Link to the Ohio detention bill text?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks, Oleg. This is the first I've heard of it. :fire: I have no doubt Taft will sign it. He has nothing left to lose.

And yet we walk into the polls and vote as many times as we wish without ever being asked for ID. :uhoh:
 
taft hasnt done anything to help..while I have yet to be asked for any Id, it would be interesting no doubt to simply reply" gee, I musta left my traveling papers at home" with a snap of my heels and the ol salute.


guiess it be off to the gulag for me:D
 
For cryin out loud, they pass garbage like this, and somehow expect prosecutor's like me to win cases under this crappy law. I can barely get a judge to agree that probable cause exists when an officer sees a coffee can in a car...:D

Seriously, this legislation is headed for the dump whether he signs it or not. It would criminalize silence. No way any judge, conservative or liberal, is going to uphold this garbage.
 
CAS700850 said:
For cryin out loud, they pass garbage like this, and somehow expect prosecutor's like me to win cases under this crappy law. I can barely get a judge to agree that probable cause exists when an officer sees a coffee can in a car...:D
Hahahahaha. Thanks for taking my rage down a notch :D

Seriously, this legislation is headed for the dump whether he signs it or not. It would criminalize silence. No way any judge, conservative or liberal, is going to uphold this garbage.

Though I'd hope so, how is it different from the presumption of guilt for, say, refusing a breathalyzer?
 
I can barely get a judge to agree that probable cause exists when an officer sees a coffee can in a car...
ROTFLMAO! :D

Seriously, this legislation is headed for the dump whether he signs it or not. It would criminalize silence. No way any judge, conservative or liberal, is going to uphold this garbage.
I'm not so sure. The Supremes said that you had to identify yourself (give your name, not show ID) if there was a state law to that effect. This is only one step more.

What about kids that don't have an ID?
 
Ohio has a state id and a state drivers license. If you are too young to have a drivers license or you have lost your driving privalege you can get a state id issued.

I do not know how young you can be and still get a state id, I know some high school kids who wanted to get jobs but were too young to have a drivers license had the state id card. 15 years old and maybe 14 I guess.

Next month I expect to also be in tennessee, sort of amusing that tennessee has so many members on this board and it seems to keep attracting more and more of them.

This is the first I even heard of this and it simply makes me more interested in finishing the closing on my property and getting gone.
 
Though I was quite unhappy when the family moved from Ohio in to Colorado in '75, I've long since realized that the move was for the better. This kind of dren only serves to further reinforce that opinion.
What about kids that don't have an ID?
Thats next, since they most of 'em already have a SS number.

And the screws tighten just a little bit....
 
There is an elephant in the room here.

No one seems to mention it : Are IDs appropriate in what is supposed to be a free country?

I say no.

And yes I ask people for ID nearly every working night.
 
One thing to keep in mind is that I think there was some recent news on the national id criteria or something in the past week or two.

I read it on another site and I doubt it made the tv news, I don't bother with tv news anymore.

Anyway, these days a passport almost seems easier to get at times.

And it is a valid phot id issued by the federal government so it is something to keep in mind.

I know I had one in junior high when my parents took me out of the country to see the crowded city of london.
 
The Ohio Patriot Act has made it to the Taft's desk, and with the stroke of a pen, it would most likely become the toughest terrorism bill in the country. The lengthy piece of legislation would let police arrest people in public places who will not give their names, address and birth dates, even if they are not doing anything wrong.

:barf:

I am glad we have US Constitution... that addresses this...err umm....hmmm...
 
biere said:
Anyway, these days a passport almost seems easier to get at times.

And it is a valid phot id issued by the federal government so it is something to keep in mind.

...yes, I think you are getting more to the direction of things, all be it you might not be thinking of it in said terms of a national ID and database.
 
Please disregard the sound of me puking.

I live in Ohio and this hits me. I can now be walking down the street and be detained be a police officer for no reason at all. No suspicion of wrongdoing, no probable cause. I can see the conversation now. "Identification, please." "Jawohl, mein herr." (left arm raised). Next comes my arrest for "hate speech". Remember when we used to say "at least we're not in a police state"?
 
And here I am in my delicate, overprotected life trying to figure out why having a coffee can in your vehicle would constitute Probable Cause?

I don't know how I could ever comprehende anything past that.
 
Last night, at the Bar Association Christmas Party, I brought this proposed law up. The defense attorneys were quick to point out the Fourth and Fifth Amendment implications of this law, in that it would seem to give officers a free pass around the Fourth Amendment, by allowing them to stop and detain an individual without probable cause, or more accurately, without reasonable suspicion under Terry v. Ohio. It would then comel the subkject to speak with the officers, in terms of identifying information. Now, the judges pointed out that the Fifth Amendment does not cover name and identifying information, but the Fourth Amendment implications are clear. As is the potential for abuse, especially in terms of drug interdiction, especially if it actually requires an I.D., and not just the information.

Imagine a cop goes to a known drug area. Walks up to a person to ask for I..D. Person cannot produce I.D., so will be taken in to verify I.D., and is patted down for officer safety incident to the arrest, resulting in the discovery of drugs. Better yet, when word of this spreads, the subjects (knowing they have dope in a pocket) run when the police approach, knowing they don't have I.D., and then you get a violent encounter, Taser use, etc.

All I can say is the judges around central Ohio aren't looking at this with friendly attitudes. Then again, a brief talk with other prosecutors got similar cold reception.
 
Something can be legal, yet also not right.

I quote from Standing Wolf:
Ohio isn't a police state. The law was signed by a governor, wasn't it? So it's legal, right?

Legal, yes. I'm sure orders establishing and commiting people to the gulags were signed by an official, too. So they must have been a good thing, right?

Remember what Mr. Franklin said about trading liberty for safety?

If that was sarcasm, my apologies for not getting it. If that was a real statement, please think through the ramifications of that line of reason.
 
1911 guy said:
Legal, yes.
Lawful, no.

I've already drawn my line in the sand. I will refuse to identify myself to an LEO on a fishing expedition, regardless of what the law says. Screw 'em.
 
Picture this scenerio...you are at a relatives house...they live on or near the lake...so you leave your ID at their house so it isn't stolen while you enjoy a dip in the lake (I'm referring to Lake Erie, not a smaller lake)....Police officer approches and asks you for id, you can't provide it, so you're arrested...you get convicted, you loose CCW and now look like you aren't a law abiding citizen.....This law is an outrage no matter how you look at it....It also allows complete circumvention of the 4th and 5th amendments......So much for the US Constutution.......


I'd be concerned if I were you....because its one more step towards a complete police state where we might as well be issued identification papers/travel documents for every movement we dare make.....


Should good ol shaft make this into law, rest assured it will be in front of the courts in record time....


And I know some of you will throw in the debate of you should always have id on you etc...But if I'm swimming in lake erie, the last 2 items on my person will be my ID and my gun...I'll leave those locked in either my vehicle or my dad's house.....Perhaps I should look at a tattoo with my SSN now or one of those implantable ID chips........*sarcasm off*


Although does anyone know of a bikini with a built in holster for a 1911 45 :evil:


Sigh.....

Mneme
 
Reading the comments thus far in this thread, it would appear there's a lot of anger amongst us.

And you want to know why we're so angry?

Because we already know we will comply with the law.
 
Two definitions of compliance.

Molon Labe, you're right. Most of us carry ID all the time anyway, but the point is that as a free American, I resent being required to show my papers when stopped for any reason or no reason at all. Get stopped for speeding? Sure, here's my license that says I'm able to drive. Got to tell the ossiffer I'm armed (req'd in Oh) so here's my ccw permit. But minding my own bussiness and get detained because some young punk of a cop is looking to make a quick collar? Forget it.
 
I am concerned, because I will have to deal with this law and its real-life impacts the day it takes effect, not when I am the unfortunate soul asked for I.D. As such, I may have to draw a line in the sand before most others. And it may cost me my job.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top