Court: Cops have the right to frisk everyone

[Truebeliever]

It's real simple. Your authority only extends to people who are breaking the law. Someone who isn't suspected of a crime has every bit as much a right to keep their holstered weapon as you do.

I get that you think you're special, but that's the problem.

Imagine the scenario you describe, but the person arriving on scene is not an LEO. Who searches who, who disarms who ? You literally should not have any power that every other law abiding citizens has. If you can't do your job because of that, we either need to change your job, give *everyone* that authority, or find someone who can do the job without it.

One of the fundamental tenants of a free society is that no one gets special privileges or immunities, no one.

Did you read the case. It was a car stop for a violation of the law. This wasn't someone who happened to be CCW with or without a license.

This case established nothing in in the law

No special privileges at all. It is not anything to do with CCW except that during the car stop he frisked the guy because he did suspect something was up. I didn't read the testimony in the suppression hearing but they be other factors as to why he suspected something. Frisk for a seatbelt aren't normal. He was found with a gun and a felon.

This is not new case law.

And special privileges would mean I would not be subject to the same stop which I can and have.

 

[Truebeliever]

I'm just going to leave this here.

U.S. v. Robinson: Have Concealed Carriers Lost the 4th Amendment?

Thank you for the link and maybe if everyone didn't do what I did, which was not read the link or researching what actually happened, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Please read the actual facts of the case and the CCW who wrote this has common sense about it.

 

[4excal]

WTF is that?? Ooooh that prop from that Nicolas Cage movie.

Reminder every once and a while is good, even for a judge.
View attachment 7807
Robin

 

[Criticalt]

Ruin your life? A frisk ruins your life? I promise you that I have been stopped and frisked than most of people on this forum combined. Stopping, frisking and disarming someone saves lives. Not just the cop but the person stopped as well. It keeps a bad move on the person stopped for being interrupted as going for gun because the cop knows he doesn't have one. I can have all the people and training around me and still get shot and killed. There is plenty of videos of cops getting killed. Official status, etc etc didn't help them right?

Okay, i see a part of a shoulder holster or something that tells me you are armed. Maybe just the bulge of the gun butt. I frisk you, disarm you and get your paperwork. You are a CCW and I return your weapon. How is your life ruined?

You say determine who is a threat? Okay, you tell me how? Maybe the guy with the gun is the biggest threat until proven otherwise? That's what the training would tell you. But you tell me how would you determine it . Please tell me.

By your standard, I should arrest the person for the violation of the law I observed such as a speeding ticket, then search and disarm if I suspected a weapon. Oh, wait it wasn't a weapon or it was a legally owned weapon yet I just arrested the person for a ticketabke offense. What should I do now? He is already in handcuffs and told he is under arrest before searching him. Do you think he would rather have been frisked , let go with a ticket? Do you think his life is ruined then ?

You stop to frisk a guy who just had his wisdom teeth out. Being in a hurry that morning the guy takes a couple of his pain pills out if the bottle and puts them in his pocket for latter. Wham, now you got him on FELONY drug possession.....life ruined.

You frisk a guy who just bought a knife at a local NY Walmart. You stand on the curd and jump off, the knife opens, 4th degree criminal possession of a weapon........life ruined.

You want more?

 

[4excal]

Ooooo @Willjr75 where arrrrre yoooouuu, I wanna argue!


@GOPerfect hasn't chimed either!?? What's going on today?!

 

[Uninformed and Compliant]

The officer's safety is paramount, for certain, but his right to seek security not superior to any rights of anyone else. A blanket "compelling safety interest" is unlawful. I can and WILL justify any amount of atrocity under the guise of "safety" if some putz tries to make it superior.

Luckily there is no conflict, here; if the officer fears for his safety, he is free to retreat just like the rest of us. He has no duty or obligation to endure harm, ever. You can scream, "YES BUT HIS JOB" all day long; he has a way to ensure his safety without violating the sacred innate rights that define this country, and that way is reasonable. We are not Europe. Being a cop is not a suicide pact, nor is it vassalage. And we will not tolerate "safety" being used to make it either of those two.

 

[Truebeliever]

You stop to frisk a guy who just had his wisdom teeth out. Being in a hurry that morning the guy takes a couple of his pain pills out if the bottle and puts them in his pocket for latter. Wham, now you got him on FELONY drug possession.....life ruined.

You frisk a guy who just bought a knife at a local NY Walmart. You stand on the curd and jump off, the knife opens, 4th degree criminal possession of a weapon........life ruined.

You want more?

I think you misunderstand the difference between a Terry stop ( a stop and frisk) and an arrest.

Reasonable suspicion is the standard for a stop that a crime is occurring, may about to occur, or has occurred.
A person may stopped on a violation or infraction committed in the officer's presence ( probable cause standard)

Then it goes it reasonable that person may be armed ( legal or not), then a frisk may be done. That is a pat down of the person. If they can feel an object with might be a weapon they can pull it out. NYS we need probable cause for drugs, not reasonable suspicion as it is with other things.

What happens after the frisk is the problem and not the frisk that "ruins someone's day or life". If it's legally posssessed then it is returned to the person if they are not arrested. Do you have any idea how many times cops have disarmed someone ( gun or knife), wrote thevticket or gave a warning, and returned the item to the person. No lives ruined. The examples of a knifevfrom Walmart had more to due with the law rather than the cop's actions to recover the knife (but maybe the cops decision to make the arrest after that which is a different decision-misdemeanors the cop has a discretion in most cases).
If you had any idea how many knives I have pulled off of people and returned to them ( bs gravity knife or not), might know what you believe as life ruining is rare compared to the number of times people are disarmed.

No arrest, no lives ruined but we were both safe from scwespon being used or a bad "misunderstanding " that could have caused a tragedy.
And yes , sometimes a frisk leads to an arrest, then the problem you should have is with the law itself

 

[Truebeliever]

The officer's safety is paramount, for certain, but his right to seek security not superior to any rights of anyone else. A blanket "compelling safety interest" is unlawful. I can and WILL justify any amount of atrocity under the guise of "safety" if some putz tries to make it superior.

Luckily there is no conflict, here; if the officer fears for his safety, he is free to retreat just like the rest of us. He has no duty or obligation to endure harm, ever. You can scream, "YES BUT HIS JOB" all day long; he has a way to ensure his safety without violating the sacred innate rights that define this country, and that way is reasonable. We are not Europe. Being a cop is not a suicide pact, nor is it vassalage. And we will not tolerate "safety" being used to make it either of those two.

A cop who "retreats" just because he fears the guy might have a gun like the general public will be quickly out of job in most cases. Most cops run TOWARD gunfire. It is part of the job and as a condition of employment can be compelled to enter such environments. The power of a Terry stop is not taken lightly and has conditions. Even with probable cause. And is given almost solely limited to the officer's geographic area of employment at least in NYS. A local NY cop can arrest someone for a misdemeanor or felony anywhere in NYS based on probable cause. A civilian it is for a felony and the standard is in fact committed yet a civilian could stop and detain someone for the police for a misdemeanor and even frisk and disarm them awaiting arrival of the police . No special powers. It's done in most shoplifting cases and done in most "civilian holding one" cases.

The main difference is that if the person resist the a legal Terry stop by the police there are legal consequences

 

[Marine Cpl]

What we are talking about here is a guy walking into a pizza shop frequented by a cop and a cop sees a print. No action should be taken by the cop.

When a cop pulls someone over for rolling a red, a ticket should be issued and nothing more after his plate and license are run. Nevermind the bulge. It's none of his business.

Now if a cop pulls over and suspects him of a crime, now you are cooking with fire. Now the cop can disarm him because he's being investigated for a crime

 

[Criticalt]

I think you misunderstand the difference between a Terry stop ( a stop and frisk) and an arrest.

Reasonable suspicion is the standard for a stop that a crime is occurring, may about to occur, or has occurred.
A person may stopped on a violation or infraction committed in the officer's presence ( probable cause standard)

Then it goes it reasonable that person may be armed ( legal or not), then a frisk may be done. That is a pat down of the person. If they can feel an object with might be a weapon they can pull it out. NYS we need probable cause for drugs, not reasonable suspicion as it is with other things.

What happens after the frisk is the problem and not the frisk that "ruins someone's day or life". If it's legally posssessed then it is returned to the person if they are not arrested. Do you have any idea how many times cops have disarmed someone ( gun or knife), wrote thevticket or gave a warning, and returned the item to the person. No lives ruined. The examples of a knifevfrom Walmart had more to due with the law rather than the cop's actions to recover the knife (but maybe the cops decision to make the arrest after that which is a different decision-misdemeanors the cop has a discretion in most cases).
If you had any idea how many knives I have pulled off of people and returned to them ( bs gravity knife or not), might know what you believe as life ruining is rare compared to the number of times people are disarmed.

No arrest, no lives ruined but we were both safe from scwespon being used or a bad "misunderstanding " that could have caused a tragedy.
And yes , sometimes a frisk leads to an arrest, then the problem you should have is with the law itself

Both of these situations I mentioned actually happened to someone I know. These two people were otherwise law abiding people, neither realized they were breaking the law, and both are still dealing with their arrests several years later. One was in NYC, the other in Buffalo. The girl with the pills was NOT a druggie, she literally had her wisdom teeth out and had 10 vicoden for pain. The cop said he smelled pot in her car do he searched her. No pot, just 2 loose vicodens. Ive known her for 25 years and never knew her to smoke pot.
The other incident was in NYC. Im not sure of the details but the knife was bought in NYS but the police said it was illegal. Walmart said the knife they sold was legal and they are still selling them.
With these two incidents the cops may have had cause, or maybe didnt. I do know the girl DID NOT have the aroma of marijuana in her car.
My point is, if cops are allowed to search at their own discretion, there will be alot of arrests for shit reasons.
You may say, "well dont break the law" but I know in these 2 cases and a couple more, these hard working people were ignorant to the law, but as we know, ignorance is no excuse, they were arrested.

 

[Truebeliever]

Both of these situations I mentioned actually happened to someone I know. These two people were otherwise law abiding people, neither realized they were breaking the law, and both are still dealing with their arrests several years later. One was in NYC, the other in Buffalo. The girl with the pills was NOT a druggie, she literally had her wisdom teeth out and had 10 vicoden for pain. The cop said he smelled pot in her car do he searched her. No pot, just 2 loose vicodens. Ive known her for 25 years and never knew her to smoke pot.
The other incident was in NYC. Im not sure of the details but the knife was bought in NYS but the police said it was illegal. Walmart said the knife they sold was legal and they are still selling them.
With these two incidents the cops may have had cause, or maybe didnt. I do know the girl DID NOT have the aroma of marijuana in her car.
My point is, if cops are allowed to search at their own discretion, there will be alot of arrests for shit reasons.
You may say, "well dont break the law" but I know in these 2 cases and a couple more, these hard working people were ignorant to the law, but as we know, ignorance is no excuse, they were arrested.

The drug pill arrest can not be based on a frisk by reasonable suspicion but probable cause as per NYS court of appeals. This is not a Terry Stop case. That is a auto exception case. Two different legal precedents. And it's would be simply corrected if she had a prescription and such so there might be more to the story. DAs would not go to trial if that were the whole story.

As for the knife, I believe that. NYC has some different knife laws than most and interrupts a gravity knife to the literal meaning of the law. Knives a lot of cops just hand back. However, just the mere public view of a knife ( in a sleath or on a clip) in NYC that doesn't fit its exceptions is against the law. It sounds like the knife was in public view, which would not make it a Terry stop because probable cause was established on the mere sight of the knife. Maybe he was stopped for something else and the knife was found. I don't know.

Establishing articulable reasonable suspicion is not always as easy as you would think.
The cop has to explain why he suspected a weapon or a person was connected to a crime. A hunch is not good enough even when right. The court will toss the evidence right out.

 

[GOPerfect]

Ooooo @Willjr75 where arrrrre yoooouuu, I wanna argue!


@GOPerfect hasn't chimed either!?? What's going on today?!

Some of us have to work for a living.

 

[GOPerfect]

BTW, I am not going to chime in on this one. I am not a lawyer and I do not fully understand the case. I read what someone else wrote about the findings, not the actual law though.

Yep. I love the Constitution. I also understand that life is not always as cut and dry as we all want it to be. I also understand that many only read what they want to and make judgements based solely on feelings and ignorance.

My feelings and thoughts on this should be as clear as mud!

 

[Acer-m14]

I wish they would just follow there oath .. if ther not causing harm to anyone just drop the BS and move on and stop looking for other crap just to pinch someone up .. if you smell pot .. ok check it out .. find just a few little grams no need to make a big deal .. find a few pounds ok thats different
same will pills .. 2 or 3 ok they prob have a script .. its just revenue to keep the poor down ..

I've always had a good experience with LEO when pulled over .. respectful , honest , ... hello officer .. you seen my inspection sticker missing ,, yep .. here is my papers .. safety passed just computer emission on the computer needs to set .. .. shop says to just drive it .. .. ok get it done ..
mean wile there is 3 rifles in the car and a shotgun .. hay i love to shoot .. hit the range or off hunting ..

pull me over and asked if anything dangerous in the vehicle .. just me i'm driving LOL .. but yes .. 3 guns and a big knife .. my hands will stay on the wheel till you ask me to move them sir ...

 

[4excal]

Some of us have to work for a living.

Yea I hear that, that's why I get up every morning too. But you're suuuuperman, I always forget

 

[GOPerfect]

Yea I hear that, that's why I get up every morning too. But you're suuuuperman, I always forget

Sorry, I should have said that some of us work some really shitty shifts! Was not implying that you were a lazy, non working slug!

 

[4excal]

Sorry, I should have said that some of us work some really shitty shifts! Was not implying that you were a lazy, non working slug!

Much better! Thank you I appreciate that, because it did seem that way posted that directly.

 

[Darth]

Ruin your life? A frisk ruins your life? I promise you that I have been stopped and frisked than most of people on this forum combined. Stopping, frisking and disarming someone saves lives. Not just the cop but the person stopped as well. It keeps a bad move on the person stopped for being interrupted as going for gun because the cop knows he doesn't have one. I can have all the people and training around me and still get shot and killed. There is plenty of videos of cops getting killed. Official status, etc etc didn't help them right?

Okay, i see a part of a shoulder holster or something that tells me you are armed. Maybe just the bulge of the gun butt. I frisk you, disarm you and get your paperwork. You are a CCW and I return your weapon. How is your life ruined?

You say determine who is a threat? Okay, you tell me how? Maybe the guy with the gun is the biggest threat until proven otherwise? That's what the training would tell you. But you tell me how would you determine it . Please tell me.

By your standard, I should arrest the person for the violation of the law I observed such as a speeding ticket, then search and disarm if I suspected a weapon. Oh, wait it wasn't a weapon or it was a legally owned weapon yet I just arrested the person for a ticketabke offense. What should I do now? He is already in handcuffs and told he is under arrest before searching him. Do you think he would rather have been frisked , let go with a ticket? Do you think his life is ruined then ?

Keep your fucking hands off me seems like a good, easy standard.

How about this: I see someone acting like a cop/ Their clothes and badge do nothing for me.

Cops keep that entitlement mentality.

 

[Criticalt]

The drug pill arrest can not be based on a frisk by reasonable suspicion but probable cause as per NYS court of appeals. This is not a Terry Stop case. That is a auto exception case. Two different legal precedents. And it's would be simply corrected if she had a prescription and such so there might be more to the story. DAs would not go to trial if that were the whole story.

As for the knife, I believe that. NYC has some different knife laws than most and interrupts a gravity knife to the literal meaning of the law. Knives a lot of cops just hand back. However, just the mere public view of a knife ( in a sleath or on a clip) in NYC that doesn't fit its exceptions is against the law. It sounds like the knife was in public view, which would not make it a Terry stop because probable cause was established on the mere sight of the knife. Maybe he was stopped for something else and the knife was found. I don't know.

Establishing articulable reasonable suspicion is not always as easy as you would think.
The cop has to explain why he suspected a weapon or a person was connected to a crime. A hunch is not good enough even when right. The court will toss the evidence right out.

I completely understand these were not Terry stops. Again, my point is, if cops are allowed to frisk at their own discretion, incidents like these will happen.
A cop sees a "bulge", frisks the guy, finds a knife bought in NYS, bam...charged with a crime.
The guy frisked was obeying the laws, minding his own business and gets a charge for being ignorant.
As far as the girl with the pills. There is no more to the story. They lowered the charges to something much less but she did get charged. I know of 2 other times when cops said they smelled pot in a car. They searched the car and occupants, no pot.
One of these was a christian rock band, with 2 youth ministers coming home from a gig in Ohio........no pot......just long hair and guitars.
Now that they dont even need the very questionable "I smell pot", SOME cops will be unbearable.
Searching for a weapon will become the new "I smell pot" and will lead to many arrests other than having a weapon.

 

[Truebeliever]

What we are talking about here is a guy walking into a pizza shop frequented by a cop and a cop sees a print. No action should be taken by the cop.

When a cop pulls someone over for rolling a red, a ticket should be issued and nothing more after his plate and license are run. Nevermind the bulge. It's none of his business.

Now if a cop pulls over and suspects him of a crime, now you are cooking with fire. Now the cop can disarm him because he's being investigated for a crime

Petty much how it is. The cop and his reaction to the "printing" will most likely depend on the guy's reaction to the cop looking at him. A nervous reaction might trigger a response. The legal gun owner in areas where gun ownership is common might not react at all where others might use their hand to check to see if their gun is showing. That would be enough for a Terry stop which might start with questions like " are you carrying? Do you have a permit". As cops, we go through this all the time on both sides of this confrontation

 

[Truebeliever]

I completely understand these were not Terry stops. Again, my point is, if cops are allowed to frisk at their own discretion, incidents like these will happen.
A cop sees a "bulge", frisks the guy, finds a knife bought in NYS, bam...charged with a crime.
The guy frisked was obeying the laws, minding his own business and gets a charge for being ignorant.
As far as the girl with the pills. There is no more to the story. They lowered the charges to something much less but she did get charged. I know of 2 other times when cops said they smelled pot in a car. They searched the car and occupants, no pot.
One of these was a christian rock band, with 2 youth ministers coming home from a gig in Ohio........no pot......just long hair and guitars.
Now that they dont even need the very questionable "I smell pot", SOME cops will be unbearable.
Searching for a weapon will become the new "I smell pot" and will lead to many arrests other than having a weapon.

Become the new "I smell pot"?

This is not new case law.

It is not as easy to articulate as you might think.

A judge will ask why didn't you suspect that budge was a cell phone rather than gun etc etc. It has to be reasonable that the cop suspected it to be a weapon. It could have the nature of the crime they were originally stopped for, how their hand dropped to that position to "check it" etc. But the cop has to explain why this person as opposed to anyone else.

Even if the cop was right, if he can't explain it it will get tossed out

 

[spat]

Become the new "I smell pot"?

This is not new case law.

It is not as easy to articulate as you might think.

A judge will ask why didn't you suspect that budge was a cell phone rather than gun etc etc. It has to be reasonable that the cop suspected it to be a weapon. It could have the nature of the crime they were originally stopped for, how their hand dropped to that position to "check it" etc. But the cop has to explain why this person as opposed to anyone else.

Even if the cop was right, if he can't explain it it will get tossed out

So, if the cop can reasonably explain why he thought it was a weapon, that still doesn't justify a search. Can you justify why you thought it was probably an illegal weapon ?

 

[Truebeliever]

I wish they would just follow there oath .. if ther not causing harm to anyone just drop the BS and move on and stop looking for other crap just to pinch someone up .. if you smell pot .. ok check it out .. find just a few little grams no need to make a big deal .. find a few pounds ok thats different
same will pills .. 2 or 3 ok they prob have a script .. its just revenue to keep the poor down ..
..

Ok, a cop pulls a car over and smells pot. He finds a few grams. Okay, let them go?

If he smells pot, do you think they might have smoked the rest?

What are they doing now? Driving a car. There is no reliable field test for driving under the influence of pot with scientific accuracy.

Should we let them go and drive down the road? Drunk drivers too?

A few pills, okay. But they don't have a script on them. Guess what? Provide a script and DAs will drop the case in NY. He'll have someone text a picture of the script and that person is free as a bird at that point. And if you have a picture of the script ( i.e. It's a digital copy) it is legal to possess to begin with.

If you knew the drug trade, it's also just a few pills on the street level activity. Go outside a methodone clinic and learn what " spitback" is and how it is sold.

Where did they get the few pills if they don't have a script. Bought it? Sometimes. Stole it, more likely. Stole it from a very sick person, every likely if it eee stolen at all. Imagine that sick person has to live in pain because they couldn't replace that drug

 

[GOPerfect]

I do not like Stop and Frisk laws and I am becoming more against Terry stops each and every day. Not because I am a HUGE supporter of the 2A, I love the freedoms that we have in the US. Day by day it seems like these Freedoms are slipping through our fingers.

I really understand Officer Safety. My safety is the most important thing to me. I will always be on my guard to protect what is most important to me when working; myself and my co-workers. Traffic stops, I will NEVER ask if their are weapons/firearms in the car unless I deem it is necessary to remove the driver. Too be quite honest, it really is none of my business. I assume innocence, I do not assume guilty. Different areas of the Country?States are different.

AB guy and True, they see things in their areas that I almost never will. Their Policing is very different than mine.

 

[spat]

Ok, a cop pulls a car over and smells pot. He finds a few grams. Okay, let them go?

If he smells pot, do you think they might have smoked the rest?

What are they doing now? Driving a car. There is no reliable field test for driving under the influence of pot with scientific accuracy.

Should we let them go and drive down the road? Drunk drivers too?

A few pills, okay. But they don't have a script on them. Guess what? Provide a script and DAs will drop the case in NY. He'll have someone text a picture of the script and that person is free as a bird at that point. And if you have a picture of the script ( i.e. It's a digital copy) it is legal to possess to begin with.

If you knew the drug trade, it's also just a few pills on the street level activity. Go outside a methodone clinic and learn what " spitback" is and how it is sold.

Where did they get the few pills if they don't have a script. Bought it? Sometimes. Stole it, more likely. Stole it from a very sick person, every likely if it eee stolen at all. Imagine that sick person has to live in pain because they couldn't replace that drug

All those examples are someone on you "think" did something wrong, but can't prove.

If you "think" they're under the influence, but can't prove it, YOU LET THEM GO. That is what innocent until proven guilty means, it is the cornerstone of every justice system that doesn't deserve the label "police state".

 

[GOPerfect]

One more thing, I really don't believe that many everyday people have any clue whatsoever what goes on in the real world that surrounds them.

You watch the evening news and you see a few crimes here and there. The amount of real criminals being arrested each and everyday, I think, would surprise many on these forums. The City of Buffalo, for one example, made 27 guns arrests this past Thursday. These were gun arrests of Felons, drug dealers and other scum. These are the stories that we the people never hear of.

Very, very few innocent are being jammed up.

 

[Truebeliever]

All those examples are someone on you "think" did something wrong, but can't prove.

If you "think" they're under the influence, but can't prove it, YOU LET THEM GO. That is what innocent until proven guilty means, it is the cornerstone of every justice system that doesn't deserve the label "police state".

Exactly, can't prove that but you can prove other violations of the law. You take them for what you can prove.

For example, The police suspect some one of a serious crime, but can't prove it yet.

If the person is arrested for the weed and can't drive, they can't kill anyone with their car. There are a number of cases where a cop gave a ticket to a driver who was under the influence of something, let them continue on their way, they got into an accident and the cop was sued.

For an example of a Terry stop is I see a teenager at two in the morning running down the street with a large screen TV in his hands? Is that reasonable suspicion that he stole the TV. Yes, suspicion. A cop can stop him and investigate. Can't prove the TV is stolen in a reasonable amount of time, the cop has to let him go. But imagine, while the cop has him stopped, a burglary call comes over the radio. The cop will continue to hold the person as other sector goes to the call and it finds that the TV is stolen from that house. I have caught people with similiar fact patterns

Something closer to this case is the Tim McVey case of OK bombing. How was he caught? FBI? No. It was a stop for not having a rear lic plate on his car. The cop saw the budge of the weapon, frisked him, found a concealed weapon, arrested him. The cop saw the stretch of the OK bombing and called the FBI on where to find him . In his department's jail cell already.


Catching people on the smaller stuff before they can do the bigger stuff or after they did the bigger stuff is why crime was reduced from the 90 until the Fugerson effect. Why do you think there is a big increase in crime? The small stuff is not being addressed as much.

 

[Airborneguy]

This isn't news, we don't have rights and haven't had any for some time.

"Reasonable suspicion" "probable cause" its all Bullshit, and sorry my privacy trumps officer safety. Welcome to the embodiment of Tyranny. The loss of rights for "government interest" and the courts support it.

If probable cause is bullshit to you, at what point would you allow arrest? Never?

 

[Airborneguy]

IF your not one of them your a criminal.

The only people I've ever heard say anything remotely like this have all NOT been cops.

 

[Airborneguy]

If he has cause to believe you have committed a crime, then he can arrest you and search. If he doesn't have cause for an arrest, then he doesn't have cause to be afraid enough to justify the search. It really is that simple. If he's got a "bad feeling" but not enough cause for an arrest, then be should steer clear until he finds enough evidence to qualify as cause.

Unlike the crazy sensationalism commonly spouted, the above describes nearly 100% of the police encounters in this country.