With links this time!
- Thread starter DasBoot
- Start date
- Status
Perhaps so, Antipitas's knowledgeable post seemed to agree with that statement, and I am no scholar.
As an idea I called the LEO's office and ask if I need to have my ID with me when not driving. His answer was " yes" so you may be correct but it just might save you a problem one of these days to not have it with you, right or not.
That's the real world. The horse is out of the barn. Seems to me the ones arguing about not having some sort of national ID have already lost. You try to make a list of instances where you are not required an ID. The fact is that is really a short list. In fact, you simply need an ID for most interactions in our modern society. Including having a police officer ask about your citizenship if you happed to be in Mecklenburg NC, or Maricopa AZ. It's a done deal. Just walk down the street in the nice bright sun shine and if a crime is committed close by you can be stopped and asked to ID.
Not sure if people that have not lived out west know this, but travel in the desert areas of Texas, New Mexico, California, etc. completely inside of the US border and you can come up on a temp. border patrol station with road block. They require you to ID and if asked to provide papers to show your immigration status. Also if you happen to be on foot. And yes that does happen. These BP stops happens all the time.
Seems to me you are arguing about something that is pretty much a done deal.
I do remove my ID when I take a shower.
Last edited:
No, it isn't a short list.. it is all the time.
Think of someplace where driving isn't required... a city with a great mass transit system.
Get out of bed, go to work, take a lunch, go back to work, come home, take my kids to little league, catch a movie, go to dinner, come home, take a stroll around town.
It isn't that I don't want to carry around ID. It is that there is no reason for me to be stopped and have my ID demanded. That is harassment.
I have been through border patrol checkpoints many times and never once had to show ID.
Playboypenguin
Moderator
Call it what you want, but it is a reality. If you are just walking down the street and a police officer asks you to identify yourself all he would have to do is say there has been a robbery in the area or almost any other crime and he could ask you to identify yourself. If you had no ID he can detain you until your identity can be verified.
I am completely against national ID cards though. Just because I accept the reality of needing ID on you does not mean I agree with it or condone even further govt. intrusion.
I actually agree about the harassment part. That is why court rulings that have allowed local police the power to check citizenship require constant checks that they are not exceeding their charter. Not saying we don't have to tread a fine line. I don't want to be harassed about my CCW.
As far as BP stops. Yes I agree I have seldom been asked to actually produce ID, except when I was coming every day back across the main El Paso border check. But the truth is me and probably you don't look like the local terrorists. The BP guys & gals are smart and know who to ask. Profiling? maybe, but it is sure time efficient.
Rangefinder
New member
In retrospect, with a crackdown of requirements just to get the id/license, the need to carry it constantly wouldn't be such an importance. It does smack of a "police state"---(paper please)---and the gestapo on every corner. Not the kind of thing I'd want to even foreshadow towards. It's been my experience that even without having a DL carried on you, it's such a simple thing for any LEO with their in-car-computer to run a ssn or dln and varify any information it would be needed for. So the point on that matter would be to make it a requirement for all individuals getting a license to provide legal residency documentation. Sound about right?
Some people just don't get it.
If a LEO has a legitimate reason to know my identity I will provide it. If there is FURTHER need for me to support my own statements, I will provide ID. I am doing nothing to make their job harder whatsoever. He is not a stormtrooper.
It is not a LEO right to walk up to any random person and demand they produce ID. Same as they do not have the right to enter my property and search it without cause. Or my car. Or my person.
Sometimes, I'll even buy things with cash, too
Playboypenguin
Moderator
Untrue...I had it happen to me. I was detained at the scene because I was in the wrong place, when police were looking for a man of my description, for over an hour while they ran my information. I had just come from playing paintball and had left my ID in my bag and could not find it when I was stopped when I got out to buy a soda at local convience store.
When I told my lawyer about it he said that all they had to do was say "he fit the description" for any crime they could think of and they could detain me legally for a certain amount of time. That whole you either have to arrest me or leave me alone thing is just not true. You are required to cooperate to a degree with law enforcement if they are actively investigating a crime. It does not matter if you later turn out to be innocent. They just have to say they had reason to believe you might be involved at the time.
And in this case he had reason to suspect you. You *were* being arrested.
If your word was not enough, and he required proof, then fine, he gets to wait while you retrieve proof.
He is not legally empowered to lie about reasons for demanding ID.
He is not legally empowered to arrest you for NOT having ID, either.
This is one of those times to produce ID, sure.
Rangefinder
New member
So just to summarize what we've got so far---the idea is to preserve and protect our own personal rights and civil liberties as citizens/legal residents while effectively eliminating the ability for someone of illegal status from gaining such liberties under illegal means, and empowering authoritive entities to enforce and maintain both.
The part that I am most impressed with is that I think we're actually making a little progress on a very complicated and touchy issue---that has to speak for something.
The part that I am most impressed with is that I think we're actually making a little progress on a very complicated and touchy issue---that has to speak for something.
Playboypenguin
Moderator
The reality is, as my lawyer stated, in these cases it would be your word against his. Anytime an officer asks you for ID there is an assumption that he has reason to suspect something. He does not just spend his day stopping everyone he sees. So you really cannot win that argument as long he he does not arrest you without cause. In this case I was never old what the crime was, what the description was, or anything. My lawyer said it could have been completely fictional but there would just be no way to prove that.
So like I said before, there is no law that says you "HAVE to carry ID" there are lots of things that can happen to you legally if you do not.
First, you ensure that IDs are valid and used for what they are: ID. Put an encrypted (decryption key held by govt) copy of the person's finger print on the mag strip if you want. This will mean that a) these IDs are very hard to copy, requiring govt access to create a valid encryption and b) makes duplication of IDs nigh impossible (same prints can't be on more than one set of cards) [of course, submitting prints to the govt is another can of worms, but the point is that there is a biometric way of doing this]
Second, you check this ID when someone needs gov't services, and when they need employment.
This cuts off the trough.
Second, you check this ID when someone needs gov't services, and when they need employment.
This cuts off the trough.
"But my point is that if it could/would dramatically increase the chances of identifying those who were here illegally, is it too big of a request for legal citizens/residents to carry and be able to provide proof of legal status in the form of their ID?"
The short answer is "Yes, it is too big a request." Not because the request to ID is so great, or because the reason is trivial, but because there would be tremendous opportunity for abuse of such a power. You might well ask yourself "If it increases the chances of finding a drug dealer, is it too big a request for citizens to submit to searches?"
Aside: It is well-established that the police have a right to ask for ID when suspicious circumstances exist. I have no problem with that.
Tim
The short answer is "Yes, it is too big a request." Not because the request to ID is so great, or because the reason is trivial, but because there would be tremendous opportunity for abuse of such a power. You might well ask yourself "If it increases the chances of finding a drug dealer, is it too big a request for citizens to submit to searches?"
Aside: It is well-established that the police have a right to ask for ID when suspicious circumstances exist. I have no problem with that.
Tim
- Status