ID to Law Enforcement

[DavidGuidos]

In most locations in the U.S. you are not required to provide I.D. unless you're suspected of committing or that you are about to commit a crime. Technically there is suppose to be some articulable, rational reason for that suspicion not just a hunch.

Why would you not want to provide I.D. "if you have nothing to hide"? Because you don't know what kind of report or database your name might end up in. Why would you not want to give permission to search your car "if you have nothing to hide"? Because you don't know what might have been left behind by someone that has been in your car and because it's your Constitutional right to be secure in your property and not have it searched without some reasonable suspicion or probably cause. Wars have been fought to gain and preserve those rights so we should so haphazardly forfeit them.

One reason you might not want your private information passed on to someone else, a property owner for example, is for your own safety. You may be operating only over public land, not even looking at that guy’s property, but if the property owner is conducting illegal activities and he thinks you are observing him, your life may be in danger.

 

[CAG]

In most locations in the U.S. you are not required to provide I.D. unless you're suspected of committing or that you are about to commit a crime

Look up and read the Supreme Court decision Terry V Ohio and then read Hiibel V Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada. Then read Heien v North Carolina. What you will find is that there is more and more latitude given to police when they stop and ask for ID as well as frisk during that stop.

Someone said that being charged with not providing ID is a secondary law that can only be used if there is another charge. If some states have that law it is contrary to case law and won't hold if challenged.

We went through two entire threads on this topic so it really is "asked and answered". If you are stopped and the officer has a call about a possible violation, whether you are the suspect at the time or not, if you refuse to produce ID while the officer is investigating you stand a good chance of being charged. The test is "reasonable suspicion" not probable cause.

unless you are detained and in many states, not unless you are arrested.

Sorry but wrong. You can be detained without an arrest. That happens every time you are stopped for a traffic violation, questioning on the street and on and on. That is "detained". The officer may detain you for a reasonable amount of time to investigate and that may even include placing you in the back of the patrol car while he/she does further investigation. AND-if there is a suspicion that there is danger to the officer he/she may handcuff you and place you in the back of the car.

Police have rather wide latitude when investigating a violation and the level of "detainment" will depend upon the crime.

IE: you get stopped. The officer suspects drugs (smell of marijuana) he/she calls the dog (you have been detained up to this point) the dog hits. You are going to sit on the curb for the entire time they toss your vehicle. No marijuana found. You walk. Sue if you want but you will not win that case.

 

[kensteele]

Look up and read the Supreme Court decision Terry V Ohio and then read Hiibel V Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada. Then read Heien v North Carolina. What you will find is that there is more and more latitude given to police when they stop and ask for ID as well as frisk during that stop.

Someone said that being charged with not providing ID is a secondary law that can only be used if there is another charge. If some states have that law it is contrary to case law and won't hold if challenged.

We went through two entire threads on this topic so it really is "asked and answered". If you are stopped and the officer has a call about a possible violation, whether you are the suspect at the time or not, if you refuse to produce ID while the officer is investigating you stand a good chance of being charged. The test is "reasonable suspicion" not probable cause.



Sorry but wrong. You can be detained without an arrest. That happens every time you are stopped for a traffic violation, questioning on the street and on and on. That is "detained". The officer may detain you for a reasonable amount of time to investigate and that may even include placing you in the back of the patrol car while he/she does further investigation. AND-if there is a suspicion that there is danger to the officer he/she may handcuff you and place you in the back of the car.

Police have rather wide latitude when investigating a violation and the level of "detainment" will depend upon the crime.

IE: you get stopped. The officer suspects drugs (smell of marijuana) he/she calls the dog (you have been detained up to this point) the dog hits. You are going to sit on the curb for the entire time they toss your vehicle. No marijuana found. You walk. Sue if you want but you will not win that case.

you use alot of what we used to call "weasel words."

touche. i guess this is what i sound like in some of my threads. noted.

 

[DavidGuidos]

Look up and read the Supreme Court decision Terry V Ohio and then read Hiibel V Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada. Then read Heien v North Carolina. What you will find is that there is more and more latitude given to police when they stop and ask for ID as well as frisk during that stop.

Someone said that being charged with not providing ID is a secondary law that can only be used if there is another charge. If some states have that law it is contrary to case law and won't hold if challenged.

We went through two entire threads on this topic so it really is "asked and answered". If you are stopped and the officer has a call about a possible violation, whether you are the suspect at the time or not, if you refuse to produce ID while the officer is investigating you stand a good chance of being charged. The test is "reasonable suspicion" not probable cause.



Sorry but wrong. You can be detained without an arrest. That happens every time you are stopped for a traffic violation, questioning on the street and on and on. That is "detained". The officer may detain you for a reasonable amount of time to investigate and that may even include placing you in the back of the patrol car while he/she does further investigation. AND-if there is a suspicion that there is danger to the officer he/she may handcuff you and place you in the back of the car.

Police have rather wide latitude when investigating a violation and the level of "detainment" will depend upon the crime.

IE: you get stopped. The officer suspects drugs (smell of marijuana) he/she calls the dog (you have been detained up to this point) the dog hits. You are going to sit on the curb for the entire time they toss your vehicle. No marijuana found. You walk. Sue if you want but you will not win that case.

My main question is not whether you should supply your ID to LE if asked, it’s whether they would be violating your privacy if they disclosed that information to a third party (IE a nearby property owner who’s not LE). Unless you’re arrested or otherwise charged for a crime, your ID should not become part of the public record, so it should remain private. And if they disclose your ID to them, we should be able to sue them and their department for violating your privacy.

 

[Thomas B]

My main question is not whether you should supply your ID to LE if asked, it’s whether they would be violating your privacy if they disclosed that information to a third party (IE a nearby property owner who’s not LE). Unless you’re arrested or otherwise charged for a crime, your ID should not become part of the public record, so it should remain private. And if they disclose your ID to them, we should be able to sue them and their department for violating your privacy.

Check your state and local laws. If they require you to identify yourself/present ID to the LEO and you decline, then you have broken a law and have to produce it anyway...,and deal with it after your hauled in and booked with your ID info.

 

[FlyGuy8675309]

My main question is not whether you should supply your ID to LE if asked, it’s whether they would be violating your privacy if they disclosed that information to a third party (IE a nearby property owner who’s not LE). Unless you’re arrested or otherwise charged for a crime, your ID should not become part of the public record, so it should remain private. And if they disclose your ID to them, we should be able to sue them and their department for violating your privacy.

You can sue anyone for anything. The question is: will you win?.... and even if you do will any award be enough to cover all the legal expenses and hassle?

 

[CAG]

There is no easy way to explain how or when the information would be used. If there is a victim in a crime, he/she will get the information. The prosecutor's office will get the information. Anyone else, including the media has to go through the freedom of information steps to get it. We never released the information to others on a call unless there was some legitimate reason to do that and most times there was not.

If you commit a crime, you have little to no right to privacy. The information is going to get out there and the media will demand it. If you didn't commit a crime there is no reason to release it so sue away. You are not likely to win anything of consequence

 

[kensteele]

Check your state and local laws. If they require you to identify yourself/present ID to the LEO and you decline, then you have broken a law and have to produce it anyway...,and deal with it after your hauled in and booked with your ID info.

fortunately, only state law and the constitution will apply. here's a couple of good articles everyone should be familiar with:

The Criminal Justice System

Use these resources to learn more facts about crime and the criminal justice system, from arrest and arraignment to plea, court trial, and the appeals process.

www.thoughtco.com

Stop and identify statutes - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

My main question is not whether you should supply your ID to LE if asked, it’s whether they would be violating your privacy if they disclosed that information to a third party (IE a nearby property owner who’s not LE). Unless you’re arrested or otherwise charged for a crime, your ID should not become part of the public record, so it should remain private. And if they disclose your ID to them, we should be able to sue them and their department for violating your privacy.

if asked, you should say "no thank you."
if demanded, you should comply with your state law.

learn the difference. when you are asked, that means no reasonable suspicion exists and the police is seeking your consent. if you consent, you have no rights from that point forward. no rights to privacy, none. there is no law against police giving your information to anybody who asks for it. maybe they should but no law against it that i am aware of. you can always sue if you were damaged by them providing your information. but the information that you voluntarily provide to police, it's like sharing it with the entire world. you take your chances out there, either way just remember these:

 

[Thomas B]

fortunately, only state law and the constitution will apply. here's a couple of good articles everyone should be familiar with:

The Criminal Justice System

Use these resources to learn more facts about crime and the criminal justice system, from arrest and arraignment to plea, court trial, and the appeals process.

www.thoughtco.com

Stop and identify statutes - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

if asked, you should say "no thank you."
if demanded, you should comply with your state law.

learn the difference. when you are asked, that means no reasonable suspicion exists and the police is seeking your consent. if you consent, you have no rights from that point forward. no rights to privacy, none. there is no law against police giving your information to anybody who asks for it. maybe they should but no law against it that i am aware of. you can always sue if you were damaged by them providing your information. but the information that you voluntarily provide to police, it's like sharing it with the entire world. you take your chances out there, either way just remember these:

And if you fail to identify, when asked or in one of the states you posted, then you get arrested and get your day ruined at best and there is still all your info in an arrest record.

 

[CAG]

maybe they should but no law against it that i am aware of.

Ah but there is. Once information is taken by a public official be it police, county clerk whatever, it becomes part of a record that can only be release with a request through a freedom of information request. It can be released but not without hoops and the officer on the scene is not going to release your name or personal information to some joe blow. The Moss Act, as it is known was originally for federal information but has been expanded to most all governmental agencies. I don't know of any agency that does not require filling out the forms to get reports and even then names and addresses may be redacted.

The other part of this is that most all states have laws (Arizona included) that say it is not lawful to resist and UNLAWFUL arrest. That is to protect you from getting shot while resisting an arrest you think is unlawful and the officer thinks is. Your dead and your family can sue for an unlawful arrest but you are still dead. So, when in doubt don't be an idiot and try to make a case out of something you may be wrong about.

I have seen several of those videos. They only prove that some are misinformed but for the two or three that are there are thousands of other officer who know the law. If you think you are right make a complaint when the incident is over. What do you gain by making a jackwad of yourself in one of these?

 

[kensteele]

And if you fail to identify, when asked or in one of the states you posted, then you get arrested and get your day ruined at best and there is still all your info in an arrest record.

i've "failed to identify." no arrest, no ruined day, no info. i guess i don't look like a victim.

 

[kensteele]

Ah but there is. Once information is taken by a public official be it police, county clerk whatever, it becomes part of a record that can only be release with a request through a freedom of information request. It can be released but not without hoops and the officer on the scene is not going to release your name or personal information to some joe blow. The Moss Act, as it is known was originally for federal information but has been expanded to most all governmental agencies. I don't know of any agency that does not require filling out the forms to get reports and even then names and addresses may be redacted.

The other part of this is that most all states have laws (Arizona included) that say it is not lawful to resist and UNLAWFUL arrest. That is to protect you from getting shot while resisting an arrest you think is unlawful and the officer thinks is. Your dead and your family can sue for an unlawful arrest but you are still dead. So, when in doubt don't be an idiot and try to make a case out of something you may be wrong about.

I have seen several of those videos. They only prove that some are misinformed but for the two or three that are there are thousands of other officer who know the law. If you think you are right make a complaint when the incident is over. What do you gain by making a jackwad of yourself in one of these?

you're law enforcement, know how i can tell?

nobody is suggesting resisting arrest, that's silly. i wouldn't do that. but i will resist an unlawful demand. i don't just cave in that easily. look, i get it, this is not for everybody. if you want to cooperate and comply, that's fine. not everyone is cut out to stand up for their rights. and the police can tell, they can spot the thousands of victims you mentioned a mile away. what i have to gain is i keep my dignity. and then as usual, the rest of the citizens will benefit from my sacrifices.

in the context of this topic, we will find police officers who will demand your id so they can complete their incident report. in my state, i will not consent to providing my id. what's so hard to understand about that? failure to consent to providing id is not a crime and you won't be arrested by an honest police officer for that. it is more likely the dishonest police officer will arrest you for flying the drone (charging you with invasion of privacy or disorderly conduct or disturbing the peace or flying without authorization or some other nonsense) before we even get to the id part. once arrested, you will have to identify. luckily i live in a honest town and i don't have to worry about the kinds of law enforcement folks that you keep talking about.

 

[Cheech Wizard]

WOW, a couple of people in this thread are hard core revolutionaries (on paper at least). I bet they will whip out their ID as the police are walking up to them. You know that the police will find out who you are from your registration number on your drone, which I will bet they put on their drones as soon as the law was made. Internet "Tough Guys' just made me smile and shake my head.

Meanwhile you are wasting a cops time when he/she could be more effective on another issue happening at the same time.

 

[DroningOn]

Internet "Tough Guys' just made me smile and shake my head

That’s funny, “Internet Statists” make me shake my head too.... but probably for a different reason.

 

[kensteele]

WOW, a couple of people in this thread are hard core revolutionaries (on paper at least). I bet they will whip out their ID as the police are walking up to them. You know that the police will find out who you are from your registration number on your drone, which I will bet they put on their drones as soon as the law was made. Internet "Tough Guys' just made me smile and shake my head.

Meanwhile you are wasting a cops time when he/she could be more effective on another issue happening at the same time.

glad you brought this back up, didn't get a chance to say it in a previous thread. when i fly with my drone, i don't even carry id on me. registration is on the drone correctly but nothing else with my name on it; guess that will have to suffice for now until testing (but i even have a plan for that).

so yes, there are those tough guys out there and believe me, if i'm about to be arrested surely i will provide my first and last name as a last resort. but i've been through several of these and it has always worked out for me. i realize the times up might come but i don't recommend it for everyone. when the police tell you what the do, agreed, most all people will just do it whatever they're told.

 

[Deleted member 93449]

WOW, a couple of people in this thread are hard core revolutionaries (on paper at least). I bet they will whip out their ID as the police are walking up to them. You know that the police will find out who you are from your registration number on your drone, which I will bet they put on their drones as soon as the law was made. Internet "Tough Guys' just made me smile and shake my head.

Meanwhile you are wasting a cops time when he/she could be more effective on another issue happening at the same time.

Internet tough guy? Not. An advocate of knowing, valuing, exercising and protecting my rights as a U.S. citizen, yes. The only thing that stands between freedom and tyrant is ONE generation that forgets why we have the freedoms we enjoy in the U.S. If the legal requirement is you have to display your drone registration when asked I comply with the legal requirement and no more. Unless there is a reasonable suspicion of a crime (refusing to ID is NOT considered reasonable suspicion of a crime) there is no requirement to show ID.

 

[ajwilson]

If your not doing anything wrong, why not just comply. A contact report will be filed as long as there are no charges, which is not accessible to the public. As a LEO I find it quite funny that people think we have nothing to do but harass people and file paperwork. Trust me any LEO hates paperwork with a passion; they would rather just verify registration by looking at your ID and FAA paperwork and go on their way. Unless of course your breaking the Law, then you leave the situation with very little options.

ID yourself, your a law abiding citizen; unless your not....in which case of course you will get your day in court.

LEOs enforce the law. Not make it. Not penalize for it.

 

[DroningOn]

they would rather just verify registration by looking at your ID and FAA paperwork and go on their way

As a LEO I just have to ask.... if a person does not present to you his FAA paperwork or maybe the drone isn’t registered, what would you as a local cop do? Cite them? Confiscate the drone? What??

 

[ajwilson]

Would depend on why I had to ask in the first place. I would never just wonder up to a pilot flying to all intents legally. They would have to be breaking a regulation, or seeming to be, or have been a reasonably valid complaint against them from a RP in the first place. If they would present paperwork or were not registered; I would educate them and move on. If they were an [Edited by Moderator] that might turn out differently.

 

[DroningOn]

Would depend on why I had to ask in the first place. I would never just wonder up to a pilot flying to all intents legally. They would have to be breaking a regulation, or seeming to be, or have been a reasonably valid complaint against them from a RP in the first place. If they would present paperwork or were not registered; I would educate them and move on. If they were an *** that might turn out differently.

Who’s regulation? Federal? Since when does a local cop have the authority to enforce federal law/regulations? I’m really curious about this

Edit: I see you did some fast editing there. I was worried that you might think I was being [Edited by Moderator] and things might turn out differently for me. phew