Police question -- Police asking for ID in VA

[tyme]

My understanding of Hibel differs from yours. I believe the SCOTUS ruled that LEOs may ask for and demand ID upon "reasonable suspicion" that a crime either has been committed or is about to be committed. This is a lower standard than "probable cause," but it is not blanket autorization to demand ID in the absence even of reasonable suspicion.

That issue was hashed through when the Hiibel decision came down, both here and on TFL, iirc. (There was a particularly lengthy discussion at TFL.)

I personally think that "reasonable suspicion" is a meaningless phrase.

Technically, the supreme court ruled that a state can pass a law which allows LEOs to demand ID on "reasonable suspicion." Nevada had such a law, but states are free to repeal (or not to pass) such laws; the SCOTUS merely ruled that such laws are constitutional.

 

[txgho1911]

Texas

Has road and bridge fees on vehicles and administration fees for liscense and registration.
You pay sales tax when you buy it. There is no property tax exsize tax or other anual doubling of tax against vehicles.
Inspection is anual and as I remember not a totaly corrupt system.

Total registration for 2000 on my 99 gmc 1 year after I got it was $67.
I wanna get back into TX so bad. I should have canceled the title transfer when I discovered the cost and pack back to TX that week.

Here in Indiana they are trying to enforce a curfew for minors on school nights. Seatbelt checkpoints and dui checks also.

 

[tc300mag1]

Do ya have a seat belt law there? We do and ive seen stops like this a few times this year... Cant say if they were check Dl or not as i was going the other way and they were only stopping west bound both times

 

[JPM70535]

In Louisiana , the State Police have been conducting Drivers License check Points at least as far back as 1976. The checks are not fishing expeditions as has been suggested, instead they are conducted to confirm that the motoring public is in compliance with 3 requirements necessary to be legal.

First, all drivers operating mlotor vehicles upon the highways of the state must be in possession of a "VALID" drivers license ( Farm implements operated for agricultural purposes are exempted) From personal experience, roughly 25% of drivers are operating on a suspended license, having been deemed unfit to be granted the priveledge of driving, and yes Virginia, driving is a priveledge, not a right as suggested by some.

The second requirement is for all vehicles operated on the highways to be properly registered and bearing a current License Plate. This requirement assures that those who use the highways of the state are bearing some of the cost of mantaining said roads. Seems fair to me, if you use it, help pay for it. Also again from personal experience, between 15-20% of vehicles driving up and down the road are stolen and check points are an acceptable method of detecting them.

The last item required is proof of liability insurance on vehicles being operated on the roadways. This requirement nets the State nothing and is there purely for the protection of all drivers. It insures that should a vehicle you own , cause personal or property damage , you will have the means to bear the cost. Once again, let those who cause the damage pay for it.

Those 3 requirements at a check point take an average of 10 seconds to verify and in no way constitutes unlawful detention. Only if one or more of the 3 items is hinky is the motorist directed onto the shoulder for further scrutiny. So unless you are a scofflaw or an illegal driver you have no bitch coming.

I can't speak for VA., but I would wager that the laws are pretty much the same

JPM

 

[lostone1413]

One thing about all the check points that gets me is 2miles away someones house is getting broke into on the corner a drug deal is going down in the apartment a woman getting beat half to death by someone she has a restraining order against. Then they wonder why people want CCW laws so they can protect theirself.Had to take care of some business in Illinois in the spring. I was going down the road and they had a police check for seat belts. They had like 5 squad cars in the check point. I could have taken anyone of them less then 5 miles away and showed them at least 3 drug deals going down and at least 25 gang bangers walking the streets.

 

[71Commander]

Road or Highway Safety Checks are for the most part somewhere in between verbal encounters and brief stops, the GA Supreme Court and even the USSC has ruled that it is not an unreasonable detention for a driver to submit to a check point.

It may be legal, but it don't make it right.

 

[Molon Labe]

If I recall correctly, you are required to show your ID if asked by a police officer.

As implied by others, this is not entirely correct.

If I understand correctly, the SCOTUS ruled that states are allowed to pass laws requiring you to present ID to an LEO in the absence of any suspicion of a crime. But if your state does not have such law, then you are not required to present ID to an LEO in the absence of any suspicion of a crime.

 

[Cool Hand Luke 22:36]

Technically, the supreme court ruled that a state can pass a law which allows LEOs to demand ID on "reasonable suspicion." Nevada had such a law, but states are free to repeal (or not to pass) such laws; the SCOTUS merely ruled that such laws are constitutional.

Under Hibble, ASAIR, a citizen is only required to "identify himself" (truthfully provide their name) upon request by a LEO, and only assuming the LEO has at least the requisite reasonable suspicion. The only time an actual identification document might be permissably demanded is if the encounter involved a citizen who recently was operating a motor vehicle requiring an operator's license, or the encounter was a stop at the border or airport, etc.

 

[Sodbuster]

His team's goal

In the old days it was called a quota. Nice to see quotas have been done away with. Does his team use a quality circle also?

 

[oneshooter]

Texas

Has a seatbelt law. All passengers must be buckled in,as long as the vehicle is rated less than 1ton capacity. Motorcycle riders below the age of 21? must wear helmets. If over the age you are not required to wear a helmet, BUT if you don't then the state/county/city cannot be held responsable for any medical bills resulting from an accident.

No exise tax, personall property tax, vehicle tax (all vehicles must be State Inspected for required safety equipment and emissions standards ),no FOID, CCL with only a class and handling test, great hunting (deer,turkey,goose,duck ), great weather. When I got out of the Corps I came back to TEXAS and have never felt the need to go anywhere else, 28yrs now. And gas is at $ 1.48 gal,Chevron!!!

Oneshooter
Livin in Texas

 

[Aguila Blanca]

"E. When (i) a person is detained by a law-enforcement officer for questioning based upon specific, objective facts establishing a reasonable suspicion that the person was engaged in or about to become engaged in criminal activity, (ii) the officer requires that the person identify himself and give a reasonably credible account of the lawfulness of his conduct and purposes, and (iii) the person refuses to comply with the requirement, he is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. "

This is taken almost directly from the SCOTUS decision in Hibel. Note that in order to effect the stop there must FIRST be "specific, objective facts establishing a reasonable suspicion ..."

This is a looong way from "Your papers, pleeeze, I do not like the color of your hair."

It is also NOT a blanket authoriztion to stop anyone without reasonable suspicion, as was initially alleged in this thread.

 

[Smurfslayer]

Hawk,

specific, objective facts establishing a reasonable suspicion

Do you mean something like "the defendant was acting fidgety, and in a nervous manner, so I effected a consentual encounter, at which point the defendant refused to identify himself. He then resisted arrest, and had to be subdued..."

 

[carp killer]

Boy, this site is really infested with Libertarians

 

[Partisan Ranger]

Okay, I can see now the logic of the cops stopping and asking for IDs -- looking for suspended licenses, stolen plates etc. And it appears the law is on their side.

It's just that after 3 years of living in Russia and being accustomed to seeing people having to produce passports on demand, I don't like seeing this in our Republic.

 

[Jim Diver]

IANAL, but this is what I would do in this situation.

1) Roll down the window ONLY far enough to slide out your papers.

2) No not let them stick thier heads or hands or flashlights in your car.

3) Refuse any and all searches.

4) Only answer questions relating to who you are. Everything else get "That's my business, not yours."


If you live near a roadblock, do people a favor. Stand up against the JBTs and stand out with a sign warning people of the block. The cops may not like it, but the 1st amendment prolly allows for it.

I agree that this roadblock crap may be legal, but it sure as h*ll is not right.

 

[Pilgrim]

Here in the PRK it is against the law to avoid a roadblock but if it is not properly set up the court would take a dim view of the police issuing a citation for trying to enforce a poorly set up road block.

I think what you are trying to say is once a motorist has entered the marked confines of a DUI checkpoint it is illegal to "avoid" the checkpoint.

My understanding of the SCOTUS decision that allows DUI checkpoints is that it be clearly identified as such, have pre-check point publicity, and allow "escape routes". A motorist may not be stopped for using an escape route, but he may be stopped for an observed vehicle code violation.

 

[Dbl0Kevin]

I believe the courts have ruled that you may NOT ask a passenger in a motor vehicle for ID in the absence of reasonable suspicion that the PASSENGER has been or is about to be involved in an illegal act.

You're half right but you said it wrong. We can ASK the passenger for whateaver we feel like....there is no requirement for them to GIVE us ID unless we have reasonable suspicion of a crime though.

1) Roll down the window ONLY far enough to slide out your papers.

4) Only answer questions relating to who you are. Everything else get "That's my business, not yours."

I would highly recommend against doing that unless you are 100% positive you are squeaky clean. I know several guys, on my dept no less, that would not take too positively to treatment like that, and if they get ticked off it's not very hard at all to find numerous motor vehicle violations on the average car. Just a word to the wise.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

and if they get ticked off it's not very hard at all to find numerous motor vehicle violations on the average car. Just a word to the wise.

I am not sure what that means. What exactly would be the things you would be able to "find"? Your statment almost sounds like the police would be bending interpretation of the law just to punish someone who didnt want their rights violated. Is that what you mean?

Police get all bent out of shape when they are perceived by the public as jack-booted thugs, but then we see comments like this.

 

[Sindawe]

I know several guys, on my dept no less, that would not take too positively to treatment like that, and if they get ticked off it's not very hard at all to find numerous motor vehicle violations on the average car. Just a word to the wise.

Police get all bent out of shape when they are perceived by the public as jack-booted thugs, but then we see comments like this.

Cry HAVOC! and let slip the dogs of war...

 

[Libertyteeth]

So far we have few roadblocks in Montana. Several years ago I encountered one coming into Helena. I pulled up alongside one of the Highway Patrol officers, rolled down my window, and gave him the evil eye. He rolled his eyes in his head and waved me on through.

I really don't like this trend, it smacks of totalitarianism in the making, regardless of their excuses. What happens when they get the new federalized ID, and more and more people begin to decide they really don't need a driver's license after all, yet fully intend to keep on driving, as is their right? Are there enough LE available to weather the attrition rate?

 

[Big Gay Al]

Ok, so maybe I'm just a little strange, but if I have nothing to hide, why shouldn't I tell the officer who I am? Why shouldn't I provide my ID?

I know, this is a free country and we shouldn't have to do that sort of thing.

But you know, I have nothing to hide. I'm not a fleeing felon, and the only laws I'm likely to break are the speeding laws. And in all honesty, I usually only go about 5 mph over the posted limit on the highways.

Frankly, I think Hibel made a big mistake. He could have avoided a lot of trouble and prevented a big court case (that went the wrong way) if he'd just identified himself to the officer.

The thing to remember, when you are stopped by a LEO for any reason, you're "playing their game." And the rules are all on their side. At least for the next few minutes. If you want to save yourself a hassle, do as they ask, at least to a point.

I would not submit to a search of my vehicle. But always remain quiet and polite. Try not to get excited.

But that's just my opinion. And IANAL and I don't play one on TV either.

 

[pax]

But you know, I have nothing to hide.

Big Gay Al ~

If you don't have anything to hide, why aren't you walking around naked?

Laws like this are an attempt to get citizens to walk around naked as far as the government is concerned.

Lots of people have the same emotional reaction to government agents demanding ID and personal information, and perhaps riffling through their personal effects, as the way you might feel if the government passed a law saying you must walk around naked at all times -- or at least, always be prepared to disrobe for a government agent on demand.

pax

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. -- David Hume

 

[Big Gay Al]

If you don't have anything to hide, why aren't you walking around naked?

Because there's a law against walking around naked. Besides, how would I hide my .45 with no clothes on. Nope, don't even THINK of answering that one.

 

[thorn726]

What happens when they get the new federalized ID, and more and more people begin to decide they really don't need a driver's license after all, yet fully intend to keep on driving, as is their right?

uhhhhhhhhh........????????/

i dont think the constitution guarantees us the right to drive, and further there ARE laws saying you have ot have a licsense to drive, so behind the wheel, we're all pretty much at the mercy of the police.
in CA the police have the right to stop you anywhere (wallking , whatever) to ask your name, but you are not by law required to have ID. of course the police will deal with you one of three ways=
believe you , and move on,
sorta believe you, but then come back 8 hrs later and run you again to make sure you give them the same info, then move on,
or decide you're lying and take you downtown and hold you till they figure out who you are (you gotta push 'em for that one)

having been incredibly poor for a time, but not a trouble maker, i was given option 2. (checked 2x in one day)

i don't like being stopped at checkpoints, but i really can't complain.
i know too many people who would still be alive had a cop stopped them, too many just plain idiots on the road.
if it gets no licsense no insurance foolios off the road, good!

and if you think insurance is a ripoff, well you're half right.
the thing is the broke people who complain about insurance =
can hand me $10000 to buy me a new truck? can they pay my bills if they hurt me?
i think the argument for driving being a privilege rather than a right is pretty darn strong

 

[Werewolf]

Ok, so maybe I'm just a little strange, but if I have nothing to hide, why shouldn't I tell the officer who I am? Why shouldn't I provide my ID?

Turn it around... You've done nothing wrong why should the officer ask for your ID.

In this country there is a presumption of innocence. Checkpoints and ID requests fly in the face of that long held tradition and presume guilt without any cause or evidence to that effect.

I don't know about you but presumptions like that are not made in FREE countries.

It is all a matter of principle. Too many people are principled only when convenient to be so and hand over their ID upon request by government.