• 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.

Can I see your ID

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,181
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
imported post

Judge says showing ID to cops not required THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
TACOMA -- Charges against an Olympia lawyer who refused to show identification during an anti-war protest at the Port of Tacoma have been dismissed.
The lawyer for Legrand Jones had argued that it's not a crime to refuse to identify yourself to police. Attorney William Ferrell said police were stopping people without cause during the July protest to gather information and discourage demonstrators.
The Tacoma News Tribune reports that Municipal Court Judge Karl Haugh also dismissed a trespassing charge Thursday against Jones who was accused of approaching a port fence with a "no trespassing" sign.
Ferrell argued that such signs usually mean the area on the other side of the fence is off limits, not the area in front of the fence.
------
 

BlaineG

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2008
Messages
149
Location
, ,
imported post

I wasn't there, BUT: I personally think that impeding a shipment of material going to a war zone is not only tacky, expensive for taxpayers, and illegal, but I don't much feel sorry for those that get arrested or hurt in the process. Have a nice, Commie protest somewhere it does not affect the flow of material. Protest, yes..... provoke, impede and damage, NYET, Comrads!
 

heresolong

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
1,320
Location
Blaine, WA, ,
imported post

BlaineG wrote:
I wasn't there, BUT: I personally think that impeding a shipment of material going to a war zone is not only tacky, expensive for taxpayers, and illegal, but I don't much feel sorry for those that get arrested or hurt in the process. Have a nice, Commie protest somewhere it does not affect the flow of material. Protest, yes..... provoke, impede and damage, NYET, Comrads!
Although it sounds like this particular guy wasn't doing anything illegal, otherwise they would have arrested him.

I agree with you in principal but we need to be careful that the line is not crossed between enforcing the law and harassing citizens expressing themselves. That being said, there were probably plenty of people (AARGH! My cat just decided to walk across my keyboard. I have now fixed all the stuff she did to this message) breaking the law that they could have and should have arrested for all sorts of things, he just didn't happen to be one of them.

I am personally glad that the police can't ask you for ID without PC that you are breaking a law.
 

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,710
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

I like the past part - sounds like what happenned to Jack Nobles in PA - police accuse him of disrupting a meeting by merely approaching the future meeting site!

-




http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/384829_portprotest25.html
Judge says showing ID to cops not required

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS


TACOMA -- Charges against an Olympia lawyer who refused to show identification during an anti-war protest at the Port of Tacoma have been dismissed.

The lawyer for Legrand Jones had argued that it's not a crime to refuse to identify yourself to police. Attorney William Ferrell said police were stopping people without cause during the July protest to gather information and discourage demonstrators.

The Tacoma News Tribune reports that Municipal Court Judge Karl Haugh also dismissed a trespassing charge Thursday against Jones who was accused of approaching a port fence with a "no trespassing" sign.

Ferrell argued that such signs usually mean the area on the other side of the fence is off limits, not the area in front of the fence.
 

911Boss

New member
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
753
Location
Gone... Nutty as squirrel **** around here
imported post

heresolong wrote:
I am personally glad that the police can't ask you for ID without PC that you are breaking a law.
Actually they can still ask for it, you just aren't compelled to give it. Coercion and intimidation still convince lots of folks to voluntarily submit to things they are not legally required to.

If in doubt, my response to any question might likely be "Am I being detained?" asked repeatedly until answered by either a yes or a no. If they say "No", then I will say good day and walk away.
 

BlaineG

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2008
Messages
149
Location
, ,
imported post

911Boss wrote:
heresolong wrote:
I am personally glad that the police can't ask you for ID without PC that you are breaking a law.
Actually they can still ask for it, you just aren't compelled to give it. Coercion and intimidation still convince lots of folks to voluntarily submit to things they are not legally required to.

If in doubt, my response to any question might likely be "Am I being detained?" asked repeatedly until answered by either a yes or a no. If they say "No", then I will say good day and walk away.
I'm not arguing, but shouldn't there be a mid-situation where a LEO can check you out without the cuff and stuff? If it gets to the point where a cop can't assess a situation properly, things are gonna get tougher........Why the paranoia over an honest citizen helping the local authorities?
 

Bear 45/70

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
3,256
Location
Union, Washington, USA
imported post

BlaineG wrote:
911Boss wrote:
heresolong wrote:
I am personally glad that the police can't ask you for ID without PC that you are breaking a law.
Actually they can still ask for it, you just aren't compelled to give it. Coercion and intimidation still convince lots of folks to voluntarily submit to things they are not legally required to.

If in doubt, my response to any question might likely be "Am I being detained?" asked repeatedly until answered by either a yes or a no. If they say "No", then I will say good day and walk away.
I'm not arguing, but shouldn't there be a mid-situation where a LEO can check you out without the cuff and stuff? If it gets to the point where a cop can't assess a situation properly, things are gonna get tougher........Why the paranoia over an honest citizen helping the local authorities?
I got to disagree with you on this one,Blaine. Unless the cop has an idea that a crime is being committed and can say what that crime is, a gut feeling isn't gonna get it, then the cop has no right to ask for ID. This isn't a police state. Cops can not run rough shod over the citizens just because he feels like it. There are way to many cops on ego trips anymore. The policing themselves thing doesn'tworks any better for cops than lawyers or politicians. Hell, it is now legal and standard operating proceedure for cops to lie to you.
 

911Boss

New member
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
753
Location
Gone... Nutty as squirrel **** around here
imported post

BlaineG wrote:
I'm not arguing, but shouldn't there be a mid-situation where a LEO can check you out without the cuff and stuff? If it gets to the point where a cop can't assess a situation properly, things are gonna get tougher........Why the paranoia over an honest citizen helping the local authorities?
They don't need to know your name and such to "check something out". They can check it out and then if they have articulable suspicion or PC that a crime has been committed or is about to be THEN they can go to the next step and start ID-ing those involved.

For the most part, if they are trying to ID you or are suspicious about something, they aren't trying to HELP you, so I am not going to be terribly interested in helping them either. I am going to help myself and that means protect my interests first.
 

911Boss

New member
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
753
Location
Gone... Nutty as squirrel **** around here
imported post

Bear 45/70 wrote:
Hell, it is now legal and standard operating proceedure for cops to lie to you.
To be fair, bad guys lie to cops all the time. I don't have a problem with "turn about being fair play".

If some schmo confesses to shooting someone because he is told they have his fingerprint on the gun when they don't, or shows up at a warrant sting because he was told he won a free Playstation 3, I am all for it. Good guys have to follow a hell of a lot more rules than the bad guys, you can't completely tie their hands and still expect them to actually solve crimes.
 

thebastidge

Regular Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
313
Location
2519 E Fourth Plain Blvd, Vancouver Washington, US
imported post

But cops lying to everyone indisciminately undermines their credicbility as the "good guys". Particularly when it comes to a reasonably honest and upright member of the ocmmunity seeking information.

Cops should only be allowed to deceive in carefully limited ways with oversight to make sure it doesn't slide over into abuse. For example, an authorized sting or investigation might include permission to misrepresent oneself (to deny being a police officer, for example) but obviously still not to instigate a crime on the part of someone who had no intent to commit a crime (entrapment) or by misinforming a citizen such that they violate a law.

Sir Robert Peel's principles of policing are relevant:

"Above all else, an effective authority figure knows trust and accountability are paramount. "

"The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon the public approval of police actions. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peelian_Principles
 

911Boss

New member
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
753
Location
Gone... Nutty as squirrel **** around here
imported post

thebastidge wrote:
But cops lying to everyone indisciminately undermines their credicbility as the "good guys". Particularly when it comes to a reasonably honest and upright member of the ocmmunity seeking information.

Cops should only be allowed to deceive in carefully limited ways with oversight to make sure it doesn't slide over into abuse. For example, an authorized sting or investigation might include permission to misrepresent oneself (to deny being a police officer, for example) but obviously still not to instigate a crime on the part of someone who had no intent to commit a crime (entrapment) or by misinforming a citizen such that they violate a law.

Sir Robert Peel's principles of policing are relevant:

"Above all else, an effective authority figure knows trust and accountability are paramount. "

"The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon the public approval of police actions. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peelian_Principles
It is my experience that they don't lie indiscriminately but only when it does serve a purpose such as in questioning, working undercover, etc. As to determining when and if someone violates a law, I don't disagree some might be "wrong", but that doesn't mean there was an intentional lie. Many times it is a judgment call (which is why we have prosecutors and courts), or it may be the officers misunderstanding, lack of training, or flat out stupidity.

If I tell you the sky is green it isn't a lie if I believe the sky is green. Not every un-truth is a lie. To be a lie, there needs to be an intent to deceive.
 

Bear 45/70

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
3,256
Location
Union, Washington, USA
imported post

911Boss wrote:
Bear 45/70 wrote:
Hell, it is now legal and standard operating proceedure for cops to lie to you.
To be fair, bad guys lie to cops all the time. I don't have a problem with "turn about being fair play".

If some schmo confesses to shooting someone because he is told they have his fingerprint on the gun when they don't, or shows up at a warrant sting because he was told he won a free Playstation 3, I am all for it. Good guys have to follow a hell of a lot more rules than the bad guys, you can't completely tie their hands and still expect them to actually solve crimes.
Now this is rich. You are saying the bad guys lie and it is wrong, but the cops lying isn't? There is no logic in that statement at all. If lying is wrongthen it makes the cops no better than the bad guys. Which is why I don't trust cops anymore. If you give your word to someone, it doesn't matter who they are it is "your" word and you should keep it. Breaking your word because the guy is a scum ball degrades you not him. Hence lying degrades the cops, not the bad guys.
 

911Boss

New member
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
753
Location
Gone... Nutty as squirrel **** around here
imported post

Bear 45/70 wrote:
911Boss wrote:
Bear 45/70 wrote:
Hell, it is now legal and standard operating proceedure for cops to lie to you.
To be fair, bad guys lie to cops all the time. I don't have a problem with "turn about being fair play".

If some schmo confesses to shooting someone because he is told they have his fingerprint on the gun when they don't, or shows up at a warrant sting because he was told he won a free Playstation 3, I am all for it. Good guys have to follow a hell of a lot more rules than the bad guys, you can't completely tie their hands and still expect them to actually solve crimes.
Now this is rich. You are saying the bad guys lie and it is wrong, but the cops lying isn't? There is no logic in that statement at all. If lying is wrongthen it makes the cops no better than the bad guys. Which is why I don't trust cops anymore. If you give your word to someone, it doesn't matter who they are it is "your" word and you should keep it. Breaking your word because the guy is a scum ball degrades you not him. Hence lying degrades the cops, not the bad guys.
I didn't say it was "wrong" for the bad guys to lie. I just acknowledged that they do. Right and wrong are moral judgments and as such are frequently determined by the circumstances. There are times when the end DOES justify the means.

To really mince words, what cops doe is not "lie" but to use a "ruse" during interviews to elicit information they might not otherwise get from a suspect about a crime.

It is a legitimate and legal tactic. You may not like it but that is what the courts have ruled. Having it available doesn't mean that cops constantly lie with impunity, time and place for everything.

Even in my job a certain amount of "dis-information" can be helpful. I have solicited taped admissions from DV suspects who freely admitted to slapping their wife or girlfriend around after I told them that everyone occasionally fights with their partner and even I have had the need to slap my wife on occasion (which is absolutely false).

I've also told people that if they've done nothing wrong they won't be arrested, we just need to talk to hem and sort everything out for the report knowing full well if I could keep them there for a few more minutes the cops would arrive and they most certainly would be arrested.

I made no "promise" to these fools that I broke and don't feel degraded in the least. There is very little in this world that is absolute black and white, you need to be able to see the gray.
 

Bear 45/70

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
3,256
Location
Union, Washington, USA
imported post

911Boss wrote:
Bear 45/70 wrote:
911Boss wrote:
Bear 45/70 wrote:
Hell, it is now legal and standard operating proceedure for cops to lie to you.
To be fair, bad guys lie to cops all the time. I don't have a problem with "turn about being fair play".

If some schmo confesses to shooting someone because he is told they have his fingerprint on the gun when they don't, or shows up at a warrant sting because he was told he won a free Playstation 3, I am all for it. Good guys have to follow a hell of a lot more rules than the bad guys, you can't completely tie their hands and still expect them to actually solve crimes.
Now this is rich. You are saying the bad guys lie and it is wrong, but the cops lying isn't? There is no logic in that statement at all. If lying is wrongthen it makes the cops no better than the bad guys. Which is why I don't trust cops anymore. If you give your word to someone, it doesn't matter who they are it is "your" word and you should keep it. Breaking your word because the guy is a scum ball degrades you not him. Hence lying degrades the cops, not the bad guys.
I didn't say it was "wrong" for the bad guys to lie. I just acknowledged that they do. Right and wrong are moral judgments and as such are frequently determined by the circumstances. There are times when the end DOES justify the means.

To really mince words, what cops doe is not "lie" but to use a "ruse" during interviews to elicit information they might not otherwise get from a suspect about a crime.

It is a legitimate and legal tactic. You may not like it but that is what the courts have ruled. Having it available doesn't mean that cops constantly lie with impunity, time and place for everything.

Even in my job a certain amount of "dis-information" can be helpful. I have solicited taped admissions from DV suspects who freely admitted to slapping their wife or girlfriend around after I told them that everyone occasionally fights with their partner and even I have had the need to slap my wife on occasion (which is absolutely false).

I've also told people that if they've done nothing wrong they won't be arrested, we just need to talk to hem and sort everything out for the report knowing full well if I could keep them there for a few more minutes the cops would arrive and they most certainly would be arrested.

I made no "promise" to these fools that I broke and don't feel degraded in the least. There is very little in this world that is absolute black and white, you need to be able to see the gray.
You really don't get it, do you? Which is sad. Either the cops are good guys or they are just more bad guys opposed to other bad guys. I don't want amoral bad guys supposedly defending me and my rights, mainly because they won't. This is just an indicator of why cops do as they please until caught and punished for it. The illegal harrassment of OCers is a perfect example too.
 

911Boss

New member
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
753
Location
Gone... Nutty as squirrel **** around here
imported post

Bear 45/70 wrote"
You really don't get it, do you? Which is sad. Either the cops are good guys or they are just more bad guys opposed to other bad guys. I don't want amoral bad guys supposedly defending me and my rights, mainly because they won't. This is just an indicator of why cops do as they please until caught and punished for it. The illegal harrassment of OCers is a perfect example too.
I "get it" just fine. The mentality of expecting someone to do a job, then throw up every possible obstacle to getting that job done, tying their hands, and then blaming them for not doing the job is what is sad. Blaming someone for using a tool in the performance of their job that the legal system has decided they can use is sad.

The cops ARE the good guys. Sure, there are exceptions and one bad apple can spoil the whole bunch. That in no way diminishes the good that the vast majority of them do on a very regular basis.

Nothing is "illegal harassment" until a judge decides it is. While I don't believe stopping and ID'ing without something other than OC being the issue is wrong, I also think it falls far short of "harassment" if that is all that is done.

No point starting another one of our pissing matches, you won't change my mind and it isn't likely anyone will change yours.

Fact of life is that the courts and the law allow the use of ruse and deceit in certain circumstances. If you don't like it work to change it, otherwise deal with it.

You always like to point to the Constitution, where does it say you can't lie ("good" guys OR "bad" guys)???
 

Venator

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
6,494
Location
Lansing area, Michigan, USA
imported post

911Boss wrote:
Bear 45/70 wrote"
You really don't get it, do you? Which is sad. Either the cops are good guys or they are just more bad guys opposed to other bad guys. I don't want amoral bad guys supposedly defending me and my rights, mainly because they won't. This is just an indicator of why cops do as they please until caught and punished for it. The illegal harrassment of OCers is a perfect example too.
I "get it" just fine. The mentality of expecting someone to do a job, then throw up every possible obstacle to getting that job done, tying their hands, and then blaming them for not doing the job is what is sad. Blaming someone for using a tool in the performance of their job that the legal system has decided they can use is sad.

The cops ARE the good guys. Sure, there are exceptions and one bad apple can spoil the whole bunch. That in no way diminishes the good that the vast majority of them do on a very regular basis.

Nothing is "illegal harassment" until a judge decides it is. While I don't believe stopping and ID'ing without something other than OC being the issue is wrong, I also think it falls far short of "harassment" if that is all that is done.

No point starting another one of our pissing matches, you won't change my mind and it isn't likely anyone will change yours.

Fact of life is that the courts and the law allow the use of ruse and deceit in certain circumstances. If you don't like it work to change it, otherwise deal with it.

You always like to point to the Constitution, where does it say you can't lie ("good" guys OR "bad" guys)???
It's against the law to lie to the police, but not the other way around.

It's when a citizen stands up fortheir rights that some LEO's get pissy. I would wager that more rights are violated by LEO's on a day to day basis than are ever hindered by a citizen standing up for his rights. Be polite and stand firm.
 

Bear 45/70

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
3,256
Location
Union, Washington, USA
imported post

911Boss wrote:
Bear 45/70 wrote"
You really don't get it, do you? Which is sad. Either the cops are good guys or they are just more bad guys opposed to other bad guys. I don't want amoral bad guys supposedly defending me and my rights, mainly because they won't. This is just an indicator of why cops do as they please until caught and punished for it. The illegal harrassment of OCers is a perfect example too.
I "get it" just fine. The mentality of expecting someone to do a job, then throw up every possible obstacle to getting that job done, tying their hands, and then blaming them for not doing the job is what is sad. Blaming someone for using a tool in the performance of their job that the legal system has decided they can use is sad.

The cops ARE the good guys. Sure, there are exceptions and one bad apple can spoil the whole bunch. That in no way diminishes the good that the vast majority of them do on a very regular basis.

Nothing is "illegal harassment" until a judge decides it is. While I don't believe stopping and ID'ing without something other than OC being the issue is wrong, I also think it falls far short of "harassment" if that is all that is done.

No point starting another one of our pissing matches, you won't change my mind and it isn't likely anyone will change yours.

Fact of life is that the courts and the law allow the use of ruse and deceit in certain circumstances. If you don't like it work to change it, otherwise deal with it.

You always like to point to the Constitution, where does it say you can't lie ("good" guys OR "bad" guys)???
So your thinking it isOK for cops to be as bad as they want, aka amoral just like the bad guys, to get the job done? You really do have a cop mentality. The bad guysare bad guy because they lie, cheat and break the law.Cops are good guys because of the badge, butit is OK if they lie, cheat and break the law to catch the bad guys and you see nothing wrong with this? You sound just like the obama people, it's OK because we did it for the good of the party. You probably wonder why there are so many bad cops on the street too. Why? because of attitudes like yours. Not a Constitutional issue, it is one of morals and if the cops act like bad guys, badge or no, they are bad guys. Whoever said being a cop was easy anyway but there needs to be a difference between the bad guys and the good guys. If not we will have a police state or anarchy(I'm OK with anarchy, it's the police state I don't want to have to fight against). Ifcops want an easy jobthey should go on welfare and sit on their front pouch. You and your thinking will have all our rights gone because it will help catch the bad guys.
 

Bear 45/70

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
3,256
Location
Union, Washington, USA
imported post

Venator wrote:
911Boss wrote:
Bear 45/70 wrote"
You really don't get it, do you? Which is sad. Either the cops are good guys or they are just more bad guys opposed to other bad guys. I don't want amoral bad guys supposedly defending me and my rights, mainly because they won't. This is just an indicator of why cops do as they please until caught and punished for it. The illegal harrassment of OCers is a perfect example too.
I "get it" just fine. The mentality of expecting someone to do a job, then throw up every possible obstacle to getting that job done, tying their hands, and then blaming them for not doing the job is what is sad. Blaming someone for using a tool in the performance of their job that the legal system has decided they can use is sad.

The cops ARE the good guys. Sure, there are exceptions and one bad apple can spoil the whole bunch. That in no way diminishes the good that the vast majority of them do on a very regular basis.

Nothing is "illegal harassment" until a judge decides it is. While I don't believe stopping and ID'ing without something other than OC being the issue is wrong, I also think it falls far short of "harassment" if that is all that is done.

No point starting another one of our pissing matches, you won't change my mind and it isn't likely anyone will change yours.

Fact of life is that the courts and the law allow the use of ruse and deceit in certain circumstances. If you don't like it work to change it, otherwise deal with it.

You always like to point to the Constitution, where does it say you can't lie ("good" guys OR "bad" guys)???
It's against the law to lie to the police, but not the other way around.

It's when a citizen stands up fortheir rights that some LEO's get pissy. I would wager that more rights are violated by LEO's on a day to day basis than are ever hindered by a citizen standing up for his rights. Be polite and stand firm.
What laws says you can't lie to cops?
 
Top