Do I have to show ID?

peterarthur said:

You make my point... they must have RAS!!! I have been stopped dozens of times, never shown ID, refuse to answer questions, and have never been threatened with arrest. Maybe because I speak civilly, like a mature adult, and give the officers the same respect I desire. I refuse compliance without being an a-hole. Confident assertion of rights without bluster will likely never get you arrested. The bonehead in Philly recently got severely mistreated, but he had a really crappy attitude that you could hear in his voice.

If I do happen to get arrested someday despite my professional, mature demeanor, at least I will keep my mouth shut when I get to jail... If they actually had RAS (I look like a bank robber), I will chalk it up to bad luck. If they don't actually have RAS, I will sue them into the stone age, if possible. But what I will NOT do is make it worse for myself by running off at the mouth once they arrest me...

If I had a pending court case, I certainly would not be posting on public boards :S

I just hope you learned through it Then it might have some value after all in case you get into any REAL trouble!

Click to expand...

Well you can make this about me all you want- it doesn't matter. You can think about suing the PD all you want- it doesn't matter. Everyone thinks they will just sue the police if they make one mistake, but it's really difficult. All that officer needs is arguable reasonable suspicion to avoid the lawsuit. Given the way the MO courts have ruled on the issue, the police will have their arguable reasonable suspicion. Even if you are able to get past that, the police department and the city have immunity unless you meet a lot of different factors including showing a consistent and blatant, similar violations.

Maybe how you get treated has everything to do with the different location you live.

lancers said:

Well you can make this about me all you want- it doesn't matter. You can think about suing the PD all you want- it doesn't matter. Everyone thinks they will just sue the police if they make one mistake, but it's really difficult. All that officer needs is arguable reasonable suspicion to avoid the lawsuit. Given the way the MO courts have ruled on the issue, the police will have their arguable reasonable suspicion. Even if you are able to get past that, the police department and the city have immunity unless you meet a lot of different factors including showing a consistent and blatant, similar violations.

Maybe how you get treated has everything to do with the different location you live.

Click to expand...

I agree, cops can get away with stuff. Location may play a part. And it's not about you, per SE, you just have a very public case and made some mistakes, hopefully mistakes that teach us all.

And I actually hate lawyers and lawsuits but they don't seem to understand anything else and going to court is preferrable to other options....

LMTD said:

CCW is a LICENSED activity, if you are CCW or are OC in an area that requires a CCW license to OC and are OC'ing then you must show the license upon request and are required by statute to have it on your person for that purpose.

If you are OC in an area that has no such restriction, you do not have to identify unless you are being detained and only then under stop and identify statute which does indeed seem to only be a St Louis / KC thing. Identify in such a situation would mean verbally giving your name, NOT your drivers license or state ID card if you have one.

You still need to ask "Am I free to go?" to verify your legal status within the official spectrum, if you are not, shut your mouth and request a lawyer, nothing else you do will help you.

Click to expand...

St. Louis City, County or both?

wow6599 said:

St. Louis City, County or both?

Click to expand...

Not sure what your question is, however stl city oc is a no fly zone and unincorporated stl county has some issues that remain unclear but that is a product of debate. As far as the munis go, each can do as they see fit and they do so across the board, you simply have to check them ALL.

LMTD said:

Not sure what your question is

Click to expand...

identify statute which does indeed seem to only be a St Louis / KC thing

Click to expand...

This^

wow6599 said:

This^

Click to expand...

Missouri Revised Statutes
Chapter 84
Police Departments in St. Louis and Kansas City
Section 84.710

August 28, 2010


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.

2. They shall have power within the city or on public property of the city beyond the corporate limits thereof to arrest, on view, any person they see violating or whom they have reason to suspect of having violated any law of the state or ordinance of the city. They shall have power to arrest and hold, without warrant, for a period of time not exceeding twenty-four hours, persons found within the city or on public property of the city beyond the corporate limits thereof charged with having committed felonies in other states, and who are reported to be fugitives from justice. They shall also have the power to stop any person abroad whenever there is reasonable ground to suspect that he is committing, has committed or is about to commit a crime and demand of him his name, address, business abroad and whither he is going. When stopping or detaining a suspect, they may search him for a dangerous weapon whenever they have reasonable ground to believe they are in danger from the possession of such dangerous weapon by the suspect. No unreasonable force shall be used in detaining or arresting any person, but such force as may be necessary may be used when there is no other apparent means of making an arrest or preventing an escape and only after the peace officer has made every reasonable effort to advise the person that he is the peace officer engaged in making arrest. 3. Any person who has been arrested without a warrant may be released, without being taken before a judge, by the officer in charge of the police station whenever the officer is satisfied that there is no ground for making complaint against him, or when the person was arrested for a misdemeanor and will sign a satisfactory agreement to appear in court at the time designated.

(RSMo 1939 § 7674, A.L. 1943 p. 727 § 7673, A.L. 1978 H.B. 1634)

Prior revisions: 1929 § 7519; 1919 § 8930; 1909 § 9782

Effective 1-2-79

may i interpret that statue as how some LEO's read it?

1. we are cops so we can arrest you and do what we please.
2 we can violate your rights as we please

kylemoul said:

may i interpret that statue as how some LEO's read it?

1. we are cops so we can arrest you and do what we please.
2 we can violate your rights as we please

Click to expand...

That is exactly right. I just spent 30 minutes on the side of the road dealing with some idiot police because of it. I was just legally parked on the shoulder of Telegraph in south St. Louis County to use my phone and the cops thought they were going to be tough guys. They asked what was up and I told them. Then they asked for my ID. I told them they are not getting it unless they are demanding it and I'm legally obligated to give it. They said I was detained, but they would never say they were demanding my ID. Between the 4 cops that showed up, they asked over 20 times. They knew who I was already, but I guess they needed my ID to run my name, because then they asked for my DOB hoping to run it like that, but I didn't give them that either. They said, "You got another warrant?" Finally I called 911 and a Lt. came up and the officers all got back. I was finally able to get out of there even though he said the officers could demand ID and did the right thing.

I kind of contradicted what I said earlier in this thread, but I KNEW they did not have RS even though they detained me.

lancers said:

That is exactly right. I just spent 30 minutes on the side of the road dealing with some idiot police because of it. I was just legally parked on the shoulder of Telegraph in south St. Louis County to use my phone and the cops thought they were going to be tough guys. They asked what was up and I told them. Then they asked for my ID. I told them they are not getting it unless they are demanding it and I'm legally obligated to give it. They said I was detained, but they would never say they were demanding my ID. Between the 4 cops that showed up, they asked over 20 times. They knew who I was already, but I guess they needed my ID to run my name, because then they asked for my DOB hoping to run it like that, but I didn't give them that either. They said, "You got another warrant?" Finally I called 911 and a Lt. came up and the officers all got back. I was finally able to get out of there even though he said the officers could demand ID and did the right thing.

I kind of contradicted what I said earlier in this thread, but I KNEW they did not have RS even though they detained me.

Click to expand...

You were in a car on a roadside. I think they have every right to ask to see your DL .

Festus_Hagen said:

You were in a car on a roadside. I think they have every right to ask to see your DL .

Click to expand...

And we are right back to the "papers please" argument involving the Germans that you hate so much.

FYI the government does not have rights, the people do.

About the worst they could have done is issue a non-moving violation for parking in the break down lane if not broken down but I doubt that is posted and it may well indeed be a parking lane in which case there is nothing to investigate or even discuss.

LMTD said:

And we are right back to the "papers please" argument involving the Germans that you hate so much.

FYI the government does not have rights, the people do.

About the worst they could have done is issue a non-moving violation for parking in the break down lane if not broken down but I doubt that is posted and it may well indeed be a parking lane in which case there is nothing to investigate or even discuss.

Click to expand...

But driving a car is a privilege, just like CCW . If a cop sees your gun under a shirt he can ask to see your permit. I see this the same way since you must have a DL to drive a car, which he obviously had been doing since he was sitting in it alongside the road. I would think it's within the law to check the DL of anyone driving a vehicle.

Festus_Hagen said:

But driving a car is a privilege, just like CCW . If a cop sees your gun under a shirt he can ask to see your permit. I see this the same way since you must have a DL to drive a car, which he obviously had been doing since he was sitting in it alongside the road. I would think it's within the law to check the DL of anyone driving a vehicle.

Click to expand...

Uhm no, he would not be able to stop you LEGALLY because he saw a gun under your shirt, that's not illegal and he is SUPPOSED to see something illegal to engage you at all and most certainly must have RAS of criminal activity before DEMANDING anything.

A cop can not stop you for no reason while driving or sitting in a car either, he must have RAS to demand anything which is exactly why they ASK, it is just not usual for someone to refuse these days, Lancers does.

The demanding of identification needs to be punishable as it has become so common place that it is expected and complied with for no legal reason way too often.

Thanks for clearing that up .

LMTD said:

Uhm no, he would not be able to stop you LEGALLY because he saw a gun under your shirt, that's not illegal and he is SUPPOSED to see something illegal to engage you at all and most certainly must have RAS of criminal activity before DEMANDING anything.

A cop can not stop you for no reason while driving or sitting in a car either, he must have RAS to demand anything which is exactly why they ASK, it is just not usual for someone to refuse these days, Lancers does.

The demanding of identification needs to be punishable as it has become so common place that it is expected and complied with for no legal reason way too often.

Click to expand...

Actually, Festus is more or less right about the CCW issue. Carrying a concealed firearm is a felony in Missouri. If the officer has reasonable suspicion that you are unlawfully carrying a concealed firearm, he can ask you for your CCW permit.

cshoff said:

Actually, Festus is more or less right about the CCW issue. Carrying a concealed firearm is a felony in Missouri. If the officer has reasonable suspicion that you are unlawfully carrying a concealed firearm, he can ask you for your CCW permit.

Click to expand...

Not sure I agree with you Hoff!

Seeing someone printing is not articulable suspicion of a crime. He would have no reason to assume you in fact did NOT have a permit which is what he would have to do in order to assume criminal activity. Just because it is a licensed activity does NOT make one automatically lose their 4a rights. The simple sight of a firearm in no way suggest criminal activity and authorizes him to engage a citizen officially. He is free to make CASUAL contact only and in casual he can try and develop RAS but he has to have RAS before he can demand anything.

Driving your car is also a licensed activity, but you MUST do something illegal before they are allowed to detain you and demand identification. They are not allowed just because it is a licensed activity to stop any or everyone participating in that activity just to check.

Missouri does not have a law against “printing” therefore the officer has no violation to suspect reasonably.

Festus_Hagen said:

You were in a car on a roadside. I think they have every right to ask to see your DL .

Click to expand...

Well of course. If I had said I did give it to them, you would have said I shouldn't...

lancers said:

Well of course. If I had said I did give it to them, you would have said I shouldn't...

Click to expand...

No. I wouldn't.

I would EXPECT to have to show a valid DL if I'm in a car on the side of the road, I don't care who you are.

OC for ME said:

Kind of sums up what a LEO can "request" if he sees you printing. Part of getting CCW in Big MO. It is what it is. Baby steps to Constitutional carry.

Click to expand...

Thank you. :idea:

Festus_Hagen said:

But driving a car is a privilege, just like CCW . If a cop sees your gun under a shirt he can ask to see your permit. I see this the same way since you must have a DL to drive a car, which he obviously had been doing since he was sitting in it alongside the road. I would think it's within the law to check the DL of anyone driving a vehicle.

Click to expand...

The "right" to bear arms is not a privilege. It is a RIGHT. Any law "infringing" on that right does not turn it into a privilege, it is simply "mala prohibida". Just because unjust laws are written to decide what we can or cannot do does not make activities that are natural human rights a "privilege".

And driving your car is only considered a privilege because the government thinks they "own" the roads that WE pay for. The roads belong to US, the people, the taxpayers. The only reason we do not view driving as a "right" is because cars did not exist when the Constitution was written. The spirit of the 4th amendment actually covers this but no one has ever challenged it and made it an issue because it just is not important enough.... YET.

Watch the videos of checkpointusa on youtube and learn about your rights.