Do I have to show a cop my I.D./LTCH?

[Titanium_Frost]

James...

Let me dip back a ways and bring up a point that your expressed. Sometimes, until we are challenged, we don't really understand the errors in our thinking... so I would ask you to really think about what you posted here.

We all agree, and black letter law was posted, that UNLESS a cop can articulate a violation that you have committed that you do not have to show your ID, right? (We're not dealing with the LTC, now, just general ID.) And that TELLING the cop the information is sufficient under the law. A drivers license is not necessary unless it involves a motor vehicle. Are you with me so far?

So what you just posted, reflexively and I think without thinking it through, that a cop who 1) has no cause to deal with you since you have not committed a violation and 2) has no legal right to ask for your ID 3) MAY STILL create a situation for you, a totally innocent citizen minding his own buisness, that will "make your life a real PITA for a short while" merely because he CAN.

I'm not saying that you said the cop should do this. I am not saying that you approve of the cop doing so. But it seems as if you posted that without once sitting back and thinking, "is this the behaviour that we want, desire, and come to expect in the very people who have the power of not only making our life a living hell but have the power of instantaneous life and death over us the moment they feel "threatened.""

THIS is the reason why many of the posters are disagreeing with you. Because we want to clear the streets of cops who are willing to create a PITA situation just because they "want to." WE want to identify them, label them and make their life miserable. Unfortunately they don't come with a yellow stripe down their spine so we can't go lifting the shirts of cops to find them.

What we can do, though, is to hold to our rights. Hold fast. And let the cops self identify and proclaim to the public just how well THEY understand the concept of "freedom" and "rights" and all those other good things.

If a cop cannot remain professional, if a cop must "make up" a spitting on the sidewalk as you posted otherwise just to get probably cause, do YOU really want that cop on the street? Do you want him busting your wife on false charges because she was nervous, didn't answer a question fast enough and it ticked him off?

Or do you want someone, somewhere, previously finding out just what this cop is made of, and hopefully either getting his behavioiur corrected or him off the force.

Jack, my teacher said Officer Friendly would NEVER do that! He always looks after my best interests even if I don't know what they are...

I think that it takes some people quite a while and maybe require a bad confrontation before they understand this unpleasant fact of life.

 

[JoshuaRWhite]

Well, since you brought it up...

No, you do not have to make it known even if you are asked.



There are many who possess a LTCH but do not carry.

And it's still none of their business.

Well by asking I mean if he asks if you have any weapons on your person or in the vehicle. Which case you have to tell them. And true on the non-carries, I've met many who don't. But then the question comes up, if your not carrying, why bring it up at all? Handing him the LTCH just screams I've got a gun.

 

[ATM]

Well by asking I mean if he asks if you have any weapons on your person or in the vehicle. Which case you have to tell them.

Negative. The right to remain silent applies here.

You can ignore that question all day long.

Why do you believe this is a requirement?

 

[jamesg]

Negative. The right to remain silent applies here.

You can ignore that question all day long.

Why do you believe this is a requirement?

so if they ask, you can ignore, and you don't have to offer it up either?

how would that make you feel as a LEO? just curious

 

[ATM]

so if they ask, you can ignore, and you don't have to offer it up either?

Correct.

how would that make you feel as a LEO? just curious

American.

 

[JoshuaRWhite]

Negative. The right to remain silent applies here.

You can ignore that question all day long.

Why do you believe this is a requirement?

Well it's more of a preventive measure I should say. Cause if you lie and then he searches the vehicle because of PC you've caught yourself between a rock and a hard place. I'm not gonna right out of the gate tell them but if it is asked of me I'm not gonna lie either. Just politely tell them I have my LTCH and a firearm. I guess you could say the reason I speak of it as a requirement is my father was an LEO and has always told me that unless asked it's none of their business but if they do you need to answer truthfully. He has the belief that LEO's are not your friend and they are not there to protect your rights. They are there to fill a monthly quota and protect themselves.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

so if they ask, you can ignore, and you don't have to offer it up either?

how would that make you feel as a LEO? just curious

Confused as to why my training on making people do what I want with carefully worded "requests" wasn't working.

They will also possibly try to get you on anything else they can and also possibly escalate the situation beyond the scope of the law. At that point a formal complaint up to a lawsuit is in order depending on the severity.

The key is for YOU to always maintain your cool and let them make all of the mistakes at that point. Remember, they are probably recording you and it is a good idea for you to be recording them as well.

 

[ATM]

...if you lie...

I never suggest that.

Silence or asking why you're being detained are both fine options.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

I don't think this has been posted in this thread yet but it is relavent. Its worth it to listen to the whole thing.



http://youtu.be/6wXkI4t7nuc

 

[JoshuaRWhite]

I never suggest that.

Silence or asking why you're being detained are both fine options.

Ah. Well agreed, not answering the question isn't technically lying.

 

[JoshuaRWhite]

I don't think this has been posted in this thread yet but it is relavent. Its worth it to listen to the whole thing.



http://youtu.be/6wXkI4t7nuc

Definitely gonna watch that later today. Would do it now but I have to be up in 3 and half hours. So I'll check back in on this thread later.

 

[ATM]

And as a side note to this thread:

The vast majority of officers are good people and we have several that are members and friends here.

I hate it when threads like this make it seem as though we are against officers in general. That is absolutely not the case.

Knowing the laws and exercising your rights act as safeguards due to the amount of authority given the profession. It minimizes the damage when things go wrong or mistakes are made.

"They" and "us" may be used casually in discussing the topic but don't let it become an undue mindset or place a "vs." between them.

We are all still us. Had to say that. Carry on.

Props yo.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

And as a side note to this thread:

The vast majority of officers are good people and we have several that are members and friends here.

I hate it when threads like this make it seem as though we are against officers in general. That is absolutely not the case.

Knowing the laws and exercising your rights act as safeguards due to the amount of authority given the profession. It minimizes the damage when things go wrong or mistakes are made.

"They" and "us" may be used casually in discussing the topic but don't let it become an undue mindset or place a "vs." between them.

We are all still us. Had to say that. Carry on.

Props yo.

I heartily agree with ATM on this. The only Us vs. Them should be law abiding Americans vs. Scum sucking criminals.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

So I think the part I still want clarification on guys, is the determining of probable cause. Does the officer have to make it clear to you that he suspects you of committing a crime, or can he proceed to carry out his duties within the law without actually informing you up front of the suspected offense? There seems to be a grey area where if he tells you, you were jaywalking, and you disagree, you now feel like you can play hardball and refuse to show ID or submit to a search but if it is probable cause to him he is within the law.

Under the ``stop and id`` statute posted earlier, read the order in which it's wrote.us The first thing listed is for the leo to inform you of the reason for the stop. IDing comes second. IANAL but I did hear that from one.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

ATM hit on it exactly, JamesG. If they have to ask your permission to search, it means they do not have either PC or RAS to do it without your consent.

Blessings,
Bill

Bill the first isn't always true, I,ve been told by several LEO they are trained to ask regardless. Just incase their ras/pc doesn't hold up.

 

[BumpShadow]

Bill the first isn't always true, I,ve been told by several LEO they are trained to ask regardless. Just incase their ras/pc doesn't hold up.

Many police are told to ask alot of things reguardless of the rights of the citizen. Many times this is to get the person to unknowingly wave they rights.

Example: Cop pulls someone over and asks,"Do you know why I pulled you over?"

This is a loaded question designed to get the person to wave their 5th(?). There is no law saying they can't ask, only that you have the right not to answer.

 

[CJK]

If an officer believes he has PC or RAS to demand something, I won't resist, but that's a whole lot different than just asking me.

They can do pretty much whatever they want, but they will answer for it later if they were wrong.

They will not be held accountable for anything I gave them permission to do and anything they find pursuant to my consent could be used against me.

I agree with you and I should have been more to the point in my original reply. If there is PC and I understand what the issue is I'll comply with the LEO. However if I'm simply asked for ID "just because" I'll ask for clarification from the LEO why I'm being asked to show ID.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Bill the first isn't always true, I,ve been told by several LEO they are trained to ask regardless. Just incase their ras/pc doesn't hold up.

Then they will perform their search whether I give consent or not, in that situation, Tim. I didn't say if they ask, I said, "if they have to ask". I don't consent to any searches, so if one happens, it will be either because they have PC or a warrant, or because they have chosen to violate the Constitution.

I don't give PC and I don't give consent, I just give polite, civil interaction. Or silence.

And yes BumpShadow, "Do you know why I pulled you over?" should, IMHO, be answered, "What seems to be the problem, officer?" or "How can I help you, officer?"
They are doing their jobs. I respect that, I'm just not going to make that job any easier when the means by which they do it is to find evidence against me. It's not adversarial on my part; the few stops I've had have all been very civil, almost pleasant, and very professional.



Blessings,
Bill

 

[iChokePeople]

Bill the first isn't always true, I,ve been told by several LEO they are trained to ask regardless. Just incase their ras/pc doesn't hold up.

All the more reason to decline their request.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Then they will perform their search whether I give consent or not, in that situation, Tim. I didn't say if they ask, I said, "if they have to ask". I don't consent to any searches, so if one happens, it will be either because they have PC or a warrant, or because they have chosen to violate the Constitution.

I don't give PC and I don't give consent, I just give polite, civil interaction. Or silence.

And yes BumpShadow, "Do you know why I pulled you over?" should, IMHO, be answered, "What seems to be the problem, officer?" or "How can I help you, officer?"
They are doing their jobs. I respect that, I'm just not going to make that job any easier when the means by which they do it is to find evidence against me. It's not adversarial on my part; the few stops I've had have all been very civil, almost pleasant, and very professional.



Blessings,
Bill

I misread, from reading your posts here I should of double checked.

You are not the type to make that kind of mistake.

I plead innocent due to temporary lack of coffee.