Quote:
Originally Posted by MathGeek
If over a season, a given enforcement agency looks in 1000 ice chests and finds fewer than 500 violations, then they do not have probable cause. Odds are they probably find violations in fewer than 10% of ice chests they look in.
How, exactly, is that probable cause?
By the way, my reasoning is exactly the same on drug searches where probable cause is given by a dog. If searches based on a given dog fail to find drugs more than 50% of the time, then that dog should no longer be used to establish probable cause.
|
Okay, then lump in other violations like safety devices and alcohol during those checks and I bet you get up there.
I guess if only 48% of people keep way over their limit and undersized fish, then the population will be fine, right?