Something Smells Rotten: The practical consequences of bad epistemology in the context of drug sniffing dogs.
This paper examines the practical consequences of most courts' rational, rather than empirical, epistemology in the context of drug-sniffing dogs. Using the case of Florida v. Harris, this paper criticizes the unscientific attitude of many courts, and argues that, by employing a purely rational epistemology to justify the use of drug-sniffing dogs to establish probable cause, the Court impedes the Constitution's skepticism of, and protection from, arbitrary government intrusions. The paper concludes by proposing a new empirical standard based on the Daubert factors.
George Souri. 2012. "Something Smells Rotten: The practical consequences of bad epistemology in the context of drug sniffing dogs." The SelectedWorks of George Souri
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/george_souri/3