Is being evasive RAS?

imported post

Savage.Detroit wrote:

sasha601 wrote:

...Do not be intimidated when officer issues a threat that you will be arrested in order to pry an ID from you. If officer has a probable cause to arrest you, he/she will anyway...

Click to expand...

So very true. They need something to cite you on and you not providing ID does not break a law.
I don't know for sure but I don't think a locality can make a show ID ordinance since the State
does not have a law saying having a State ID is required.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, this is not the case. Local ordinance can differ from the state law. State must have a specific preemption statute to prevent localities from regulating in a specific area of the law. Michigan does not have such a preemption law in respectto"stop and identify". So, you would have to sniff through local ordinanceswhere you visit on foot.We are fortunate enough to have statefirearms preemption law (MCL 123.1102). Here it is just for reference: http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(vu3cn545dqpfarvin1esng45))/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=mcl-123-1102

imported post

sasha601 wrote:

Unfortunately, this is not the case. Local ordinance can differ from the state law. State must have a specific preemption statute to prevent localities from regulating in a specific area of the law.

Click to expand...

In my opinion, seizing ID in an unlawful stop related to OCing would be covered in part by preemption.

Also covering the seizure of ID, I feel, is the 4th amendment.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

imported post

sasha601 wrote:

Savage.Detroit wrote:

sasha601 wrote:

...Do not be intimidated when officer issues a threat that you will be arrested in order to pry an ID from you. If officer has a probable cause to arrest you, he/she will anyway...

Click to expand...

So very true. They need something to cite you on and you not providing ID does not break a law.
I don't know for sure but I don't think a locality can make a show ID ordinance since the State
does not have a law saying having a State ID is required.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, this is not the case. Local ordinance can differ from the state law. State must have a specific preemption statute to prevent localities from regulating in a specific area of the law. Michigan does not have such a preemption law in respectto"stop and identify". So, you would have to sniff through local ordinanceswhere you visit on foot.We are fortunate enough to have statefirearms preemption law (MCL 123.1102). Here it is just for reference: http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(vu3cn545dqpfarvin1esng45))/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=mcl-123-1102

Click to expand...

I'm not aware of any ordinances that say you have to give up certain rights protected by federal and state law. If you find one please post.

imported post

Venator wrote:

sasha601 wrote:

Savage.Detroit wrote:

sasha601 wrote:

...Do not be intimidated when officer issues a threat that you will be arrested in order to pry an ID from you. If officer has a probable cause to arrest you, he/she will anyway...

Click to expand...

So very true. They need something to cite you on and you not providing ID does not break a law.
I don't know for sure but I don't think a locality can make a show ID ordinance since the State
does not have a law saying having a State ID is required.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, this is not the case. Local ordinance can differ from the state law. State must have a specific preemption statute to prevent localities from regulating in a specific area of the law. Michigan does not have such a preemption law in respect to "stop and identify". So, you would have to sniff through local ordinances where you visit on foot. We are fortunate enough to have state firearms preemption law (MCL 123.1102). Here it is just for reference: http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(vu3cn545dqpfarvin1esng45))/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=mcl-123-1102

Click to expand...

I'm not aware of any ordinances that say you have to give up certain rights protected by federal and state law.  If you find one please post.

Click to expand...

The problem is that Michigan does not have a state law that explicitly says that a person is under no obligation to provide ID when detained. If we would have such a law, then I would agree with you - it would be unlawful for any local government to have an ordinance requiring ID simply because it will be in direct violation of the state law. But because Michigan Law is mute on the subject, local governments can come up with their own. And, it is allowed per Hiibel vs. Nevada

imported post

I've been searching the web for a Michigan court decision that I once read but can't find it. IIRC the MI Supreme Court ruled a Detroit ordinance unconstitutional because it allowed DPD to ask for papers without RAS.

I've looked but I'm not finding it.

Bronson

imported post

Bronson wrote:

I've been searching the web for a Michigan court decision that I once read but can't find it.  IIRC the MI Supreme Court ruled a Detroit ordinance unconstitutional because it allowed DPD to ask for papers without RAS.

I've looked but I'm not finding it.

Bronson

Click to expand...

Actually anybody can ask for ID. I can ask for your ID. Police officer can ask for your ID. By asking for ID they do not violate any law, I think. The bottom line question is "Is citizen required at any time during interaction with police to either produce ID document or verbally provide any ID information?"

For Michigan the answer is "No" unless locality where you are stopped has any "stop and identify" laws. Michigan state law is mute in respect to "stop and identify" requirements. This fact makes it legal for localities to enact "stop and identify" ordinances. According to Hiibel vs. Nevada these ordinance can not compel citizen to provide more than name. Some states and localities went beyond name and require address, date of birth, actual ID document and, in some case, a good account of citizen action. These are unconstitutional in my opinion, but so far go unchallenged. As an example, this is Ohio "stop and identify" law:

2921.29 Failure to disclose personal information.
(A) No person who is in a public place shall refuse to disclose the person’s name, address, or date of birth, when requested by a law enforcement officer who reasonably suspects either of the following:

(1) The person is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a criminal offense.

(2) The person witnessed any of the following:

(a) An offense of violence that would constitute a felony under the laws of this state;

(b) A felony offense that causes or results in, or creates a substantial risk of, serious physical harm to another person or to property;

(c) Any attempt or conspiracy to commit, or complicity in committing, any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section;

(d) Any conduct reasonably indicating that any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section or any attempt, conspiracy, or complicity described in division (A)(2)(c) of this section has been, is being, or is about to be committed.

(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of failure to disclose one’s personal information, a misdemeanor of the fourth degree.

(C) Nothing in this section requires a person to answer any questions beyond that person’s name, address, or date of birth. Nothing in this section authorizes a law enforcement officer to arrest a person for not providing any information beyond that person’s name, address, or date of birth or for refusing to describe the offense observed.

(D) It is not a violation of this section to refuse to answer a question that would reveal a person’s age or date of birth if age is an element of the crime that the person is suspected of committing.

imported post

i don't get it, why would'nt i show my id to a leo ? if im legal and have no wants or warrants what harm is there in it? so what if they know who i am, i meen i have nothing to hide. (just asking thats all) i just dont understand what harm there is in it.

imported post

Because your ID is not his business. If LEO has a problem with you, if LEO has resonable saspision to detain or probable cause to arrest you, then he will do it anyway. We are not in Nazi Germany or USSR. We do not have to have walking papers on us.

I would pose the same question from another end: Why would officer want to know my name? What difference does it make if my name is John Smith or Joe Shmoh? Start thinking like a free man

imported post

spikedawg wrote:

i don't get it, why would'nt i show my id to a leo ? if im legal and have no wants or warrants what harm is there in it? so what if they know who i am, i meen i have nothing to hide. (just asking thats all) i just dont understand what harm there is in it.

Click to expand...

It may seem somewhat extremist and I used to feel the same way, but what you have to remember is that every piece of our freedom that it taken away is that much more we will either never get back or will have to divert our efforts to get back. We are not (or should not be) a "papers please" country. Piece by piece we are losing freedoms, fight for the ones we still have. Today they make you show your ID, maybe tomorrow if you aren't carrying your ID they can 'take you downtown' just to run your prints to see who you are, and just for good measure eventually they can just lock you up for not answering all of the LEO's questions. It might seem unlikely, but why risk it?

It's not about having something to hide, it's about the fact that I should be able to go about my business without being hassled when I have done nothing wrong or illegal and haven't given any reason to believe the contrary.

imported post

sasha601 wrote:

Because your ID is not his business. If LEO has a problem with you, if LEO has resonable saspision to detain or probable cause to arrest you, then he will do it anyway. We are not in Nazi Germany or USSR. We do not have to have walking papers on us.

I would pose the same question from another end: Why would officer want to know my name? What difference does it make if my name is John Smith or Joe Shmoh? Start thinking like a free man

Click to expand...

ok here we go, i spent 13 years in the army(3rd ranger bn) so i fought for our freedom. i like to think that i do think like a free man. i do ride alongs with the local leo's and know a couple of them on a first name basis's. the rc of our motorcycle group is a state leo and i go to the local shootin range with the town leo all the time. so its not like they dont all ready know me. i was just asking why i would'nt show my id if asked. i dont have anything to hide so whats the harm?

imported post

spikedawg wrote:

sasha601 wrote:

Because your ID is not his business. If LEO has a problem with you, if LEO has resonable saspision to detain or probable cause to arrest you, then he will do it anyway. We are not in Nazi Germany or USSR. We do not have to have walking papers on us.

I would pose the same question from another end: Why would officer want to know my name? What difference does it make if my name is John Smith or Joe Shmoh? Start thinking like a free man

Click to expand...

ok here we go, i spent 13 years in the army(3rd ranger bn) so i fought for our freedom. i like to think that i do think like a free man. i do ride alongs with the local leo's and know a couple of them on a first name basis's. the rc of our motorcycle group is a state leo and i go to the local shootin range with the town leo all the time. so its not like they dont all ready know me. i was just asking why i would'nt show my id if asked. i dont have anything to hide so whats the harm?

Click to expand...

It's stepping stone to more freedoms lost. The constitution was designed to empower the people and restrict the government, lets keep it that way.

Let me ask this, what harm is there in not wanting to give more information than is required by law?

imported post

spikedawg wrote:

ok here we go, i spent 13 years in the army(3rd ranger bn) so i fought for our freedom. i like to think that i do think like a free man. i do ride alongs with the local leo's and know a couple of them on a first name basis's. the rc of our motorcycle group is a state leo and i go to the local shootin range with the town leo all the time. so its not like they dont all ready know me. i was just asking why i would'nt show my id if asked. i dont have anything to hide so whats the harm?

Click to expand...

Thank you SIR! from the bottom of my heart, for fighting on my behalf so I can live a life free to roam the entire country on a whim (without having to get a permit to travel), speak my opinions fearlessly (without having to get a permit to speak), and carry a gun for my personal protection openly in plain sight (without having to provide identification just because I have a gun).

In short, I am grateful to you (and to all our service men and women) for fighting to protect this country from becoming a place where anyone in authority can, at any time, demand to see my "papers".....

It isn't a matter of whether or not I have anything to hide... it is a matter of having the freedom to not have to prove I have nothing to hide.

And you Sir, and many others (some of whom gave the ultimate sacrifice by giving up the chance to see the sun rise... their chance to make love again... see their first son/daughter born... buy their first house)...., have fought for freedom for everyone in this country to be........ free from having to "show your papers".

Edited to add:
I reread my post and thought that perhaps it could be read as either sarcasm or an insult. Neither was my intent. I was, and always am, sincere in my gratitude to our military.

imported post

maybe it's the 13 years in the army and being taught to follow orders thats still with me, but i do understand where ur coming from and i dont want to lose any freedoms we have. i guess i never looked at it like that, but i will start. thank you sevenplusone-bikenut

imported post

spikedawg wrote:

maybe it's the 13 years in the army and being taught to follow orders thats still with me, but i do understand where ur coming from and i dont want to lose any freedoms we have. i guess i never looked at it like that, but i will start. thank you sevenplusone-bikenut

Click to expand...

I also would like to express my gratitude for your sacrifice and commitment.

What you posted above is exactly what I was thinking. It's not uncommon for veterans, and military members to take this attitude, but understand that it is a dangerous attitude.

As a members of the armed forces, we gave up many liberties and rights that ordinary citizens enjoy as part of the privilege to serve. Like other military members, we were not free when we were in the military. Because of the acclimation of that lifestyle, it is a culture shock to encounter people who are resistant to waiving their rights or surrendering their freedom. It's easy to devalue something to which one has become accustomed to not having. Therefore, it's to see how one has difficulty relating to someone who does know freedom and resists giving it up.

The founders warned that freedom should be guarded jealously, and that we should be ever vigilant. Unless you can come to accept that your viewpoint does not jibe with the concept of freedom, then it will be a difficult concept to understand.

imported post

spikedawg wrote:

sasha601 wrote:

Because your ID is not his business. If LEO has a problem with you, if LEO has resonable saspision to detain or probable cause to arrest you, then he will do it anyway. We are not in Nazi Germany or USSR. We do not have to have walking papers on us.

I would pose the same question from another end: Why would officer want to know my name? What difference does it make if my name is John Smith or Joe Shmoh? Start thinking like a free man

Click to expand...

ok here we go, i spent 13 years in the army(3rd ranger bn) so i fought for our freedom. i like to think that i do think like a free man. i do ride alongs with the local leo's and know a couple of them on a first name basis's. the rc of our motorcycle group is a state leo and i go to the local shootin range with the town leo all the time. so its not like they dont all ready know me. i was just asking why i would'nt show my id if asked. i dont have anything to hide so whats the harm?

 

Click to expand...

I feel like my remark in the end was a little out of line. I apologize for tht.

imported post

The LEO is only the front to an increasingly intrusive government. A free man ought to be able to attend to his private affairs without intrusion from the government. Unless I have business to attend to with the state.gov or local.gov, why do I need to demonstrate my identity to an agent of .gov?

imported post

spikedawg wrote:

ok here we go, i spent 13 years in the army(3rd ranger bn) so i fought for our freedom. i like to think that i do think like a free man. i do ride alongs with the local leo's and know a couple of them on a first name basis's. the rc of our motorcycle group is a state leo and i go to the local shootin range with the town leo all the time. so its not like they dont all ready know me. i was just asking why i would'nt show my id if asked. i dont have anything to hide so whats the harm?

Click to expand...

These remarks are not offered as criticism; they are offered as suggesting things to think about:

Probably most important is that just because one cannot imagine a potential harm does not mean it does not exist. By way of example, I formerly assumed that anyone exercising their 5th Amendment right to silence was probably guilty of something. "If you didn't do anything, why refuse to talk.?"

Boy, was I short on knowledge. I learned this when I watched the video Talking to Police by Prof. James Duane of Regent University Law School. By the time the video is over, the viewer has a law professor, a police detective, and a Supreme Ct. Justice telling him to not talk to police. The law professor gives eight reasons why. None that I ever really knew.

Just as a general principle, it is the government's job to fully justify an intrusion--and where they got the authority for it. Free men do not have to justify exercising a right.

Rights are rights are rights are rights. Not debate points or arguments.Their justification was worked out centuries ago. They need no defense. A right exists even if you cannot argue successfully against a cop's demand for a justification for exercising it. Think about it for a second. Does your right to silence disappear just because you cannot think up a good explanation to defend it when the cop asks, "If you havedone nothing wrong, why are you unwilling to talk?"

From an OC point of view, perhaps one of the most compelling reasons to not identify oneself to police is the case of forum member Theseus from California. The police seized his ID from his wallet without his consent during a detention. They let him go, finding they could not citeor arrest him. Sometime later the prosecutor decided to charge him,even going so far as asking the court to redefinea "publicplace" in order to make the charges stick and obtain a conviction. Had the governmentnot known who he was by their ID seizure, they would never have been ablevindictively prosecute him.

The damnably ironic thing is that the US Supreme Court in case called Hiibel v 6th Judicial Court several years ago foresaw the situationthat happened to Theseus. They mention it in the next to last sentence of that opinion. In the last sentence the court refuses to do anything about it.

Educational media:

Talking to Police video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

Busted: A Citizen's Guide to Surviving Police Encounters video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqMjMPlXzdA

Nothing to Hide by Daniel Solove, Professor, Geo. Wash. Univ. Law School, paper: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565

Hiibel v 6th Judicial District Ct. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/03-5554.ZO.html

imported post

spikedawg wrote:

i don't get it, why would'nt i show my id to a leo ? if im legal and have no wants or warrants what harm is there in it? so what if they know who i am, i meen i have nothing to hide. (just asking thats all) i just dont understand what harm there is in it.

Click to expand...

Why bow to authority when one doesn't have too. What it does is brainwash people like you that say "Why notif I have nothing to hide". Well certainly that is your choice but if not required to why would you? More sheep that wolf.

imported post

spikedawg wrote:

sasha601 wrote:

Because your ID is not his business. If LEO has a problem with you, if LEO has resonable saspision to detain or probable cause to arrest you, then he will do it anyway. We are not in Nazi Germany or USSR. We do not have to have walking papers on us.

I would pose the same question from another end: Why would officer want to know my name? What difference does it make if my name is John Smith or Joe Shmoh? Start thinking like a free man

Click to expand...

ok here we go, i spent 13 years in the army(3rd ranger bn) so i fought for our freedom. i like to think that i do think like a free man. i do ride alongs with the local leo's and know a couple of them on a first name basis's. the rc of our motorcycle group is a state leo and i go to the local shootin range with the town leo all the time. so its not like they dont all ready know me. i was just asking why i would'nt show my id if asked. i dont have anything to hide so whats the harm?

Click to expand...

Aah 13 years being brainwashed by the government..Now I understand.

imported post

Venator wrote:

spikedawg wrote:

sasha601 wrote:

Because your ID is not his business. If LEO has a problem with you, if LEO has resonable saspision to detain or probable cause to arrest you, then he will do it anyway. We are not in Nazi Germany or USSR. We do not have to have walking papers on us.

I would pose the same question from another end: Why would officer want to know my name? What difference does it make if my name is John Smith or Joe Shmoh? Start thinking like a free man

Click to expand...

ok here we go, i spent 13 years in the army(3rd ranger bn) so i fought for our freedom. i like to think that i do think like a free man. i do ride alongs with the local leo's and know a couple of them on a first name basis's. the rc of our motorcycle group is a state leo and i go to the local shootin range with the town leo all the time. so its not like they dont all ready know me. i was just asking why i would'nt show my id if asked. i dont have anything to hide so whats the harm?

Click to expand...

Aah 13 years being brainwashed by the government..Now I understand.

Click to expand...

As much as I love military folks, they definitely come out lacking in the 'independence from the gov't' arena. Whether it be guns, freedoms, or other concerns of free citizens, I've generally been pretty dismayed at their responses.

It must be a more difficult adjustment getting out than we civvies realize, not having to report to a CO and account for your activities and whereabouts every day all day.

I'm not trying to bust spike's balls, but like others said, this is a very real, very well documented slippery slope, not unlike gun registration. It hurts me to see how the sheep seem to have accepted the idea that they MUST produce papers when asked by any authority figure.