THE AUTHORITY TO STOP AND SEARCH

          ‘Probable cause’ is the standard by which a police officer has the right to make an arrest, conduct a personal or property search and obtain a warrant for an arrest. According to the laws in many countries, a police officer needs to have  ‘probable cause’ and  believe there is evidence of a crime to search a person or his/ her automobile. Although the constitutional laws emphasize the fact that the police cannot make a search without a probable cause, in many countries there are many police officers who disregard this law. A question has emerged from these circumstances: should the police have legal authority to stop and search a person without a ‘probable cause’. Even though there are people whose  answers are ‘yes’ to this question, I believe that the police should have a probable cause to conduct a search.

          First of all, people have the right to be secure in their persons, houses, with their papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches. Unless there is a reason to make a police officer believe that a search is necessary, police officers should not make a search and violate  human rights. Police officers are allowed to conduct a search if there is a situation which threatens their protection, an attitude or an item in plain view that creates  doubt. In other cases there is nothing that endangers the safety of society and so it is not necessary for the police to conduct a search. Therefore, the search in these cases is a violation of human rights and should not be allowed.        

          Secondly, an unreasonable search makes people feel awful and guilty. For example, when  a man is  on his way out and  a policeman stops and searches him without a ‘probable cause’, the man starts to act in a weird way and exhibits the   behavior of a  guilty person even if he is innocent. Moreover, being exposed to an unnecessary police search in a public area embarrasses him and makes him feel awful.  If the man hasn’t been acting suspiciously, in other words if there is not a ‘probable cause’, the police officer does not and should not have the authority to stop and search him.

          There are many people who claim that  the view that more legal authority should be given to the police to stop and search a person without showing a valid reason. They justify their thoughts on the grounds of the need to protect citizens from danger and criminals. However, they are missing  a point. The police are already given the authority to stop and search a person if there is a strange attitude or suspicious object. For example, if a police officer stops a vehicle to check the license plates and he notices  the smell of alcohol or sees cans of beer, he will have the authority to search the vehicle. In  this situation, the police officer does have  ‘probable cause’ and this is enough to prevent danger.

          In conclusion, police officers have enough authority to search people if there is a necessity (there is the need to do so) and they do not need more. If they are given authority to conduct unreasonable searches, the right to privacy will be violated. Therefore, the police should not have the legal authority to search people without a valid reason.