| User | Comment |
|---|
Matty    |
Yes, if he wants to. Where there's smoke, there's fire seems an awful assumption to make here. However, it's also true sometimes. The more bad guys we catch, the better off we are. Dammer was caught during a routine traffic stop. |
LJD   |
Depends.... |
| Enheduanna |
No. |
| Galomorro |
Sure. Why not. They catch criminals this way. |
| Otter |
Police officers should not be hampered from doing their jobs, they should have the right to check anyone's ID whenever they want, for no reason. |
LindaH  |
WTF, now that is absurd. People should have a right not to provide ID, if they are not involved in any criminal incidents. |
| LindaH |
I don't think it's any cops business who the other people in the car are. For all he knows, they don't have ID. If they aren't driving, they don't need licenses or ID cards. They didn't commit the traffic violation. They should be free to get out of the car and wander off if they want.
One time, I witnessed a traffic stop, where a passenger jumped out of the car and ran off, barefoot. I lmao. |
bill  |
It might have been better to ask what happens if someone doesn't have an ID or refuses to provide one. Can the cop do anything about that? I think not. |
| Irene007 |
No. I also don't believe that cops should stop you for no reason like what happened to me the other day. Just a spot check they said... Both cops came out of the car and one proceeded to flash his light on my wheels. They just wanted to look at my mags really.
That's the trouble with living in a small suburb; the cops are so young. *sigh* But cute too!  |
| LindaH | | (reply to bill) posted 6-Oct-2008 5:02pm |
The cop didn't do anything when the barefoot guy ran off. Too busy with the driver, I guess. |
| cerealkiller |
Yeah, and if they're illegals the cop should be allowed to shoot them. |
| LindaH |
How would they know they are illegals? There's no database anywhere. |
| cerealkiller | | (reply to LindaH) posted 6-Oct-2008 5:12pm |
I guess if they looked like illegals that would be close enough  |
| JessicaWoman99 | | posted 6-Oct-2008 10:22pm |
Yes your ID should be checked by the cops it is their job to check your passengers there could be a warrant out for one of your passengers |
| JessicaWoman99 | | (reply to LindaH) posted 6-Oct-2008 10:26pm |
> WTF, now that is absurd. People should have a right not to provide
> ID, if they are not involved in any criminal incidents.
Cops are just being cops when checking the ID of passengers and we know pigs have good snouts to sniff out anything in your car???? |
| LindaH |
Cops are supposed to respond to complaints, catch criminals, stop bad drivers. They aren't supposed to check innocent people's IDs 'just in case' a bad driver has a bad passenger. |
| paulyw | | posted 6-Oct-2008 11:39pm |
They should ONLY ask the driver for an ID if s/he did a violation. |
Joanne  |
Wha?! No. Not as a constant, but I think it's okay if the cop has explainable suspicions. Word being 'explainable'. |
| JessicaWoman99 | | (reply to LindaH) posted 7-Oct-2008 2:19am |
> Cops are supposed to respond to complaints, catch criminals, stop
> bad drivers. They aren't supposed to check innocent people's IDs 'just
> in case' a bad driver has a bad passenger.
I am innocent until found guilty in a court of law me done no wrong!!!!!
the police love to pick on innocent people and make them look so bad and send innocent people to the pig pen oink"
oink" |
| Matty | | (reply to bill) posted 7-Oct-2008 8:22am |
> It might have been better to ask what happens if someone doesn't have
> an ID or refuses to provide one. Can the cop do anything about that?
> I think not.
No, not at all. Unless there's a basis to search or otherwise perform an investigation. You are not required to carry i.d. at all times. This survey was not legally astute to say the least. But I took it to ask if cops could do anything to passengers in the car, not necessarily regarding i.d.
I guess in that sense I was thinking expansively, you know, filling in the gaps of a poorly written survey. 
|
| dab | | (reply to Matty) posted 7-Oct-2008 8:59am |
My understanding is otherwise. That if a cop stops a car he can demand ID from everyone in the car. If anyone doesn't provide ID, he can hold them until their identity is proven. And that this has been upheld by the courts. Unfortunately, this is just one of those things "I heard", I don't have a citation to give, so it's certainly possible that I heard something untrue.
Interesting comments here from people claiming to be cops. Answers are all over the place though mostly seem to say it's not required. Except in Alberta. |
| Matty | | (reply to dab) posted 7-Oct-2008 9:10am |
It's all over the place because the concept of "probable cause" is so nebulous. A cop can hold you until you establish your identity, but only if you're suspected of doing somrthing. As to what constitutes probable cause and what has been upheld by which judges, you'd have to look at the individual county, yes, I said county. States haven't tested this to the extent they should have. Or, in other words, ask a dozen cops, DAs, and judges about this, and you'll get 13-14 answers. I would say, though, if a cop detained a back-seat passenger with no other probable cause than the driver was speeding, that cop's days as an enforcement officer are numbered. Don't forget citizens have the "unlawful detention" statutes to protect them. If I were a regular citizen, in that back-seat, and doing nothing, my first call would be to my lawyer...my civil lawyer. |
| bill | | (reply to Matty) posted 7-Oct-2008 9:13am |
I think you original reaction/attitude is a better way to be. Being overly critical of a survey is a drag. I think it's generally better to do what you did (realize the spirit of the survey and respond to that, ignoring any details that may be slightly off). I didn't mean to come off as being critical of the survey, per se, but I can see how it seemed that way.
It's actually an interesting issue. Especially, given recent shifts toward more security and things like national ID systems for home security, etc. I know some libertarians even question whether people should be required to have a license/ID to drive a car. |
| Matty | | (reply to bill) posted 7-Oct-2008 9:24am |
I didn't think you were being critical so much as you were pointing out the way the survey was written hindered your response. Is that critical? OK, maybe I don't know what I'm talking about. Anyway,...
It's very hard to figure out because this is an issue left to the States; answers are all over the place. Plus, there's a conceptual versus actual crim procedure issue to this question. I think the bottom line for me is that a peace officer or trooper should be given enough lattitude to act on suspicious activity without having to be a lawyer. The problem is we are hiring so many cops that standards are dropping, and that lattitude may be displaced. |
| LindaH | | posted 7-Oct-2008 10:32am |
Well, the survey brought out the kind of conversation I wanted it to bring out anyway. |
they  |
Allowed? I don't know.
Should he? Not unless they are doing something bad. |
| they | | (reply to bill) posted 7-Oct-2008 2:45pm |
> It might have been better
> to ask what happens if someone
> doesn't have an ID or refuses
> to provide one. Can the cop
> do anything about that? I
> think not.
He can ask you for your personal info and look you up anyway. I've been pulled over without my DL and was asked for my SSN.
|
| bill | | (reply to they) posted 7-Oct-2008 3:39pm |
I suppose you could have lied... but, then again, fake ids are not that uncommon either. Driving without a license can be pretty serious. It sounds like the cop took it easy on you. Maybe they have your picture in their computer, though. |
| they | | (reply to bill) posted 7-Oct-2008 4:09pm |
I was a cute young girl then. They used to let me go for speeding and burnt out bulbs all the time.
I could lie and give my sister's SSN, but I'd be more likely to go to jail with that one. |
| Lahdee | | (reply to Irene007) posted 8-Oct-2008 7:06am |
|
| cloudhugger | | posted 8-Oct-2008 10:17am |
Yes, why not. ? |
| judgescratch | | posted 8-Oct-2008 12:27pm |
Whatever the law is I accept and support. |
| Otter | | posted 8-Oct-2008 12:33pm |
I was stopped in Ohio and the trooper gave me a hard time because I wouldn't give him my SS number. I gave the trooper my driver's license, Federal law requires a SS number to obtain a Commercial Driver's License, the number isn't on my license, I can provide the license, I need not provide the SS number. He told me he could take me into custody if I didn't give him my SS number. I told him I would tell the judge the same thing, I don't give my SS number to anyone.
I also think it should be against the law for shippers & receivers to photo copy my driver's license. I haul alot of refrigerated foods, I can understand being required to show proof of who I am, I usually show my passport, but I refuse to allow anyone to photo copy my driver's license.
I have no problem with showing ID to a law enforcement officer, he's doing his job, which is to protect and serve, we are protected from illegal search, and illegal detainment. A law enforcement officer has the right to check the area a driver has access to for him own safety, that doesn't mean he can search your car without cause or a warrant. but he can have you get out of the car and check the area with in reach for weapons.
I don't have a problem with the police doing their jobs, they work for us. I do have a problem with people who refuse to answer a simple question from a customs officer, border patrol agent or police officer, such as where they were born, is there anyone else in the vehicle, or other questions they ask in the line of doing their jobs. |
| LindaH | | (reply to Otter) posted 8-Oct-2008 1:45pm |
But they shouldn't be allowed to check the ID of the passengers. There's no justifiable cause. The passengers aren't the ones being pulled over.
If a guy is just walking down the road and a cop stops and asks him to identify himself, is that right? |
| Cain |
Dunno - on the one hand it seems unnecessary, on the other hand, if the passengers in the car have nothing to worry about, then there's no harm done and if they do have something to worry about, it's an opportunity for the police to do something about it! |
| Otter | | (reply to LindaH) posted 8-Oct-2008 7:10pm |
The police officer should have some reason to ask someone on the street for ID. I've had the police ask for ID when I was walking down the street. Maybe he has a reason, maybe not, I don't know who he's looking for or why, he's not the enemy. |
| LindaH | | (reply to Otter) posted 8-Oct-2008 9:32pm |
So why should a passenger in a car he stops be any different? He asks the driver for a license, for obvious reasons. But being a passenger in a car that gets stopped isn't probable cause for anything.
No, a cop is not the enemy, but he should treat all innocent people as though they have no ID. If you have a legitimate reason to not want any particular person to know you were walking around there, (or hanging out with that driver) that's a good enough reason not to want a cop to know who you are. |
| Irene007 | | (reply to Lahdee) posted 8-Oct-2008 11:55pm |
Is he married? |
| gambler |
Yes............... though i see why this could be an issue, but.......... yea |
| Lahdee | | (reply to Irene007) posted 10-Oct-2008 3:24pm |
I dont think so. lol |
| Otter | | posted 22-Oct-2008 10:04am |
The fact that the officer stopped the car for a violation is all the reason he needs to ask everyone in the car for ID. He can take a passenger into custody if he fails to get ID or reasonable explanation as to why they don't have ID. As far as stopping someone on the street and asking for ID for no reason, that's pushing it. He would have to defend his action, if he pushed the issue. I don't have to know his reason, as long as he has one. |
| LindaH | | (reply to Otter) posted 22-Oct-2008 11:22am |
You don't need ID to be a passenger in a car. It is not illegal to not possess an ID.
And how is being a passenger of a traffic violator any more cause for ID checking than being a person walking down the road? |
| LindaH | | (reply to Otter) posted 24-Oct-2008 10:31am |
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.
Being a passenger in a vehicle where the driver forgot to use his turn signal is not probable cause. |
| Otter | | (reply to LindaH) posted 24-Oct-2008 12:39pm |
Asking someone to identify themselves is not search and seizure, in order to search the police officer would need a warrant, probable cause, or reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed. The police officer can state he wants to see ID because you match the description of someone who's wanted, he could ask me for ID because I have a minor child with me. For his own safety he could ask the operator to step out of the vehicle and check the area within reach of the driver for weapons. None of which would be though of as an illegal search by a judge. |
| LindaH | | (reply to Otter) posted 24-Oct-2008 1:45pm |
Asking for someone's identity is considered 'searching' them. Innocent people shouldn't have to give their identifying information to anyone. If you look like someone else, I can understand though. But what does a minor child have to do with anything? You should have to tell an officer who you are just because there's a kid with you? That's even worse than checking someone because they match the description of a criminal!
A passenger should be allowed to say "My name is Bob Jones" and give no physical ID card. And that should be enough. |
soyring1  | | posted 26-Oct-2008 12:33pm |
its the divers fault |
