Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 123

Thread: Duty to identify

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Linn County, Iowa, USA
    Posts
    491

    Post imported post

    I had a conversation with a civil rights activist at a recent gun show. He related his experience of carrying a firearm while in Wisconsin. He was approached by a LEO and the officer demanded proof of ID. Question is, was he legally obligated to produce an identifying document?

    Along with that question comes a few others. Is there any obligation by a person in Wisconsin to identify him/herself upon demand by an officer? I don't just mean producing a document but can they even ask you to state your name? Are people in Wisconsin required to carry identification for just walking? Or walking while armed?

    Citing relevant law would be appreciated. I may have to pay Wisconsin a visit and exercise those rights not protected in Iowa.

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    , Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    908

    Post imported post

    This is what the Wisconsin Attorney General said in his memo of April 20, 2009.

    5

    ¶9. And "even when officers have no basis for suspecting a particular individual, they may generally ask questions of that individual, [and] ask to examine the individual's identification," as long as the police do not convey a message that compliance is mandatory.
    Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429, 434-35 (1991). The Fourth Amendment does not prevent police from making voluntary or consensual contact with persons engaged in constitutionally protected conduct. See United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544, 553-54 (1980). Accordingly, a law enforcement officer does not violate the Fourth Amendment by approaching an individual in public and asking questions. Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491, 497 (1983). An officer may approach and question someone as long as the questions, the circumstances and the officer's behavior do not convey to the subject that he must comply with the requests. Bostick, 501 U.S. at 435-36. The person approached need not answer any questions. As long as he or she remains free to walk away, there has been no intrusion on liberty requiring a particularized and objective Fourth Amendment justification. See Mendenhall, 446 U.S. at 554.

    The emphasis is mine.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Lurchiron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Shawano,WI.
    Posts
    1,011

    Post imported post

    Can't cite, but I believe if your pulled over for a traffic stop; then yes(driver's liecense). Walking down the street; no I.D., but you have to state your name & city of residence.

    http://www.legis.state.wi.us/rsb/stats.html

    Did a lot of work in Iowa, what part are you in?
    Bale da Hay

    "Have you Spanked a leftist today; it's the Right thing to do!!!"


    Within the gates before a man shall go,
    (Fully warily let him watch,)
    Full long let him look about him;
    For little he knows where a foe may lurk,
    And sit in the seats within.

    Havamal (Bellows translation)

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Linn County, Iowa, USA
    Posts
    491

    Post imported post

    Lurchiron wrote:
    Can't cite, but I believe if your pulled over for a traffic stop; then yes(driver's liecense). Walking down the street; no I.D., but you have to state your name & city of residence.Â*

    http://www.legis.state.wi.us/rsb/stats.htmlÂ*

    Did a lot of work in Iowa, what part are you in?Â*
    I live and work in Linn County.

    Thanks for the link, here's what I found:
    Article I, §11 - ANNOT.
    An anonymous tip that a person is carrying a gun, without more, is insufficient to justify a police officer's stop and frisk of a person. The tip must bear indicia of reliability. Reasonable suspicion requires that a tip be reliable in its assertion of criminal activity, not just in its tendency to to identify a person. Florida v. J.L. 529 U.S. 266, 146 L. Ed. 2d 254 (2000).
    The way it's presented on the website it looks to be a notation, based on court precedent, to clarify a constitutional provision. This might be enough to bar a police officer from asking a person to provide identifying information based only on being armed.

    Anyone else with more information or a differing interpretation?

  5. #5
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,197

    Post imported post

    You have every right (if you aren't operating a motor vehicle)not to provide ID. You have the right to remain silent. You do not have to provide ID, your name, or your address. Wisconsin has no stop and identify statute.
    www.wisconsincarry.org Wisconsin Carry, Inc. is not affiliated with opencarry.org or these web forums. Questions about discussion forum policy or forum moderation should be directed to the owners of opencarry.org not Wisconsin Carry, Inc.

  6. #6
    Regular Member hardballer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    West Coast of Wisconsin
    Posts
    925

    Post imported post

    Your link does not lead to a relevant statute. The statutes that Lammie has cited, seem in contradiction to your unreferenced claims. Please clarify. Thank you.
    Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid. Han Solo

    http://buffaloholstercompany.blogspot.com/ Concealment holsters IWB, SOB, and belt slide. Open Carry too. New from Buffalo Holster, Women's holsters for concealment and or belt carry.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Lurchiron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Shawano,WI.
    Posts
    1,011

    Post imported post

    hardballer wrote:
    Your link does not lead to a relevant statute. The statutes that Lammie has cited, seem in contradiction to your unreferenced claims. Please clarify. Thank you.
    Said from the begining that I couldn't cite, provided the only link I had; and didn't feel like playing receptionist. Clear 'nuf?
    Bale da Hay

    "Have you Spanked a leftist today; it's the Right thing to do!!!"


    Within the gates before a man shall go,
    (Fully warily let him watch,)
    Full long let him look about him;
    For little he knows where a foe may lurk,
    And sit in the seats within.

    Havamal (Bellows translation)

  8. #8
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    Lurchiron wrote:
    hardballer wrote:
    Your link does not lead to a relevant statute. The statutes that Lammie has cited, seem in contradiction to your unreferenced claims. Please clarify. Thank you.
    Said from the begining that I couldn't cite, provided the only link I had; and didn't feel like playing receptionist. Clear 'nuf?
    I hope the rules are clear enough as well - if you proffer a rtule of law, you should be able to cite to some authority, e.g., code section, link, news article, etc., or else, you should not state the rule of law as correct - prefacing the rule with "I think the rule is" is a way to explain that you donl;t actually know if the rule is correct but think it might be.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    Like this...

    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman wrote:
    Wisconsin has no stop and identify statute.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_an...80.9D_statutes

    Wisconsin Wis. Stat. §968.24
    968.24 Temporary questioning without arrest.
    After having identified himself or herself as a law enforcement officer, a law enforcement officer may stop a person in a public place for a reasonable period of time when the officer reasonably suspects that such person is committing, is about to commit or has committed a crime, and may demand the name and address of the person and an explanation of the person’s conduct. Such detention and temporary questioning shall be conducted in the vicinity where the person was stopped.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Lurchiron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Shawano,WI.
    Posts
    1,011

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    Lurchiron wrote:
    hardballer wrote:
    Your link does not lead to a relevant statute. The statutes that Lammie has cited, seem in contradiction to your unreferenced claims. Please clarify. Thank you.
    Said from the begining that I couldn't cite, provided the only link I had; and didn't feel like playing receptionist. Clear 'nuf?
    I hope the rules are clear enough as well - if you proffer a rtule of law, you should be able to cite to some authority, e.g., code section, link, news article, etc., or else, you should not state the rule of law as correct - prefacing the rule with "I think the rule is" is a way to explain that you donl;t actually know if the rule is correct but think it might be.
    I believe that the first 4 words of my original post covers that.
    Bale da Hay

    "Have you Spanked a leftist today; it's the Right thing to do!!!"


    Within the gates before a man shall go,
    (Fully warily let him watch,)
    Full long let him look about him;
    For little he knows where a foe may lurk,
    And sit in the seats within.

    Havamal (Bellows translation)

  11. #11
    McX
    Guest

    Post imported post

    i dunno guys. i'm a loveable, and compliant kind of guy. i'd give my driver's license, and business card to the officer. comply. hope he would see my cooperation as sincere, that i am not a threat, and let me go on my way.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Linn County, Iowa, USA
    Posts
    491

    Post imported post

    McX wrote:
    i dunno guys. i'm a loveable, and compliant kind of guy. i'd give my driver's license, and business card to the officer. comply. hope he would see my cooperation as sincere, that i am not a threat, and let me go on my way.
    Well, I'm not so compliant when I feel I'm being bullied. The idea is to see how far I can go without being in violation of the law. If I am not required to have ID while carrying then I might just feel the urge to leave any identifying documents behind.

    I ask because while an officer can ask a person to provide ID there is still some question on whether a person must comply. An officer can always ASK, but that does not mean I must comply with their whims. An officer can ask me to pat my head and rub my tummy but I have no obligation to do so. One question appears to have been answered, no one is required to carry identification while walking and carrying openly.

    This is how I interpret what has been offered so far, an officer cannot stop a person based solely on being armed. An officer can ask for a person to identify but a person is not required to comply unless the officer views the person as a suspect or witness to a crime. So, if I am stopped in Wisconsin by an officer and asked for my name I'd feel compelled to ask if I am required to answer. If they say yes then I will identify myself. If they answer no then I will ask if I may leave.

    An officer can be untruthful in the collection of evidence or in the seeking of compliance of a suspect but not when it comes to a person's rights. An officer can knock on a door and claim to be a pizza delivery guy but they cannot claim to have a warrant if they do not. If they ask for my name and untruthfully tell me I must answer then any charge of a crime or arrest could be viewed as "fruit of the poisoned tree" and put me on very good footing to have any charge dropped. I doubt it would go that far but it is something that I wondered about.

    Here's a bit of a rhetorical question, being from out of state, and not driving at the time, what kind of ID would be considered "valid" if asked for ID by an officer? I'm sure that is up to interpretation by the officer.

  13. #13
    McX
    Guest

    Post imported post

    well, if the cop starts being a weenie, i got my miranda rights, even if he don't read them to me. i can shut up anytime. i can object anytime, i can ask if i'm being detained, and why? i can get his badge number, and file a complaint. what he gives me he will get back, i can start loveable, but i can be a weenie too.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    SMITHFIELD, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    270

    Post imported post

    Name OK, ID I want a reason why.

  15. #15
    Regular Member BROKENSPROKET's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Trempealeau County
    Posts
    2,187

    Post imported post

    I think what I am about to say may contradictthe popular concensus of OCDO members.

    My conviction is that if one is going to exercise the right to Open Carry, then you must do so with a great measure of responsibility such as firearms safety training, pratice marksmanship skills, weapon retention tactics, contemplate Draw or No Draw scenarios and situational awareness. I think everyone still on board so far

    In addition to that, I feel strongly that if an LEO asks a person for ID while they OC, then surrender it immediatley. I know its not a requirement of the law, but I feel that would be a responsible reponse while I OC. If LEO get conditioned to not question or bother someone that will not cooperativley ID themselves, then criminals will adjust and POSE as a OC law abiding citizen, while they may have a warrant, been convicted of a felony or domestic abuse charge, or have an restraining order against them.

    IF WE, LAW ABIDING CITIZENS DO NOT COOPERATIVELY ID OURSELVES WHEN WE ARE IN THE ACT OF OPEN CARRYING, THEN WE ARE NOTHELPING LEOFROM KEEPING THOSE WHO CANNOT LEGALLY DO SO FROM DOING SO. Having BG pose as law abiding OC citiznes andLEO cannot properly ID them will give alot of ammunition to WAVE and the anti-gun proponents.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    mid south but not madison , , USA
    Posts
    232

    Post imported post

    BROKENSPROKET wrote:
    I think what I am about to say may contradictthe popular concensus of OCDO members.

    My conviction is that if one is going to exercise the right to Open Carry, then you must do so with a great measure of responsibility such as firearms safety training, pratice marksmanship skills, weapon retention tactics, contemplate Draw or No Draw scenarios and situational awareness. I think everyone still on board so far

    In addition to that, I feel strongly that if an LEO asks a person for ID while they OC, then surrender it immediatley. I know its not a requirement of the law, but I feel that would be a responsible reponse while I OC. If LEO get conditioned to not question or bother someone that will not cooperativley ID themselves, then criminals will adjust and POSE as a OC law abiding citizen, while they may have a warrant, been convicted of a felony or domestic abuse charge, or have an restraining order against them.

    IF WE, LAW ABIDING CITIZENS DO NOT COOPERATIVELY ID OURSELVES WHEN WE ARE IN THE ACT OF OPEN CARRYING, THEN WE ARE NOTHELPING LEOFROM KEEPING THOSE WHO CANNOT LEGALLY DO SO FROM DOING SO. Having BG pose as law abiding OC citiznes andLEO cannot properly ID them will give alot of ammunition to WAVE and the anti-gun proponents.
    Exactly! excellent point. why upset the cart?

  17. #17
    McX
    Guest

    Post imported post

    the sproket that is broken speaks the truth.

  18. #18
    McX
    Guest

    Post imported post

    that scenario has been rumbling around in the back of my mind too; what if the dirtbag tries to imitate me. i mean there's fake cops out there, fake utility workers, the oc-er that shows id is probably on the up and up, at least it might be a way to weed out the copy cats if they ever come. scumbags are getting pretty creative these days.

  19. #19
    Regular Member AaronS's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,497

    Post imported post

    BROKENSPROKET wrote:
    I think what I am about to say may contradictthe popular concensus of OCDO members.

    My conviction is that if one is going to exercise the right to Open Carry, then you must do so with a great measure of responsibility such as firearms safety training, pratice marksmanship skills, weapon retention tactics, contemplate Draw or No Draw scenarios and situational awareness. I think everyone still on board so far

    In addition to that, I feel strongly that if an LEO asks a person for ID while they OC, then surrender it immediatley. I know its not a requirement of the law, but I feel that would be a responsible reponse while I OC. If LEO get conditioned to not question or bother someone that will not cooperativley ID themselves, then criminals will adjust and POSE as a OC law abiding citizen, while they may have a warrant, been convicted of a felony or domestic abuse charge, or have an restraining order against them.

    IF WE, LAW ABIDING CITIZENS DO NOT COOPERATIVELY ID OURSELVES WHEN WE ARE IN THE ACT OF OPEN CARRYING, THEN WE ARE NOTHELPING LEOFROM KEEPING THOSE WHO CANNOT LEGALLY DO SO FROM DOING SO. Having BG pose as law abiding OC citiznes andLEO cannot properly ID them will give alot of ammunition to WAVE and the anti-gun proponents.
    For the most part I disagree.

    If the only reason the cops stop and demand ID from you is the fact that you are exercising your right to self protection, then the cops are not my friends in the first place. If I were in my car, I could understand being asked for ID, but not if I am just shopping, or walking down the street. The right to open carry in Wisconsin is just that, a right. I do not have any reason or need to show ID to be able to exercise any of my other rights, so why would I for Art.1 Sec.25?

    A "bad man" with a holstered gun could make him look like a law abiding person. But, in Milwaukee our "bad men" open carry all the time, most of them just keep the gun in hand... Never in my life have I read about an open carry "BG"... Have you?

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Linn County, Iowa, USA
    Posts
    491

    Post imported post

    Exactly! excellent point. why upset the cart?
    The Bill of Rights is not a buffet that the officer is allowed to pick and choose from. So many are carrying openly because it upsets the police. They got smacked down in the courts over this several times now. We need to stand up for our rights, ALL of them.

    I am not willing to submit to an unreasonable search by a police officer to satisfy his or her curiosity. This has gone to court before and the officer cannot require a person to provide ID upon request. The officer can ask your name, and depending on the circumstances, you may be required by law to answer.

    The reason I started this thread is to find out what the law was in Wisconsin and inform others of the law. I don't know when I will have the time to visit the state but if I do visit I plan to carry a firearm, and no ID, just to see what would happen. I suspect it may go something like this:

    Officer: Sir, may I see some ID?
    Me: My name is Iowa Farmboy from Linn County, Iowa.
    Officer: That's not what I asked, do you have a driver's license?
    Me: Yes but I don't have it with me, officer.
    Officer: Why not?
    Me: Because I am not driving, officer.

    Where the encounter goes from there can vary greatly depending on how far the officer wishes to press the issue. I've heard many stories of Wisconsin police hassling people over open carry and I am advocating that the only way for this to stop is for people to be aware of their rights and not roll over when the police stops people for not breaking the law.

    You can do what you wish but do you want to be stopped every time a police officer notices you? That can only stop as soon as the police learn that people know their rights and are not willing to live in a "papers please" society.

    I also find the claim that "bad guys" will take advantage of the open carry as a way to avoid being noticed. BGs will not carry openly since it gets them noticed. They will avoid even the possibility of getting hassled by police by carrying concealed. I don't believe that any officer is going to ask for ID from someone carrying openly in the hopes of catching some violent felon. They are going to ask for ID only to intimidate.

    Bad guys don't open carry.

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    , Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    908

    Post imported post

    WHY UPSET THE CART?

    We have not had 2,777,955 casualties in 12 major wars protecting our freedom and theBill of Rights just to have them squandered away because we don't want to upset the cart!



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...ualties_of_war

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    14

    Post imported post

    I am not a lawyer and can give you no legal advise, this is all my opinion.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_an...80.9D_statutes

    First it depends on what type of encounter it is: consensual, detainment(terry stop), or arrest.

    To determine if the stop is consensual, ask "Am I free to go?" or "Am I being detained?" or something similar. Some LEO's will not want to answer that question. He will try to deflect you with questions of his own, but just keep asking if you are free to go. If you are free to go, you have the right to just walk away without saying another thing. If you stick around you are agreeing to the consensual encounter. You still have the right to not speak if you don't walk away, but the cop has the right to keep asking you questions.

    If it is a terry stop or an arrest, according to the law, you have to give your name, address, and conduct under §968.24. The constitutionality of requiring your address and conduct has not been addressed by the courts. But requiring your name has been addressed and it is constitutional. Personally, I would just give name and address cause I think telling them why I'm there could be giving up my 5th amendment rights.

    You are not required to carry ID unless you are driving. If you are driving, you MUST produce ID when asked for it.

    NEVER lie to a police officer. If you don't like the question, don't answer it. Respond with either silence, "I choose not to answer that", "I would like to consult with my lawyer", or ask him a question(basically not answering his). Answering his question with a question will piss him off.

    Always keep in mind that even though it is against the law for you to lie to a LEO, it is NOT against the law for him to lie to you. Some LEO's will try to intimidate you and lie to you. Its your responsibility to know your rights.

    LEO: "let me see your ID"
    me: "do i have to give it to you?"
    LEO: "yes, its the law"

    If you are not driving, it is not the law. But he can lie to you about it.

    ALSO, keep in mind that any LEO can arrest you for anything he wants too. If he doesn't like your choice of shirts he can arrest you for disorderly conduct, and take you down to the station. If he thinks its the law that you have to show ID, he can arrest you and take you to the station for not producing your ID. He can do anything he wants. Then the DA has to decide if he wants to press any charges. MANY MANY people have been thrown in jail for up to 72 hours just to have the DA drop all charges, just because the LEO didn't like someone's attitude or he didn't know the law. So choose wisely when not answering a LEO's questions or disobeying his orders.




  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481

    Post imported post

    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman wrote:
    You have every right (if you aren't operating a motor vehicle)not to provide ID. You have the right to remain silent. You do not have to provide ID, your name, or your address. Wisconsin has no stop and identify statute.
    + 1000

    You have Rights for a reason. Use them.

    As for the stop and identify issue:

    968.24 Temporary questioning without arrest.
    After having identified himself or herself as a law enforcement officer, a law enforcement officer may stop a person in a public place for a reasonable period of time when the officer reasonably suspects that such person is committing, is about to commit or has committed a crime, and may demand the name and address of the person and an explanation of the person’s conduct. Such detention and temporary questioning shall be conducted in the vicinity where the person was stopped.


    Would apply as long as the LEO has RAS.

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481

    Post imported post

    AaronS wrote:
    BROKENSPROKET wrote:
    I think what I am about to say may contradictthe popular concensus of OCDO members.

    My conviction is that if one is going to exercise the right to Open Carry, then you must do so with a great measure of responsibility such as firearms safety training, pratice marksmanship skills, weapon retention tactics, contemplate Draw or No Draw scenarios and situational awareness. I think everyone still on board so far

    In addition to that, I feel strongly that if an LEO asks a person for ID while they OC, then surrender it immediatley. I know its not a requirement of the law, but I feel that would be a responsible reponse while I OC. If LEO get conditioned to not question or bother someone that will not cooperativley ID themselves, then criminals will adjust and POSE as a OC law abiding citizen, while they may have a warrant, been convicted of a felony or domestic abuse charge, or have an restraining order against them.

    IF WE, LAW ABIDING CITIZENS DO NOT COOPERATIVELY ID OURSELVES WHEN WE ARE IN THE ACT OF OPEN CARRYING, THEN WE ARE NOTHELPING LEOFROM KEEPING THOSE WHO CANNOT LEGALLY DO SO FROM DOING SO. Having BG pose as law abiding OC citiznes andLEO cannot properly ID them will give alot of ammunition to WAVE and the anti-gun proponents.
    For the most part I disagree.

    If the only reason the cops stop and demand ID from you is the fact that you are exercising your right to self protection, then the cops are not my friends in the first place. If I were in my car, I could understand being asked for ID, but not if I am just shopping, or walking down the street. The right to open carry in Wisconsin is just that, a right. I do not have any reason or need to show ID to be able to exercise any of my other rights, so why would I for Art.1 Sec.25?

    A "bad man" with a holstered gun could make him look like a law abiding person. But, in Milwaukee our "bad men" open carry all the time, most of them just keep the gun in hand... Never in my life have I read about an open carry "BG"... Have you?
    I have to agree with Aaron here. It would be different if there had just been an armed robbery at the nearby gas station. I could understand the LEO just stopping you and asking for ID then. But for them to just stop and detain you for no reason other than the fact that you were OCing is un-called for.

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481

    Post imported post

    Lammie wrote:
    WHY UPSET THE CART?

    We have not had 2,777,955 casualties in 12 major wars protecting our freedom and theBill of Rights just to have them squandered away because we don't want to upset the cart!



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...ualties_of_war
    Well said Lammie!

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •