• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Stop and ID

kg4usk

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2010
Messages
18
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
Just wondering if any of you all knew... say if I were walking down the street or riding my bicycle OC'ing, and a LEO stops me and asks for my ID, do I have to produce it?
 

45acpForMe

Newbie
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
2,805
Location
Yorktown, Virginia, USA
From reading several other threads the answer is no.

You do not need to provide ID. You do have to identify yourself by giving him your full name. Some people have found out that if you give them your drivers license they will keep it which allows them to "inadvertantly" detain you without officially detaining you. The only time you have to show your drivers license is if you are driving or in your car.

Now with that said, if they have reasonable suspicion they may detain you and keep you longer in order to identify you better.
 

ed

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
Mar 8, 2008
Messages
4,841
Location
Loudoun County - Dulles Airport, Virginia, USA
From reading several other threads the answer is no.

You do not need to provide ID. You do have to identify yourself by giving him your full name. Some people have found out that if you give them your drivers license they will keep it which allows them to "inadvertantly" detain you without officially detaining you. The only time you have to show your drivers license is if you are driving or in your car.

Now with that said, if they have reasonable suspicion they may detain you and keep you longer in order to identify you better.

Good answer
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
*Waits for Citizen*

(chuckle) I guess I must be too well known around here.


Dear KG4USK,

First lets make a distinction. Identifying oneself can occur verbally, or by providing an ID document. This is not a statement of law. It is simply a statement that the words "identify self" covers both ways, and it is sometimes useful or even important to distinguish one from another.

Another term: Stop-and-Identify (S & I) statute. Generally, a law that requires a person to identify himself to a police officer under certain conditions when the cop is investigating a suspected crime. Generally, these laws require only verbal identification, but I have seen at least one in another state that required a person to show his drivers license or state-issued ID if he has one on him at the time.

There was a stop-and-identify bill introduced in the General Assembly this year. I have word from a reliable source that it died in committee, BUT, I have not verified that myself.

Otherwise, there is no stop-and-identify (S & I) statute in Virginia.

There is no law requiring a citizen to carry ID in VA. This is distinguished from carrying your drivers license while driving.

Next, we have word, verified, that at least one Virginia locality has a stop-and-identify ordinance.

At least one forum member is convinced any such ordinance is invalid under the idea that a locality can only derive its power from the General Assembly, and since the GA has not authorized localities to write S & I ordinances, and since the GA has not written a state S & I statute, any local S & I ordinance would be invalid. Personally, I don't think a cop is going to stand around and figure out whether his local S & I ordinance, if any, is valid. He'll just cite or arrest and let the courts figure it out. I would not refuse to identify myself in a locality with a S & I ordinance unless I had the time and money to take it to court and try to prove the ordinance invalid.

Earlier I said I mentioned that certain conditions must exist for the cop to demand identification under an S & I statute. Here is what I meant by certain conditions. There is a court opinion to the effect that a police officer must first have reasonable articulable suspicion (RAS) of a crime before the officer can enforce a S & I statute against a detainee. Meaning the cop must have RAS and an S & I statute authorizing his identity demand before he can make an identity demand and make stick a citation for refusing. The court opinion is Hiibel vs 6th Judicial District Court. This case also cites Brown vs Texas, and Kolender vs Lawson. Together, those three cases seem to be the controlling cases on identity demands by cops of detainees. However, it is very important to note that you will have almost no way to know for sure whether the cop actually has genuine RAS during the encounter. This is an entire discussion in itself. I can't elaborate here. Until you learn more about RAS and how cops use it, just pretend it is not an avenue for dealing with a cop during the encounter itself.

For myself, I plan to identify myself if demanded by a cop, while at the same time politely, verbally, refusing consent. Identifying myself saves me the bother of trying to memorize which localities have S & I ordinances. Besides, the cop is going to learn my name when the formal complaint or lawsuit lands, anyway. Politely, verbally refusing consent ensures clear understanding that I am complying with a demand, not voluntarily identifying myself. If it turns out the cop did not have authority to make such demand, all the better for me. I just add another point to the list for the complaint or lawsuit.

Note that there is a low, but present danger in identifying yourself when you don't have to. The police now know who you are and where you live. If they can invent a charge or figure out a way to charge you (twist the law) after the encounter, they know who to put their hands on. This actually happened to an OCer, Theseus, in California. The cops let him go after the encounter, and then some time later the prosecutor figured out how to go after him, even getting a court to change the meaning of a word in order to make the charges stick. The police seized his ID out of his wallet without his consent. Thus, when the prosecutor figured out his nasty little strategy, they knew who the OCer was and where to find him. If the cops had not got their hands on his ID, the prosecutor wouldn't have known who to try to screw-over.

Final note. Some VA police consider that if you are being cited for a serious misdemeanor and you refuse to provide an ID document, you are showing that you plan to skip your court date. Some cops will arrest you in this case.
 
Last edited:

JamesCanby

Activist Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
1,480
Location
Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
Refusing consent

For myself, I plan to identify myself if demanded by a cop, while at the same time politely, verbally, refusing consent. Identifying myself saves me the bother of trying to memorize which localities have S & I ordinances. Besides, the cop is going to learn my name when the formal complaint or lawsuit lands, anyway. Politely, verbally refusing consent ensures clear understanding that I am complying with a demand, not voluntarily identifying myself. If it turns out the cop did not have authority to make such demand, all the better for me. I just add another point to the list for the complaint or lawsuit.
Sorry if you have covered this before, citizen, but can you clarify what you mean by "refusing consent?" I'm inferring that you might say something like, "Certainly, officer -- my name is Joe Schmatz, and I respectfully refuse consent to any searches of my person or property. Now, am I free to leave?"

Please correct me if I have it wrong.
 

Thundar

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
4,946
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
5 Rules for Activists

When Activism was necessary in Virginia I advocated:

1) Sterile Open Carry. Sterile means no means of ID on your person. The keys to my truck remained in my truck. (I have a door electronic combination lock). I even bought a lockable thin metal case to put my credit cards in (Rolling combo lock, not key).

2) Always have voice recorder on. Don't wait until you see a cop. Always have it on.

3) Electrical tape over your firearms serial #. They can run serial numbers only if they see the serial #.

4) Make sure your cell phone is locked. Cops will use it to try and ID you if they can.

5) Practice the following phrases: Am I being detained? What is your Reasonably Articulated Suspicion? I wish to exercise my 5th Amendment Right to Remain Silent. I wish to have my attorney present for any questioning. I do not consent to your unconstitutional detainment/ search but I will not physically oppose your illegal actions.



The OC hysteria has all but disappeared. I still recommend a voice recorder at all times, as this is a very valuable assistant in the very messy he said, she said world that can happen when you OC.
 

Tess

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
3,837
Location
Bryan, TX
Not disagreeing with any of the advice here. Another option....

At our first Burke Lake Park picnic, an officer asked if anyone would be willing to identify himself for the report in case there were later questions. BobCav admirably produced identification -- his military ID (retiree) card. The advantage of providing this card is that it does NOT contain an address. And if an officer is seen recording the social-security number, one can politely inform him the card has an identification number that he should use instead.
 
Last edited:

ProShooter

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
4,663
Location
www.ProactiveShooters.com, Richmond, Va., , USA
tinfoil-hat.jpg
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Sorry if you have covered this before, citizen, but can you clarify what you mean by "refusing consent?" I'm inferring that you might say something like, "Certainly, officer -- my name is Joe Schmatz, and I respectfully refuse consent to any searches of my person or property. Now, am I free to leave?"

Please correct me if I have it wrong.

Depends on the circumstances. For the most part, VA police seem to have been making extra-legal ID document demands for so long, they forgot they do not have authority for it. We've all read the reports. Almost always some version of, "I wanna see some ID!" So,


COP: "I wanna see some ID!"

Citizen: "I will provide my ID, officer. I do not consent to giving you my ID; but since you have demanded it in a way that makes me think compliance may be compelled, I will give it to you." (said while digging out wallet and digging for drivers license in wallet).

In order to not put him on guard, you could also feign uncertainty, "Uh, sure, officer. I don't think I should consent to this, but since you are demanding it, I don't feel like I have a choice. I, uh, don't consent to this, but, here it is." Changing the words "do not consent to providing my ID" to "do not agree with providing my ID" is even less likely to put the cop on guard, I should think.

The important point is that I'm just applying search-and-seizure law to ID demands. Specifically, the idea that consenting to a search or seizure automatically makes it legal. See the video on youtube: Busted: A Citizen's Guide to Surviving Police Encounters. My rationale is that consenting to an ID demand or even a request automatically makes it legal, just like a search or seizure. Note that these are not meant to be comprehensive statements of law. There are exceptions. For example, coerced consent would not be genuine consent.

Another important point that some readers fail to notice is that refusing consent does not mean to non-comply. When I say "refuse consent" I mean only verbally and politely. While still complying with any demands.

Of course, if you want to see a cop who is being a real a-hole cop get so mad he almost bursts from trying to hold in his anger, you can always tell him, "I don't have to show you my ID." I've seen it done. I don't recommend it; but it is entertaining to look back on it. Again, I don't recommend it, though. He might turn out to be such an a-hole that he doesn't bother trying to contain his anger and turns it into aggression. Remember, some of these people consider proning-out somebody as light entertainment, something to look forward to during a dull shift.
 
Last edited:

NovaCop

New member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
471
Location
, ,
Remember, some of these people consider proning-out somebody as light entertainment, something to look forward to during a dull shift.

Oh Citizen,

Why play word games? If you are propelled enough, just ask "am I free to go, or am I being detained"? If the answer is you are free to go... then go. If you are handing over an I.D. but stating that you are doing it because you feel compelled, it wouldn't even matter since the officer ASKED "I want to see some id" and thus no detention occurred. Most officers would meet that statement back with something like "well the option is up to you to hand over your i.d.". You forget to point out that most LEOs are extremely experienced and trained with such encounters and your word games are not anything new.

I can assure everyone on this board that LEOs don't try to prone innocent people out as light entertainment as something to do during a dull shift. You do realize that doing such thing without justification would be met with some serious consequences both civil, criminals, and from your department (termination). HAHA Citizen you are a true work of art. Your anti-LEO bias tarnishes much of your legal standpoints. How can you justify such a comment? Do you have a cite?
 
Last edited:

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Oh Citizen,

Why play word games? If you are propelled enough, just ask "am I free to go, or am I being detained"? If the answer is you are free to go... then go. If you are handing over an I.D. but stating that you are doing it because you feel compelled, it wouldn't even matter since the officer ASKED "I want to see some id" and thus no detention occurred. Most officers would meet that statement back with something like "well the option is up to you to hand over your i.d.". You forget to point out that most LEOs are extremely experienced and trained with such encounters and your word games are not anything new.

I can assure everyone on this board that LEOs don't try to prone innocent people out as light entertainment as something to do during a dull shift. You do realize that doing such thing without justification would be met with some serious consequences both civil, criminals, and from your department (termination). HAHA Citizen you are a true work of art. Your anti-LEO bias tarnishes much of your legal standpoints. How can you justify such a comment? Do you have a cite?

Welcome back LEO229.

I never said LEOs try to prone out innocent people. Nice try at deliberately shifting the context to bash me. I said "some of these people..." Clearly the context was to further illustrate that some a-hole cops are friggin' dangerous. We've all seen the videos. Since the truly dangerous ones don't wear signs saying, "I am one of the really dangerous cops", the OCer has no way to know until it is too late. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that I was giving more explanation about why I didn't recommend annoying a cop.

By the way, if I recall, it was you who introduced us to the the terms prone out and hands on and the idea that some cops consider it good fun.

Heh, heh, heh. Kinda blew your own cover didn't you LEO229? Only you would take such an easily grasped section of a post and get it so far sideways in your own mind, then take offense, and then attack me for it. You've done it so many times before, it is a signature of your personality. What tiny reservations I previously had about your actual identity just disappeared entirely. There cannot possibly be two cops in NoVA who:

spend so much time on OCDO
don't seem to actively support OC, but spend time here
have such similar, almost if not identical argument tactics
and twist text in their mind the same way

And, there are no other cops on the forum who do things with such similarities. Read that again, folks. No other two cops on the entire forum have those characteristics so much in common, much less two cops from NoVA.

I'm a little surprised, too, LEO229. I kinda supposed you had gotten the idea that you were really reflecting poorly on your department with the way you represented it. I admit, it took me awhile to realize it myself, and even then I figured you did not realize it yourself--otherwise you would have stopped sooner. But, after the disappearance, and the name change, and after it took me awhile to suspect who NovaCop10 was, what with your better behavior, I figured you had finally realized you were previously reflecting poorly on your department. Now, with this evenings outburst, I am surprised.

Oh, well. Sorry to disappoint you LEO229, but I cannot play as much as I used to. I'll indulge myself a little more tonight, but, alas, it cannot be the way it was. You'll just have to make an a$$ out of yourself without my highlighting it. Oh, I'll still hammer each and every mis-statement of rights, and every advocacy for not exercising rights, just like I promised before. I just can't afford to spend as much time playing at the back and forth that went along with it.
 
Last edited:

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
I can assure everyone on this board that LEOs don't try to prone innocent people out as light entertainment as something to do during a dull shift. You do realize that doing such thing without justification would be met with some serious consequences both civil, criminals, and from your department (termination). HAHA Citizen you are a true work of art. Your anti-LEO bias tarnishes much of your legal standpoints. How can you justify such a comment? Do you have a cite?
I don't speak for anyone but me. I try not to get in the middle of these kinds of threads, I hope you will acknowledge that I've always tried to give you a fair shake.

The simple fact is that nobody can factually make a claim that speaks to all law enforcement officers, and the fact that there have been Section 1983 cases won in courts of law is really all the evidence needed to refute a claim that it doesn't happen.

There are good and bad people. Some of them are LEOs. Citizen has tried to be prepared for them and is sharing how he has prepared for them.

This is not much different than the reason any of us carry firearms for self-defense in the first place. The odds are low, but the consequences are high. For encountering either a criminal, or a LEO who does things their own way.

To wholly dismiss the fact that there will be LEOs who operate below the expectations of their department and the communities they serve is no better than the anti-gunners belittling folks who carry because they won't ever be a crime victim.

I appreciate your participation here. I think you add value to our discussions. But you have to keep at least one foot in the real world, or you lose credibility.

TFred
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
SNIP If you are handing over an I.D. but stating that you are doing it because you feel compelled, it wouldn't even matter since the officer ASKED "I want to see some id" and thus no detention occurred. Most officers would meet that statement back with something like "well the option is up to you to hand over your i.d.". You forget to point out that most LEOs are extremely experienced and trained with such encounters and your word games are not anything new.

Bwahahahahahahahaaaa!! He thinks we're dumb enough not to notice that he switched the discussion from ID demands to ID requests.

And, while telling us that an ID request refusal would receive a polite, "well it is up to you...", he conveniently omits the reports we've received of cops whose standard reply is, "If you're not doing anything wrong, why do you object?" Christ! I recently had two Fairfax County cops pull a very similar one on me and I wasn't even the one being investigated. Correction. One cop asked why I objected. His partner lectured me about it! And, let me re-emphasize, I wasn't even the person being investigated!!

Oh, yeah. Right. The cop who is investigating someone will just say, "OK. I understand. It is your privilege to refuse to identify yourself. Can we talk about the weather?" Suuuure he will. He won't mind being thwarted in his investigation at all. He will be inclined not at all to make some other attempt to get identity info. He just asked for it because he was bored. Not because he really wanted it. Uh, huh. Suuuure. In all fairness, there might be some percentage of cops who play the way LEO229/NovaCop10 says, but I ain't encountered one, yet. And, it is rather revealing that he left out the whole body of cops who will bait and badger.

Hahahahhahahahaaa.
 
Last edited:

simmonsjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
1,661
Location
Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
Oh Citizen,

Why play word games? If you are propelled enough, just ask "am I free to go, or am I being detained"? If the answer is you are free to go... then go. If you are handing over an I.D. but stating that you are doing it because you feel compelled, it wouldn't even matter since the officer ASKED "I want to see some id" and thus no detention occurred. Most officers would meet that statement back with something like "well the option is up to you to hand over your i.d.". You forget to point out that most LEOs are extremely experienced and trained with such encounters and your word games are not anything new.

I can assure everyone on this board that LEOs don't try to prone innocent people out as light entertainment as something to do during a dull shift. You do realize that doing such thing without justification would be met with some serious consequences both civil, criminals, and from your department (termination). HAHA Citizen you are a true work of art. Your anti-LEO bias tarnishes much of your legal standpoints. How can you justify such a comment? Do you have a cite?
No offense but only a cop could see that as being asked. That is a demand.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
SNIP You forget to point out that most LEOs are extremely experienced and trained with such encounters and your word games are not anything new.

Well, thank you very much for the reminder. Glad you asked. If the cops are so experienced, why are they making demands for ID for which they have no authority?

And, why haven't you, Mr. Liberty-minded, freedom-loving, OC supporter, ever chimed in with tactical advice on how OCers can best exercise their rights on this matter? Oh, is it because you don't want to reveal that police have no authority to demand ID? No, it couldn't be that! Oh! Is it because of that discussion ages ago where you spent vast amounts of energy avoiding the distinction between a demand and a request. Pages of evasion as I recall. All trying to evade the various indications of a demand. You recall the one I mean. The one where you totally screwed up the facts of US vs Mendenhall while saying you had just read it. No. Avoiding the distinction between a demand and a request couldn't possibly be it. Oh, no. Such distinction would lead right into the fact that LEOs have no authority to demand ID. And cannot enforce the extra-legal demand. So, that just couldn't be the reason you have never chimed in with tactical tips for OCers about how to exercise their rights on this point. You being the professional who fully understands the dynamics of cops and encounters and all.

Bwahahahahahahahahaha!!!
 

NovaCop

New member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
471
Location
, ,
CItizen,

I never said that LEOs have the right to demand i.d. in VA. They don't. Citizens don't even need to tell a LEO anything about themselves, unless they are being charged with a crime obviously. I have stated that in previous threads. Once again, I am not against anything exercising their rights. I even said to leave if you feel it necessary if you are free to go. Geez old man, give me a break here. Here's one thing that you didn't consider... you don't know what information/suspicion the LEO has. They might have enough to Terry stop you without you knowing it. The information might even be wrong, but a detention would still be legal. Regardless I don't understand why you would want to play word games. You must read a lot of internet talk and watch internet videos. Of course not all LEOs are the most professional, as with any profession involving humans. You act like a government conspiracy is out to get you. Like that officer requesting your id is doing so because he has a secret plan to sneak into your house and take your loaded weapon off your hip while you sleep (oh I know you keep it there while you sleep). keep believing in your conspiracy.

Now for LEO229 stuff- You have called me LEO229 before, which I didn't realize what you were referring to, till I did a little research. Although this is the internet and lies run rampant, I am not LEO229, although after reading some of his/her post, I support some, not all, of what they said. Obviously our views will be similar since we work in the same field, gain the same knowledge of the real world. i could care less if you believe I am LEO229. Care less. If it makes you feel good about yourself, then you can call me whatever, whoever you want. I said prone out/hands on?? I can't recall, not denying it, just can't recall.

TFred,
I agree with you that there are good bad LEOs. I agree that I have been given a fair shake by most involved on this site (although those that seem to bully me, along with others, seem to be much louder). I just can't agree with the comment that there are LEOs that prone people out just to make a shift more exciting. Can't do it. I could see bad LEOs doing unethical things, but not that extreme. I am always for the termination of said officers.
 

mpd8488

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
29
Location
Williamsburg, VA, ,
I am not against anything exercising their rights.

but goes on to say:
You act like a government conspiracy is out to get you. Like that officer requesting your id is doing so because he has a secret plan to sneak into your house and take your loaded weapon off your hip while you sleep (oh I know you keep it there while you sleep). keep believing in your conspiracy.

You may not be against it, but your attitude suggests that you have no strong inclination toward asserting one's rights. This is not just NovaCop' attitude; it is symptomatic of the way in which many, if not most, Americans think about their rights these days. That obscure list of rights doesn't really matter that much and only crazies such as the ACLU and the gun rights groups push them. It should never be considered crazy to protect your identity. It should never considered crazy to speak your mind (the act, not necessarily what you say). It should never be crazy to carry a gun for self protection.

Regarding the topic of this thread specifically, NovaCop would you please take a minute to consider what it means to demand somebody's ID (and let's be honest a request from an officer sounds a heck of a lot like a demand to just about anybody else). We all understand that you need to identify people to do your job and I doubt that anybody can find fault with an officer requesting ID, but think about how that has been abused over the years. The fear of demanding identification is one of the tools that authoritarian regimes use to keep their citizens in line. It's a tool of intimidation. They restrict peoples' movements and use IDs to help enforce it. They use them to institute racist institutions and bar undesirables unless they prove they are the right race, ethnicity, or religion. In places like the GDR once a stasi official had your name you can bet your ass that you would be under surveillance.

The United States, as a beacon of rights for the entire world, stands in opposition to such tactics. We should all cherish the fact that we can say 'no' when asked by an authority to identify ourselves. Doing so is effectively saying, "no officer, as a law abiding citizen I will not let the state intimidate me or interfere with me or my personal business as I pursue my happiness." It will be a sad day when such things are no longer important in this nation.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
I got this in this mornings feeds. It is the perfect example of an Officer who thought he was off camera, making an illegal demand then changing to... it was a request, when he was on camera.
Novacop will say that he is a small percentage and should be disciplined. That's Police code for "You got caught brother".:D
[video=youtube;qe9QNdcRplw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qe9QNdcRplw&feature=player_embedded#![/video]
 
Top