See http://www.flexyourrights.org/traffic_stop_scenario.
The complete video is at BUSTED: The Citizen’s Guide to Surviving Police Encounters.
It’s very educational. You are not obligated to answer the officer’s questions or to consent to a search.
Of course your answer to the cop’s inquiry (and request to search) should be no.
And should he end up searching and finding anything, to the extent you say anything it should be along the lines of “Where’d that come from? What is that? I’ve never seen it before in my life.” And then shut up until you have your lawyer.
Just my personal opinion, not legal advice…
This is of course just my opinion but to answer your question:
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
“Is this address on your driver’s license current, Mr. Bongmaster?”
No, it’s "Please sit down here on the curb while I call for the drug-sniffing dogs, Mr. Bongmaster." 
This is the first time I’ve heard that. After all, it’s not like you are under oath or anything, is it? Can someone toss me a cite on this?
Maybe a little reverse psychology?
“Got any drugs on you, sir?”
“Oh, man, right now I sure wish I did.”
Never consent to a search of your car, ever. I don’t care if you’ve never done drugs of any kind, drive 5 miles under the speed limit, wear a seatbelt to move your car in the driveway, or etc. There’s no benefit to you in allowing a search.
What if you happen to have some (legitimate) prescription medication that you’re carrying not in the bottle issued by the pharmacy but say in a different container for whatever reason; in some places that in and of itself would get you in trouble.
What if someone was riding in your car and stashed drugs in it? Yeah, that’s pretty “far out there” but why even risk it? You’re under no obligation to consent to a search.
You should also act courteous, somewhat relaxed, and non-aggressive, and keep your hands in plain view of the police officer. Any requests he makes along the lines of keeping your hands in view or etc. you need to comply with. If you do anything that gives the officer reasonable cause to worry about his own safety he can do a search of your person and possibly parts of the vehicle (although I don’t believe a search done for these purposes can be intensive like a search you’ve either been required to submit to by a warrant or that you have complied with.)
In my experience there’s really only a few reasons that a police officer will pull you over:
-
Speeding. If you’re speeding all he’s really interested in is ticketing you for that offense, and you probably won’t run in to trouble.
-
Registration/etc. Most of the time I think police pull you over for this stuff again, to ticket you for that specific offense, or to give you a warning (depending on how much leeway they have in these matters with their local department.)
-
Mechanical issues. Stuff like broken tail lights, broken windshields, etc. Again, often times this is just done so the cop can give you a warning or simply inform you of the problem (depending.)
If the cop has just pulled you over to ticket you, it’s usually pretty obvious. I honestly think the best course of action in that regard is to be courteous and cooperative to just get the situation resolved and over with ASAP.
Now, if you’ve been pulled over because your license plate has been reported as belonging to someone who just robbed a bank, or because it’s a stolen car, obviously it’s a completely different type of stop. But keeping it to what happens to “normal” people really the only other time a cop will stop you is if for some reason he is just “suspicious” about you.
Driving slowly around some neighborhoods can sometimes cause such suspicion, sometimes the car you’re driving can cause such suspicion. In general in my experience (I’ve been pulled over twice in cases where I’d say it was because the police were suspicious about something) you can tell this from a normal stop pretty easily. Usually it is done under the guise of a stop for another reason (busted tail light, speeding, registration, etc.) But instead of being all business the cop will ask somewhat probing questions. “Where do you live? Where are you going?” You don’t have to answer either of those, but I do tend to answer questions that can’t possibly be incriminating to me. The way I see it is, if a cop is for some reason suspicious of me being somewhere the best thing, practically speaking, is to just be cooperative (to a point) to allay his suspicions so I can get back to my life.
4 or 5 times. All of them traffic stops.
Oh, yeah, in none of those cases DID I have anything illeagle. Just ain’t going to participate in the man’s fishing expidition.
It’s best not to say anything and not to allow the cop to search or give them any reason to believe that they are welcome to search your vehicle. If you can do that without getting the supposed ‘asshole’ checkbox marked, good for you. Of course it’s even BETTER not to be carrying contraband of any sort in your car, and it’s especially reckless to be speeding if you are carrying contraband.
Well that’s the thing. You don’t get in more trouble by politely refusing to cooperate within your rights. “Oh yes…I can see how that tripple murder rap will go better for me if I just confess”.
It’s quite obvious when they are trying a number of variations of classic negotiations, sales and/or interrogation techniques:
Intimidation (Bad Cop) - oh man…are you in trouble now
Good Cop - look, we can help you if you tell us what’s in the car
Deal/Concession Close - Look, we can get you out of here but only if your honest with us.
Time-Driven Close - It will be a lot worse if we have to get a warrent
and so on
The best technique is to be polite, don’t lie (at this time, I did not see/did not recall…) and don’t say nuthin’
The OP was based on a recent 500 mile highway trip I took with a quarter ounce hidden under the spare tire in the trunk. I wasn’t giving it a second thought, speeding slightly but not excessively, when I saw a car pulled over on the side of the highway with cops searching suitcases in the trunk. I assumed since with my travel bags, etc. if stopped for speeding a cop would clearly see I was going on a trip, and not a drug smuggler and would not even think to search the car, but then I wondered what made him search the suitcases of the other car. So of course I didn’t speed the rest of the way, but wondered if I was caught speeding, if highway searches are rare, arbitrary, based on the mood of the cop, whether the cop has a drug dog or not, the actions of the driver, or what, exactly, and if not consenting to a search, if the cop would say OK and let me go with the speeding ticket, or if he would automatically try and search as a result, and if I said he could search, if he would not search since I said he could. Awkward last sentence, I know.
Different states have differing law on whether it is a crime to provide false information to the police. However, with regard to federal investigations, 18 USC 1001 criminalizes false statements in any matter relating to the federal government (including to federal investigators like the FBI). It provides, in relevant part:
I’m probably going to mess up the legal terms, but my brother-in-law the lawyer explained it to me thusly:
They have to have a reason to pull you over. Speeding, busted tail light, etc. Now, in some places, this can be a little wiggly, and an officer can pull you over for doing illegal things (speeding, crossing the yellow line, no turn signal) or for doing everything right (not-speeding, being “overly cautious” and acting suspicious by being “too good”.) But, whatever reason he comes up with, he has to come up with a reason.
So, that’s done. The cop walks up to the car. He can do one of three things: write you a ticket, ask you for permission to search the car or, under certain circumstances (like if your hands are in your pocket or he sees a metallic gleam from the spot between your seats), he can ask you to step out of the car and perform a very minimal pat-down and/or visual search of the car (without opening glove boxes, trunks, luggage, etc.) to see if you have a weapon within your reach that you could hurt him with. In any of these cases, he must first explain why he pulled you over.
If he wants to do more than a visual scan, he must give you *another *reason why he should - it CANNOT be the same as the reason he pulled you over, and it CANNOT be because you said no. So if he pulled you over because you “looked suspicious”, he cannot search your care because you “look suspicious”. Has to be two different reasons.
If you know you are carrying (or hell, if you’re just like me and a little paranoid of The Man, or if you’re just intent on preserving all our rights, not just some), you should absolutely NOT tell him, nor should you give search permission. As said, it’s only going to end badly. If he gets the warrant and searches anyway, it won’t go any better for you, of course, but your rights will remain intact and it increases the likelihood that he’ll forget to cross a t or dot an i and the evidence will be thrown out.
If I may re-parse MikeG’s post:
-Don’t tell cop, cop doesn’t search - You’re free and you keep your stash
-Don’t tell cop, cop searches and finds it, cop decides to let you go - You’re free but you lose your stash
-Don’t tell cop, cop searches and finds nothing, cop lets you go - You’re free and you keep your stash
-Don’t tell cop, cop searches and finds it, cop decides to arrest - You’re arrested and you lose your stash
-Tell cop, cop decides to let you go - You’re free but you lose your stash
-Tell cop, cop decides to arrest - You’re arrested and you lose your stash
So you’ve only two chances of keeping your stash, and they’re both under “don’t tell”.
(This happened to me once in my irresponsible youth, because of a busted tail light, when I was pulled over quite wasted after having just scored a half ounce of hash - a classic encounter which ended up with me shaking with fear and blaming it on the cold, then getting all weird on the cops and saying “magic fingers!!!” Amazingly, I didn’t get busted, and kept my stash, half of which was hidden in my brother’s mouth.)
Wee Bairn, he’s not gonna bother asking to search you unless he wants to search you. And he’s not gonna bother asking to search you if he has the legal right to search you without your consent, he’ll just do it.
So by asking to search your car, he’s told you that he doesn’t have the right to search your car, but wants to do it anyway. What do you have to gain by consenting? Even if you know for a fact that your car is completely clean? You have nothing to gain.
Cops can’t search you just because you were speeding, or had a busted taillight, or other traffic related reasons. If a cop stops you for traffic reasons, but then feels that he’s in immediate danger from you, he has the right to search YOU and your immediate area…what you can reach with your hands, for weapons. But he still can’t search your car. He has to have probable cause to search your car. He smells pot. He sees you are visibly intoxicated. He sees contraband in plain view. Your vehicle matches the description of a wanted vehicle. Or if you consent to a search.
If he stopped you for speeding and had a dog, and the dog alerted on your vehicle, he doesn’t have to ask your permission to search your car, the dog’s alert is enough. So he won’t bother asking for your permission. Without a dog, if he stops you and wants to search you for drugs, he might tell you that either he can search your car now, or you’ll have to wait for a K9 unit. But if you’ve got drugs, why would you consent in that case? If you decline to let him search, the cop has to sit there and wait for a K9 unit too. He’s just trying to pressure you. If he really thinks you’ve got drugs, he’ll call for K9 and make you wait, and won’t need your consent. And he’s not going to call for a K9 and waste the K9 unit’s time unless he’s pretty sure he’ll get an arrest…like you’ve got dreadlocks, grateful dead bumper stickers, and reek of patchouli. But even then he’s got to have to give a reason to call in the K9, even if the real reason he wants to search is because you’re a damn dirty hippy, he’ll have to find some other plausible reason to give the judge.
In no case is your situation improved when you consent to a search of your car if you have drugs in the car. In no case is your situation improved if you admit that the drugs the cop found in the car are your drugs.
Just watch COPS a couple of times, and see how many times the cops talk people into busting themselves. People let the cops search, knowing the cops will find drugs. They admit to crimes when they should just shut up. They get aggressive with the cops when they should remain calm and polite. So watch the ACLU video, and the companion Chris Rock video on how not to get your ass kicked by the Police:
No. Won’t admit it. Won’t consent to a search.
They might bring a “K-9” to sniff your car. But it’s probably best to call their bluff on that (the K-9 might be busy elsewhere and it might take hours to bring one in) they might back down. In fact, even if I had nothing in the car I would still refuse and force them to bring in the K-9. I’d consider it my own small way of fighting the drug war. Every minute of time I make them waste is a minute they aren’t busting some other poor chap who actually is carrying something.
Oakminster
I don’t have a cite, and I’ve heard of this too. Fortunately, it’s illegal for the officer to communicate with the DA and/or judge in this way, such as using 
or 
to denote the defendants attitude.
I did something similar back in my pot smoking days:
Cop: “You got any drugs in the car?”
Me: “No sir. You’re more than welcome to check the car if you like.”
Cop: “Nah, that’s alright.”
I totally had an ounce on me at the time.