The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by eric3579.

*promote

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Sunday, September 7th, 2014 1:58pm PDT - promote requested by eric3579.

WTF, America... seriously *wtf? How is this not unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment?

This video shows clearly why you should never, EVER, under any circumstances, waive your rights. As long as you don't have anything illegal in plain sight to give them probable cause, they have absolutely no authority to search your vehicle without a warrant and you are under no obligation to tell them what your vehicle is carrying (thus doing the search for them). You should respond to any requests to search your vehicle or your person with "Officer, I know you're just doing your job but I do not consent to any searches."

This site has great advice for how to handle being pulled over in a way that maximizes your protection.

http://www.flexyourrights.org/faqs/when-can-police-search-your-car/

Adding video to channels (Wtf) - requested by SDGundamX.

Seems like another great reason to never answer a question from a cop, you are not required to answer questions or consent to search.
Just say 'NO!'. (See, that slogan is good for something!)

If I was someone who had money to burn I'd seriously consider having people driving around with wads of cash and troll for these chuckleheads. Then when they try to run off with the cash I would take these criminal asshats to court and publicize it from coast to coast, this shit just keeps getting deeper and deeper.
On the other hand it does kind of mystify me why some people feel the need to drive around with so much cash on them, the one guy with the restaurant had some kind of excuse but if you score big in Vegas why wouldn't you just deposit your winnings?

I've heard there's a nice little problem with that - at least in Britain - to let police practically do as they wish. I think over here they need to see something in your vehicle or on your person or in your behaviour that makes them suspicious and decide to search. Denying a search is considered a suspicious act and although that alone doesn't justify a search, it can count for something. The police might say well i've seen an item in your car that isn't suspicious alone, but in conjunction with your lack of consent on a search it's enough that i now need to search your car.

Then they walk a dog around your car and make it excited. This is then said to be a positive result for detecting controlled substances and permission to search your vehicle is no longer required.

Your lawyer buddies in your legislatures made this possible.

I've been waiting for you to say something about how this isn't the 'conservative' cops being thugs and thieves and it's really 'liberal democrats' we should blame. Thanks so much for the predictable attempted redirection of responsibility.

(I would point out that, because cops being assholes and thieves may be 'legal', it still makes you all assholes and thieves. Nothing in the law requires cops to seize property or cash, or to be assholes about it, it's 100% at their discretion, so it's 100% on them (you) for abusing the power.)
Are you suggesting we need more regulation!?!?

This is regulation, in case you didn't notice that.

Cops don't make the law, they only enforce it.

No, this is police theft under the guise of 'regulation'. Actual regulation would regulate when they can seize, not give carte blanche to steal any money they find and require the victim to 'prove' their money isn't suspect. That's a lack of regulation along with immunity granted for institutional theft.
Once again, (reiterating because of your repeatedly and recently displayed lack of comprehension) cops are at their discretion to seize, and they repeatedly and constantly abuse that power, meaning they need to be regulated. Government regulation can mean regulating the government...but that's a concept that escapes you.
Cops (and their 'conservative' lawyer buddies) wrote this law and lobbied to have it instated....proof that sometimes cops do make the law AND abuse it. Prison guards have the largest, best funded, biggest lobbying union in the US, they're cops, and they've written many laws.

*length=11:36

The duration of this video has been updated from unknown to 11:36 - length declared by PlayhousePals.

If you can go to court and get your money back, then no, it's not regulation, it's police incompetence at best, harassment most likely, and criminal at worst.

Unfortunately, because of the lax way the 'law enforcement lobby' wrote these laws, many people can't go to court to get their money back, either because they can't prove where it came from (instead of the American way, where the cops have to prove it came from illegal business) or because it's designed to be more expensive to 'fight' in court than the money is worth (and apparently that legal fee isn't reimbursed when the cops are proven to be thieves).
My suggestion to solve the issue would be to re-write the law so, if the citizen wins in court and gets their money back (because the officer either lied or made a mistaken assumption to take the cash in the first place), the officer that made the decision to take the cash should have to pay the citizens legal fees out of their paycheck. That would make them be CERTAIN they would win in court before stealing innocent people's money. Unfortunately, I'm all but certain that won't happen.