and "I'd do this, wouldn't do that" - but when it comes down to it, things get fuzzy when you're actually out there on the road. It would be strange enough to be stopped by a cop while on my bike, I suspect some people would still be working through THAT thought process before they'd realize what they're consenting to do/not do.

For me, it would depend on where I was. If I were just on my own on a busy street going from A to B, I'd have to see credentials and ask for cause before I'd say ok, and if it felt legit, I'd allow it. If it were a public gathering where pedestrians were also being searched (like getting to the ballpark or a concert) and there were people around me, I'd be more willing to let it happen and get on with things. Just having a person in a uniform flash a light or not give a reason to have me stop my travel wouldn't be good enough.

But we're no more immune to things than anyone else just because we're on a bike. As long as the legit LEOs weren't impounding or harassing the responsible folks, I don't see the problem. I just don't see police bike searches becoming a "must worry about" thing for 99% of us.

I would refuse. And my lawyer would probably get a call when I got home.

What for? There's no law against asking. That's their standard M.O..

Now if I was the decider, I'd make it illegal for a cop to even ask to search unless there was at least some reasonable suspicion. When a cop asks to search without RS or PC, he's trying to intimidate you into giving up a whole bunch of your rights without realizing it. There's something immoral about that and it's not what I pay him for. At the least, they should have to "Mirandize" you when they ask.

Innocent citizens get resentful, uncooperative and mistrusting of all cops when they find out about this game being pulled on them (and I'd bet $$$ to dounuts the innocents far outnumber the guilty). Cops have a hard enough time trying to avoid being thought of as thugs without engaging in sleazy tactics and it has to have cost them a high price in the long term for the gains in public safety.

Of course if some cop repeatedly stops you and asks consent to search, that might constitute harassment. Then, by all means, please give your lawyer a call.

This is why I couldn't give a simple yes or no answer. If I could assume all LEOs are ethical, I wouldn't hesitate to let them do a search. So I guess it would depend on the LEO asking to do the search. If I get "bad vibes" from him/her, I'll probably say no. Otherwise I would say yes.

Since I have great charisma, and a fantastic personality, I doubt I would ever be asked for a search anyway. :D:rolleyes::D

Yeah, but the trick is, how good are you at instant ethics evaluations? Personally, I'm not that good so I have to err on the conservative side and go for the "nothing to lose" option. Having said that, I could conceive of a scenario or two where I might consent, but the odds are pretty low.

But, then again, I don't have your charisma and fantastic personality.:)

Since the Bush folks made 'ends justify the means' defacto policy, trying to justify torture and all kinds of other nonsense, it has gotten worse. :(

DOnt buy what the media and the prog-libs are selling.

Yeah, but the trick is, how good are you at instant ethics evaluations?

I suck at it. :( But I was talking more about getting a "bad vide". Everybody has at one time or another gotten those kinds of feelings about someone else before. Call it our sixth sense if you will.

My game plan when dealing with a LEO will always involve respect and cooperation. I think that would minimize the chances of them ever asking to do a search in the first place.

Here is what I was told during a trip to the DMV to get my license renewed. When you are out on public roads, the police have the right to search your vehicle. That includes bicycles. It's a pain, but its the law.

Its also a way to score on some good used bikes. The ones they've taken from drunks that were out biking. That came from the cops! LOL

I would never, ever consent to a search, because I have nothing to hide.

Those of you who feel it is more "convenient" or whatever to surrender your rights might have a hard time wrapping your head around this concept.

Here is what I was told during a trip to the DMV to get my license renewed. When you are out on public roads, the police have the right to search your vehicle. That includes bicycles. It's a pain, but its the law.


Really, which state would that be?

Here is what I was told during a trip to the DMV to get my license renewed. When you are out on public roads, the police have the right to search your vehicle. That includes bicycles. It's a pain, but its the law.Next time you see this legal expert, ask "which law"?



Its also a way to score on some good used bikes. The ones they've taken from drunks that were out biking. That came from the cops! LOLI don't know what state you're in, but do they have a vehicle forfeiture law in their DUI arsenal? Or are they just doing some extra-legal picking on drunks on bikes?

Here is what I was told during a trip to the DMV to get my license renewed. When you are out on public roads, the police have the right to search your vehicle. That includes bicycles.

I don't know about the rest you guys, but from my experiance with "DMV" employees, I get the impression most of them came from the shallow end fo the gene pool. I wouldn't take anything they tell me as something that needs to be written in stone.

Several years ago I was stopped in Utah for speeding. The cop asked me if he could search my vehicle I politely refused and asked him for my speeding ticket. He held me at the side of the road for around 40 minutes until a K-9 unit showed up. They walked the dog around my car but the dog never hit on my vehicle so I was issued my ticket an went on my way.I'd be extremely leery of the legality of this detention and "non-search." Walking a dog by something the cops want to search, but can't, does not violate the 4th Amendment. Detaining somebody, when they have no probable cause to search, while they wait for the K9 unit, becomes suspect, I think, depending on how long they detain the person. I don't know what the case law is on this, but I doubt they have free rein to hold you for as long as they want/as long as it takes to get a K9 unit there. More likely, they can "temporarily" detain a person, and the legality of the detention will revolve around what "temporary" means.

Of course, they had probable cause on the speeding citation, so they can detain you for that, but at some point, even the reasonableness of that seizure begins to be stretched.

I have nothing to hide, but I am very disturbed by the agressive police state mentality of many of our folks in blue today.

I have no interest in seeing our civil liberties further eroded so I will most certainly not agree to let the police search anything of mine.

+1

related note, Once met a guy (hispanic) who often was stopped when driving and searched for drugs an inordiante amount of times (his theory being because of his race and type of vehicle). He always did not give consent (tho the cops do it anyway), and afterwards always requested that the cop call his sergeant so he could report a complaint that he believed the search to be race related and without good cause. (no they don't beat you up at this point, they really do have to call out their superior)
After a while they stopped pulling him over and searching him, because all the problem offerers had become more educated.

I would very calmly and politely ask for an explanation of the request.

If the explanation made sense or offered sufficient entertainment value, I'd allow the search.