does this apply to st louis and KC only? what about other cities and counties? IE st charles, jefferson, etc...
Yeah, that is a confusing one for sure!
FYI nearly a record for reviving of a dead thread!
does this apply to st louis and KC only? what about other cities and counties? IE st charles, jefferson, etc...
cash50 wrote:
As an example, if you sort of resemble someone the police are looking for and they have his name, one way to prove you aren't that guy is to show your picture I.D. If they think you are who they are looking for, they may have to wait for fingerprint results or something else. You will probably be detained for a while for hindering their investigation. Your day will be ruined too.
i would assume st louis refers to city and county.
is there a MO RS that applies to the whole state?
I'm with you kyle. I'm having difficulty finding anything that applies to the entire State. Most everything I've found is specific to STL and KC. SPD had informed me a while back when I inquired for a student that there was a Supreme Court case on the matter and I truly don't recall what the case was.
That said, I do know that should someone refuse to identify that the Patriot Act gives LEOs the ability to have someone detained for an unspecified period of time to rule them out for terrorism. I wrote a paper on this particular subject and I was very surprised to find that out as it's not exactly clearly written in the act itself.
I agree. If a LEO wants to ask me for ID if I am doing nothing wrong, I will ask if I am being detained and if so why and if not then I will politely be about my way.
Wishful thinking...
As for the stop and ID, I've said it before in other threads, MO courts are clear that if the police demand ID, you must give it up. It's not really a battle you can win. If you get arrested, all you can expect is to spend money and have the charges dropped. No big lawsuit, no sending a message; just a night in jail and money to an attorney.
So has the question really been answered? To me it seems that you shouldnt need to show ID unless your suspected of wrong doing. But others seem to disagree, saying that in MO they have the authority to demand your name for no reason.
Wishful thinking...
As for the stop and ID, I've said it before in other threads, MO courts are clear that if the police demand ID, you must give it up. It's not really a battle you can win. If you get arrested, all you can expect is to spend money and have the charges dropped. No big lawsuit, no sending a message; just a night in jail and money to an attorney.
Police force--officers of state--powers to arrest (Kansas City).
84.710. 1. The members of the police force appointed in pursuance hereof are hereby declared to be officers of the state of Missouri and of the city for which such commissioners are appointed
Actually wrightme, Lancers has significant experience with it.
When he is speaking of ID he is talking in general terms, and you are correct, we are not required to have any form of state issued identification with us unless we are participating in an activity that requires it.
I believe the quoted RSMO statute covers KC and St Louis unless it has changed fairly recently.
What Lancers is referencing is officers violating a persons rights anyway and demanding it. If one goes into custody for it, while a clear violation, a great many phone calls seeking an atty to take the case and press the issue is an exercise in near futility and cost significantly up front to get it pursued.
This will likely remain a never ending debate, but as a general rule, while wrong, a vast majority of law enforcement are under the impression that anyone and everyone MUST comply with whatever they say and dramatically over react when someone does not. That situation has played itself out enough here that it holds merit and lawyers do not seem to be chomping at the bit to take on city hall so to speak.
Actually wrightme, Lancers has significant experience with it.
When he is speaking of ID he is talking in general terms, and you are correct, we are not required to have any form of state issued identification with us unless we are participating in an activity that requires it.
I believe the quoted RSMO statute covers KC and St Louis unless it has changed fairly recently.
What Lancers is referencing is officers violating a persons rights anyway and demanding it. If one goes into custody for it, while a clear violation, a great many phone calls seeking an atty to take the case and press the issue is an exercise in near futility and cost significantly up front to get it pursued.
This will likely remain a never ending debate, but as a general rule, while wrong, a vast majority of law enforcement are under the impression that anyone and everyone MUST comply with whatever they say and dramatically over react when someone does not. That situation has played itself out enough here that it holds merit and lawyers do not seem to be chomping at the bit to take on city hall so to speak.
LMTD, I'm not sure RSMO Chapter 84.710 covers both KC and St. Louis.
....More or less just a mess.
Well, I am not surprised that LEO's "violate" Lancer's rights. His comments on the video in jail suggest an inability to control what he says, making me suspect that he creates most of his own trouble. Yes, I know the history, I read all of it in many threads. I don't want to get into all of that again. Same thing I have already said before.
But since I started carrying over 2 years ago, I have been stopped and asked for ID about 20 times. I complied once, the first time I was asked, and was then treated as a criminal until I was run though the system. After watching dozens of videos by sovereign citizens like CheckPointUSA that know their rights and refuse to ID, I have never ID'd since. I tell them NOTHING about who I am, what I am doing, where I am going, etc. I ask THEM questions. They work for US from OUR tax money. They are accountable to US. THEY are public servants. When the LEO's see you standing on your rights in a mature, calm manner, they realize what they are up against and move on. I know that there have been some cases when the police acted inappropriately. That does NOT mean we should start giving up our rights to avoid being handcuffed and screamed at. I will take the abuse if it comes and use it to further my cause. And if the problem ever becomes systemic and we truly begin to lose our rights as a standard matter of course, I will join those who oppose it to whatever extent is required.
No free man should ever do less. You reap what you deserve when you fail to stand against tyranny. And a police state is tyranny. They have no Constitutional authority over us. Only elected officials, ie, the Sheriff have executive authority over citizens, and then ONLY if you are a suspect in a crime.
Something else I have recently learned. A friend of mine has no drivers license. When he gets pulled over, he simply states to the officer that the city that the cop works for is a private corporation (this is legally true) and that since he never signed a contract with the coproration (getting drivers license), he is not bound by their statues or ordinances. He also refuses to sign the ticket because it is a contract. That's why they have you sign, to bind yourself contractually. And is never arrested and never pays a fine. And he knows many lawyers that say legally he is correct... I will be doing more research on this. He drives without a license because he has no contract with the state and has the right to free movement and peaceable journey... but I digress...
Anyway, know your rights and act like a free man.