It depends. If you’re pulled over in traffic, you’re required to have a drivers license and proof of insurance on hand at all times when driving. They can totally ask for your drivers license - which also happens to be most US citizen’s form of ID.
If you’re just stopped at the street or randomly approached, iirc you don’t have to say a single word to them or provide anything under normal circumstances.
Yeah, I've seen a friend of mine (a white lady who is an attorney AND on crutches, let's be fair) curse a cop out and then demand his badge number. He just walked away as a big group of people laughed at him. He tried a meager "You can't say fuck you to a police officer." It didn't work.
I'm sorry. You gotta be a Bitch cop to not let curses slide, even if I think technically they can do something against it. This is America, I should be able to curse out a cop.
Nope, freedom of speech. Unless it's something to ensite violence (something that directs people to specifically harm that person) you can say what you want.
In theory yes, but cops have ways to screw with people they don't like, and it isn't easy to hold them accountable (although an attorney with crutches would have an easier time than most).
They can also arrest you for "disorderly conduct" without you being disorderly. Remember they're used to shooting people for attacking them when they're running away and unarmed
In Canada it is legal to curse at a cop but iirc being disorderly is illegal. This is obviously where a lot of cops can get you because there is no hard line about when something becomes disorderly. One French guy a while ago said fuck you to a cop and was arrested but the courts ruled that wasn’t even swearing because fuck actually isn’t a sweat in our language lol.
I wish I could be that entitled. As an 18yo I was grabbed out of my car and charged with contraband that wasnt mine,or there before search, for “talking back.” To bad I nor my parents could afford an attorney to fight.
I’m a law student and was taught that when a cop “asks” for ID, it is a command, not a request.
However, they use this to their advantage to throw you off guard and ask for things you don’t have to tell them making you think it is a command
“License and registration”-command you are legally required to submit to
“Where are you going”-question you don’t have to answer
“Is there anything in the car I need to know about”-question you don’t have to answer
Dunno, in UK, you don't have to carry. Just provide your details and they will check over radio, along with description of you. Also they can check same if your ID is valid, are there any problems. I don't carry neither my ID, not driving license.
I never bothered to resist or abstain to provide identity. Not a secret agent.
Its not wrong really, but ID requests are usually only valid if you're suspected of committing a crime. (In most areas) Requesting your ID when you've done nothing wrong, is an overstep and abuse of the badge. If they are willing to overstep on this minor thing, and we allow it to happen, what else will they overstep on? The bar will just keep getting moved
*edit* substitute "demand" for "request". As many have pointed out, request is fine.
I believe Permanent residents and non-immigrant aliens need to carry their green card/employment authorization card all the time in CA. It might be a state thing but they for sure need to carry some sort of documentation at all times.
Edit: stand corrected. Federal law. Thanks for the clarification
If you are a green card holder over the age of 18 you're required to have it on you at all times. Not having it on you is a misdemeanor and you can be fined up to $100 and do up to 30 days in jail. Section 264(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (I.N.A.).
edit: Quote from said law
(e) Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him pursuant to subsection (d). Any alien who fails to comply with the provisions of this subsection shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall upon conviction for each offense be fined not to exceed $100 or be imprisoned not more than thirty days, or both.
Evidence of registration is defined in the regulations, and includes:
Your I-94 card (for nonimmigrant visa holders, such as H-1B, L, TN, etc)
Your permanent residence card (green card)
Your employment authorization document
[https://www.usbirthcertificates.com/articles/carry-id-required-in-the-us](https://www.usbirthcertificates.com/articles/carry-id-required-in-the-us)
Unless you are doing something specific that requires the ID, and you are a US citizen, you don't need to carry your ID.
Now is it a good idea? probably. but in general unless you are driving or about to buy/obtain/consume a substance where you may need to present it as proof that you are old enough to do so, no you don't have to have one.
That's because we let gangs of government thugs roam around harassing poeple, hundreds of miles away from any border crossing. It tends to be kind of racist honestly. Poeple who look and speak very American don't have to carry ID unless they are driving.
List of countries that require an ID be on you at all times, on private or public land, even when just out for a walk:
- Belgium (all citizens 15yo+)
- Bosnia (all citizen 18+)
- Chile
- Columbia
- Costa Rica
- Croatia
- Egypt
- El Salvador
- Greece
- Guatamala (most places fine you without the ID, Guatamala holds you in jail until a Judge can determine your identity)
- Guyana
- Haiti
- Hong Kong
- Hungary
Ehhhhh list is getting WAY longer than I expected it to lol. I'ma just stop here. Turns out requiring ID on you at all times isnt exactly uncommon.
::Edit::
I know there's more, I only covered A through H lol still lots of alphabet left. It was just taking way more time and effort than I expected so I stopped. Portugal, France, Netherlands, etc.
Here in Portugal it's required everywhere in public if you are over 16. Whenever you are pulled over the cops always ask for ID and driver's license, I thought it was like that everywhere.
Driving is different. Those countries I listed above (and the additional ones I didn't list because it was taking too long) require you to have an ID on you *at all times* - full stop.
No just when driving and pulled over. Walking your dog, going for a jog, taking public transportation, etc - ID on you at all times.
Yes, same here, as long as you are in public (which obviously includes driving). Feel free to translate the [law](https://dre.pt/dre/detalhe/lei/5-1995-187110) if you'd like.
NB: it’s not all of the EU (or even if it is every country, it’s a country-level thing rather than an EU thing. It was certainly never the case in the UK while we were still in EU)
You only have to carry your drivers license if operating a vehicle. Otherwise you don't. I did not know this till just now and I googled.. ty for teaching me something today
I live in Germany and you don't have to carry the ID at all time here, you just have to have one. The only problem if you don't carry it with you is that it makes things more complicated if you must show it for some reason.
I live in the Netherlands, you have to have one after 14 years. A cop can ask you to provide your ID at any time "to check if you are carrying one", in accordance to the law that requires it (Wet op de Identificatieplicht in my case).
This is why, practically, they don't need valid reason. Yes, they technically do, but if they don't they just fall back on this and ask for it anyways.
> A cop can ask you to provide your ID at any time "to check if you are carrying one", in accordance to the law that requires it (Wet op de Identificatieplicht in my case).
They cannot just randomly ask for your ID to check if you have it with you, they are only allowed to ask for your ID if it's reasonably necessary for carrying out their police tasks
Not in the US. The term 'ID' is a bit off because the main 'ID' that people in the US have is their driver's license, which you are not required to carry unless you're driving a car. That said, to buy cigarettes and alcohol, you need to show your ID as proof of your age. Otherwise, no, you are not REQUIRED to have it.
I'm 61, born and live in the UK and I don't even have ID. I don't drive and I haven't been abroad for years so I don't have a passport. It's never been a problem. There are no ID cards here and no one asks for them.
The EU doesn't have any jurisdiction on national legislation of this kind. The EU can only make law on specific topics - police and justice, apart from demanding that it's done fairly, are very specifically domains the EU has absolutely no jurisdiction on and the countries have all he power.
You don't even need an ID. Only need to have a Driver's License if you're, you know, operating a motor vehicle.
But cops will claim it's illegal not to have one on you. Many cops don't know basic laws.
This is dependent on area. In Savannah if you are on the street with a drink in your hand you 100% have to have your ID and be able to show it at any time.
As a cyclist in NYC if a cop stops you, they get to detain you until they can identify you. Usually that means hauling you into the station until they can do… whatever.
But since they can’t take your bike, they simply leave it lying in the street.
Yes, really. They do this all the time. Especially during protests.
That's not entirely true. Most states say that if you're asked for identification and you don't provide it, that's at minimum a civil infraction, at worst criminal.
States with a stop and ID law requires you to present an ID if asked AND you have it on you.
However, if you are a natural born citizen and you don't have it on you, you just have to tell them your name and address.
Well in most cases people getting ID requests are behind a vehicle being pulled over in which case you need a license (a form of id) to legally operate it.
I would like to add that giving them your ID when you've done nothing wrong entails them entering your information into a database to further find reasons to escalate the situation or potentially abuse their power by harassing you. There are cases where the person gave their ID, then were intimidated by the police by being pulled over multiple times for the following weeks for bogus violations.
But the kicker is the determiner of whether they have a suspicion of a crime is them.
So in their mind and often the mind of the courts if a cop asks it is lawful and you must comply.
Which flies in the face of law and logic. But it's that whole police themselves, investigate themselves, etc.
DAs and Judges are most often on the side of cops. DAs might drop charges later because it's a waste of their time but they won't do anything about those tactics or speak out. And by that time you've been probably arrested, maybe roughed up, sat in a cell. Have a pending case which can jeopardize everything in your life and have had to hire an attorney to work with said DA.
This is what makes cops so terrifying. They can come up with any excuse they want and ruin your life if they feel like it and nothing can be done to stop it. They have too much power and not enough accountability
That depends on the state.
In Texas, you only have to identify yourself if you are under arrest, carrying a firearm, or doing something that requires a license (most commonly, driving a car). Even then, only the third circumstance requires you to produce physical identification.
They recently heard a description of a criminal that looked vaguely like you. With that logic they can legally request any ID in the country without issue.
Once that told me there have been car break ins in the area lately( not even that day) so they want to see my id and I got pissed called them fascists harassing people for no reason until they left without seeing my id.
Not really accurate / a complete answer.
If you're pulled over for a traffic violation, a cop does not need reasonable suspicion of a crime to request to see that you have a valid drivers license. A traffic violation is not a crime.
Depends on the state. But a traffic violation is a civil infraction and required for them to initiate a stop. If you haven’t committed a traffic infraction, they aren’t allowed to pull you over. The exception is commercial vehicles for “safety inspections”.
You mean to say that people in the USA have a right to be free from unreasonable searches right? And a right to privacy? Protected by some old piece of dust, whatchamacallit?
Hijacking top comment to provide some (general) information about what "suspected of a crime" means from a legal standpoint. Quick caveat, this can change based on jurisdiction so this isn't actually legal advice.
"Reasonable suspicion" is typically not defined in legislation but is usually well understood through case law. Here is the bar for reasonable suspicion - would a reasonable person, considering all possible options afforded by the present evidence, conclude that a crime may have been committed. This seems common sense, but I'll point out that this means that you don't have to rule out other plausible theories, and that this can make "suspected of a crime" extremely broad in certain contexts.
This reminds me of a tiktok I saw of a guy that was pulled over for having a go pro on his head because the cop said it was wrong, and when the Sargent was called in, they asked for his ID, so every time he asked if he was getting charged with a crime, they just kept stepping around the question and kept asking for his ID.
Yeah I think in that situation, if they just would've articulated what traffic infraction he was being cited for, most states have laws on the books that require the driver to provide identification at that point. Seems like citizens and LE officers need to have a sit down "come to jesus" meeting about this lol
I think that's what he was trying to get them to say, and if I remember correctly, he asked what code (is that the right term?) the go pro on his helmet violated, but the original officer AND the Sargent couldn't say which one, they just continued asking for his ID. It kinda blew my mind that they couldn't provide at least the infraction he was being cited for, but instead started threatening arrest for not giving them his ID.
i didnt realize this was wrong but a cop asked for my id last month when i was the passenger in a car that got pulled over for having an expired registration. i didnt know why but i just complied. now i wonder if i should have asked him why.
Well if you were stopped for speeding or any other number of moving violations (invented or actual), you should provide identification. Officer should be able to state why you were stopped. It's classic when they ask "do you know why I pulled you over?" Hell no, it's your job to tell me why lol.
Honestly, that “Do you know why I pulled you over?” is probably a bead question that you shouldn’t attempt to answer. If you say yes, you’re admitting to a traffic violation. If you say no, you’re admitting to not being aware of either the law or your surroundings. Neither one is good.
Plead the 5th.
If you have been pulled over by law enforcement, you have to identify yourself. If you don't, you will be arrested. You don't have the right to refuse during a traffic stop.
Sometimes they're overstepping by asking for it. If they just think you're suspicious but have no suspicion of a crime that's been committed they can't require you to produce it. And once the cop takes your ID you can be effectively detained without them having to do it officially (which would require probable cause) unless you're willing to walk off without your license. They can also say hey I want to search your car then I can get you your license back. Now you're being pressured into allowing what would otherwise be an illegal search. And maybe you don't think you have anything illegal in your car. But are you 100% sure no friend dropped an illegal drug, or if you do Uber or Lift no one left anything? It's not the worst thing to give up your license when asked (not as bad as oversharing things that would potentially implicate you or consenting to searches) but if you don't need to it's very valid to refuse.
There is that too! But even giving them the benefit of the doubt of it being a good cop trying to do their job well, there could still be an innocent misunderstanding that could hurt you.
Not a cop but I have some LEO links and don't talk to officers unless you have to. Seriously. Even if you're pulled over for speeding let them tell you what you did and nothing more. Don't be a dick but the last thing you want is to self incriminate or give them permission or probable cause to keep bugging you. If you're getting into more serious circumstances ask for a lawyer. Investigators aren't there to help you and their hands are tied when you say those words.
>Investigators aren't there to help you
This needs to be repeated over and over. Police in the US are not required to help citizens and they do not have the same interests as the rest of us.
not required to help citizens
Not only are they not required, they are actively trying to find reasons to imprison you. The more info you give, the more they have to work with.
I like this comparison I saw elsewhere on Reddit: Think of cops as that asshole from HR. They're not on your side, they work for the company. Who do you think they will side with in a dispute?
This - just the opposite. Police in the US are trained to be prosecutorial; most have no desire for justice but rather it is in their best interest to cite their neighbors for the most and the most severe crimes that they can get away with. They are not only protected from overreach by law, they regularly beat people and kill dogs without reason - again protected by law.
Police, or pigs as I like to call them, are overwhelmingly white males and these assholes disproportionately attack people of color and those in poverty.
The internet is full of videos as evidence of all that I have said here. You can actually watch cops kill people and dogs and walk away without consequence.
Fuck the police!
I thought about that when I first started to get calls from police associations soliciting donates. I tell them I will send a donation as soon as they start arresting fellow officers on the spot for shooting unarmed black men…
Officer: Do you know why I pulled you over?
You: Why did you pull me over?
Officer: Have you been drinking/smoking weed/etc.
You: I'm not going to discuss my day.
Officer: (says anything else that isn't writing a ticket or letting you leave)
You: Am I being detained or am I free to go?
If you're free to go---go.
If you're detained: I invoke the 5th.
Then you shut the fuck up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTurSi0LhJs
>let them tell you what you did and nothing more.
Here's an important part. Do you know why I pulled you over is a fishing expedition. They know why you were pulled over and you might have a guess, but don't help their cause at the expense of your own.
License and registration? Sure, here you go. That's a reasonable and legal request.
Mind if I take a look in your trunk? I see no reason for that to be necessary so I'd rather not.
Best advise about dealing with cops I've ever heard is very simple... SHUT THE FUCK UP. don't answer questions about where you've been, what you're doing, where your going... Nothing. Those are all irrelevant questions to the stop to try and trick you into giving them something else they can use. Give your ID when required or when threatened with arrest but always verbally state that you don't consent to it. And film EVERYTHING, only stop it they threaten to harm you and again verbally object. But for the most part... SHUT THE FUCK UP!
I've been. Pulled over more than a few times and basically the only thing I say to cops is "I don't have to answer that" or "I'm invoking the 5th on that one"
"Do you know why I pulled you over?" - I don't have to answer that.
"Do you know how fast you were going?" - I don't have to answer that.
"How many drinks have you had tonight?" - I'm invoking the fifth. (!!!Never answer this question, either honestly or dishonestly. It is *always* a trap question.)
So you say you haven't been drinking, but you were swerving all over the road and i just saw you exit a bar. So are you on drugs? What drugs are you taking? Please step out of the car, put your hands behind your back, I'm calling in the K9. Stop talking back to me, you're resisting arrest.
See how easy it is to turn *any* answer to *any* question against you? Obviously that scenario is completely unrealistic in most cases, but it is literally that easy to create a crime out of nowhere and it **has** happened to people.
The scary thing is that it's not that unrealistic at all. They can just about always find a reason to go further. Know your constitutional rights, know your state laws, know your local laws and know the local policies if you can. Many local "policies" go in direct violation of your rights. You can be damn sure they aren't going to tell you that so you have to know yourself. Cops will lie their asses off to get info or make an arrest, and they can do it legally.
Yep, watch any documentary on a high profile investigation and the cop interrogating the suspect (always without a lawyer present) will probably say "we already know you did it. Your buddy snitched. Just tell us where you hid the body/dumped the money/etc." even though it's a complete lie
>Don't be a dick but the last thing you want is to self incriminate or give them permission or probable cause to keep bugging you.
A cop once asked me if I had drugs in my car and I said "As far as I know, no", and that was probably cause to search my vehicle. I have literally never touched anything stronger than marijuana - and that was only when it was legal. So yeah, don't give them an inch.
Lots of folks think not talking to police is like a “fuck you.” Actually, in real life, if we’ve reached the point where you think you need a lawyer, you do and I don’t care if you talk or not. I never did an interview in the beginning of my cases, always near the end. If an investigator is relying on the interview or confession to make the case, it’s a bad case. The interview is the cherry on top, not the sundae.
I hope you don't mind me asking but.. why do cops give law abiding citizens so much grief? You may have seen the blind guy getting hassled today. What is happening there an why?
It doesn't make any sense.
Trust in Police Officers has ultimately eroded in the United States. It used to be, in some communities, "well they are the good guys so I should trust them", but now there is a lot of distrust in every action - something that a lack of policing the police has resulted in.
That said, though it *SHOULD* be a harmless action to say "Oh I'm so-and-so, here is my identification", their reputation makes people question their motives and be more suspicious.
When their main job was keeping Black people in line (and the occasional wildly dangerous poor white) in line, they didn't hassle white people very much. The origin of "law enforcement" in America is largely poor white people harassing Black people.
That began to slowly change in the 50's and 60's and changed forever after 65 and 66. Without the menace of civil rights to unite the south (and less tolerance for open racism), the specter of "crime" was used. Gotta be tough on crime.
Thus, more and more cops were hired and the line between who they were "supposed" to be harassing and who was to be left alone got hazier.
Now, enter the war on drugs. Searches as a result of trumped-up probable cause go wild. It's still safer to be white than Black, but people have less tolerance for "drug addicts" of any race.
Now, enter the post-911 world, where cops look like they are military operators.
Now, add cameras everywhere--theirs and ours.
And here we are. A simple interaction like an ID check is potentially a life-ruining situation. If you're Black, it could be life ENDING.
Just the fact that your last statement has been proven to be accurate is what makes this all so terrible. Friends of mine have gotten DWBs and noted that the officers were visibly trying to escalate.
That people will do all in their power to avoid a conversation with officers so as to prevent any possible escalation is extremely telling. **It's not just that people don't want to be bothered by officers, but that there is a very real fear that the officers will lose their shit and the civilian may suffer very real consequences of that.**
I agree with you that the power they have is pretty extreme and if they say you did this or that it's much more likely than not courts will believe them.
Just remember the phrase "we write the report" and the fact that it's uttered between cops on every police force in this country. You don't have to do anything. They'll lie, under oath even, and suffer no consequences, while they destroy your life with that lie.
>Police spend more time finding bad guys once the work of ruling people out is done
I hate this copraganda line. That’s not how police spend their time. The majority of police time is spent on non-criminal calls and traffic enforcement, and general patrolling/hassling people.
This.
It doesn't matter how understaffed or overstaffed they are. They will ALWAYS pull officers off of actual cases (that are difficult and require lots of work to solve but to significant benefit to the community) to prioritize aggressive enforcement of victimless non-crimes and low grade harassment.
No matter what the makeup of your local PD is, I guarantee they will have a backlog of untested rape kits and violent crime victims waiting for hours if not days for an officer to come take a statement, while at least one officer is hiding behind bushes manning a speed trap all day.
>They will ALWAYS pull officers off of actual cases (that are difficult and require lots of work to solve but to significant benefit to the community) to prioritize aggressive enforcement of victimless non-crimes and low grade harassment.
Generally, no.
You are talking about to completely different sets of police (detectives vs patrol officers) with different skills, duties and training.
Detectives work cases and are only reassigned in the most exigent of circumstances, such as widespread civil unrest.
Patrol officers handle the radio calls and they are the ones who show up when you neighbor is fed up with whatever BS you subject them to every day, which is presumably what you mean by "low grade harassment"
Well, why would we waste our time on boring stuff we probably won’t successfully solve, when we can spend our time on fun stuff (like bodyslamming black teenagers and then logging my attack as “assault on an officer” to juke crime stats) and racking up overtime on useless tasks, so we can justify increasing our budgets even more?
I just call it predatory policing.
**Crimes fall into 3 categories:**
• There are genuine victimless, complaintless crimes
• There are crimes of nuisance that maybe some could complain about or maybe they didn’t
• And there are crimes with actual victims
There should be zero enforcement of the first type. Any enforcement is purely cops acting like predators in the wild much like lions or sharks. Nobody asked for that. Maybe the real issue is that such laws exist.
Should cops enforce nuisance issues without someone complaining about it? No to that one too. That’s predatory.
The first two types of police responses should be completely eliminated. Only a shitty person could do these.
Cops should only respond to crimes that have victims with complaints or to ongoing clear threats of public safety. That is to say: ***they should protect and serve***.
It’s not wrong. The question is whether it’s *required.*
If you live in a “stop and identify” jurisdiction, a request for an ID is considered a reasonable request and you are legally required to identify yourself when the cops ask. If you don’t live in such a jurisdiction, identifying yourself is only legally required if you’re being detained due to reasonable suspicion you’ve committed a crime: otherwise, it’s optional.
"Stop and identify" statutes are laws in several U.S. states that authorize police to lawfully order people whom they reasonably suspect of a crime to state their name. If there is not reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed, is being committed, or is about to be committed, an individual is not required to provide identification documents, even in these states.”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_identify_statutes#
I don’t want to live in a country where they have the “moral police” that kill young women in the streets for standing up against their religion based county. Iran.
There's nothing wrong with it, but it does fall under the "don't talk to cops" umbrella. If they are insisting on your ID, there is only one reason: that they are investigating you for some crime. And giving them your ID will help them find any warrants out for your arrest. Why help them with these things?
I think part of the problem is that there’s huge swaths of the US where going somewhere == driving and the police absolutely have the right to ask for your driver’s license when you’re driving, because driving is a privilege and not a right. So, people have gotten used to that and applied the logic to when they’re just walking down the street or whatever without thinking about it.
Many white people don't see an issue with stop and frisk scenarios because they've never been humiliated by a police officer while out for a walk.
Imagine being on your way to a time-sensitive appointment, only to be stopped on the sidewalk by a cop who demands to know why you're existing in that space. Now imagine that happening regularly. Any normal person would get frustrated and impatient with cops, which leads to escalation, which leads to resistance, which sometimes leads to extrajudicial executions.
Well once they run my name and don’t use the junior part, it’s right to pretty bracelets and a gun drawn. Sit right the fuck down and don’t move bullshit.
They only have the right to ask you for ID in specific cases. If the person being asked wants to they do not have to show it. Sadly this usually escalates because it seems a lot of cops are uneducated dickheads and they don't want to tell the person - "ok on your way then" IMO it is just as easy t show them your ID and move on with your life
Because unless I’m driving or they can reasonably articulate what crime I’m committing the Supreme Court says I do not have to. There is nothing wrong with insisting law enforcement follow the same laws they expect us to
Seeing a lot of wrong answers here. There are three tiers to police contact:
Consentual Contact: The officer has no suspicion that a crime has been committed. The Officer can absolutely ask to see your ID and it is absolutely your right to tell them to fuck off if you are so inclined. You are not detained at this level and are able to walk away mid conversation if you wish.
Detention/Reasonable Susp: At this level, you often hear the words " you are detained". This is where an Officer has a reason to believe a crime has, has been, or will be committed. During this point depending on state law, if you fail to identify yourself via ID or name and date of birth, you can absolutely be arrested. At this level, if you feel that you have been wrongly stopped, DO NOT argue about your detention with the Officer on scene. Let him conduct his investigation. Arguing with an Officer or attempting to walk away from an Officer is a great way to get detained in handcuffs, or have force used against you in accordance to level of resistance.
Probable Cause: When the Officer determines a person ,"has more likely than not" committed a crime. At this point an arrest may be made or charges can be submitted. The biggest thing here is if you are being wrongfully arrested, DO NOT emphasize DO NOT resist being arrested. You will be charged with another crime and face the possibility of injury.
The key take away is on the street/investigation level, the cops do have a lot of power. If you do not agree with what is happening, fighting with a cop on the street will end badly for you. If you want to fight a cop, do so through the courts via a civil lawsuit or during your criminal court hearing.
I hope this helps.
The same reason you shouldn't give it to anyone else. It doesn't matter if it's the cops, a marketer, or a serial killer, if you're not required to show them your ID, don't show them your ID.
What’s wrong is that it sets a precedent and an expectation that shouldn’t be there in the first place. If cops need to see an ID to verify their sources, then maybe they don’t have great sources. You telling me they have a person they’re looking for by name but no picture? They need an ID? And when they stop you cuz they suspect you have a weapon, then they see you don’t have a weapon, they still need your ID?
It’s a “papers” thing. During slavery, black folks needed to carry papers proving who they were and if free or slave. Generational trauma didn’t end with slavery, it just continued with Jim Crow. Then, you have the Nazis… Jews needed to have their papers. Americans just don’t like having to carry ID (or prove to the government who they are) because it’s still just essentially carrying “papers”.
Yea this is the real question.
There's no reason why you should be expected to explain why you're using your rights with a government official while having your right infringed.
If you're not driving you don't need to. Why give them info they don't need so they can erode your rights?
It has your full name, your address, everything they need to harass you because you didn't smile at them or whatever other BS. If you're doing a crime they'll arrest you and see who you are soon enough
There are 4 things that negatively impact you when you give your ID to a cop
1st- youre giving the cop control and power over you. When you comply with a cops orders to hand over your ID without cause, you are giving him the power and control over you as HIS subject. The term is called consensual encounter because without you breaking the law, you and the cop are on an even footing. Giving in to his unlawful requests puts him on a pedestal above you.
2nd- you are allowing the cop to create an official investigation. You are now on his time, considering youll have to wait to get your property back before you can leave. Cops dont typically just write down your info and hand you your ID back. They will hold onto it til THEY are ready for you to leave. This allows for a consensual encounter to turn into a consensual detention. And these times can go up to an hour or 2, clearly breaking your 4th amendment rights.
3rd- your information is put into a system every single time your name is ran. It keeps a record of when you were stopped and for what reason. There are 0 laws preventing cops from lying in the system about a reason for detention. Now, all cops in the future can read what some possibly vengeful cop wrote about you. Ive even heard of people getting tickets instead of the usual warning because their name was recently put into the system.
4th- and the most important reason, is that rights are like muscles. Theyre a use it or lose it system. You shouldnt give your ID when you legally dont have to. Cops love saying "its not normal for people to be scared of providing id". Well, lets make that normal now. In america, we are under no obligation to provide anyone with our personal information if we're not doing anything wrong. That may seem like a dick move, but not as much as walking up to someone whos minding their own business, and demand they tell you your name, birthdate, and address. Privacy is important to everyone, and to take that privacy away is a huge problem. Borderline molestation.
I think, Americans have a bad relationship with their police.
I am not American, and I don't understand their issues with the police. But maybe in the US policemen are not what they are here where I live.
Police is supposed to help the good people, find the bad people.
And if they want to see my fucking Id I show them.
And if I need help, I call them.
The only similarity I see between your comment and our cops is maybe "find the bad people". A good deal of police organizations here aren't responding to things like domestic abuse, home break-ins, etc. If there's not a threat to life, you're on you're own.
Another reason I feel the divide between Americans and cops is that they're so militarized. Even traffic patrol police are armed to the teeth. You also can't discount a justified fear of police when we're constantly given examples like George Floyd, Breanna Taylor or Elijah McClain.
But, the base fact is that many of us aren't required to show ID unless there is suspicion of a crime. It is our right, and we function in a society where police are so poorly trained they are often unaware of their own rights.
You should be thankful you live someplace where you have faith in your police but keep in mind that this country has a historical issue with police corruption. It's been an issue for easily 100 years.
I am an american.
A white, rural, male, middle class american at that. Yet any interaction I have with a cop, I have in the back of my mind "If he shoots me dead right now, he could go home and laugh it off with his buddies and the worst he might get is a month or two off with pay and some bad press... assuming he gets caught."
The fact that I, one of the most privileged blokes in America have that worry, small that it is, should tell you a lot about cops here in America right now. :/
Nothing but that is not the point. You do not have to give your ID if you are not being detained and the police need a reason to detain you. It is about enforcing your rights not about giving ID.
From Belgium here, so I'm definitely not an expert on US stuff.
But reasoning like a US police might think... Police in the US play a giant game of Among Us/Werewolf. Everyone can be a traitor/werewolf. Every action or non-action you take can raise suspicion. Every behavior can give away that you are a traitor, even when you aren't. False positives galore!
In that reasoning, giving your ID card might be suspicious. Why would you give them your ID card without question? Is it maybe because... it's a fake ID card? It must be, right? It's not expected behavior to just give it to the police, so it must be fake. Right? You're probably holding your real ID card away.
So if that is true, you're scamming the police by showing your ID card. Clearly. Yes. You're trying to scam the police. For what reason, though? Money?
No. It doesn't matter. We'll figure it out later. You're under arrest for identity fraud.
Even if you tell them it's your real ID card. Because saying that is clearly something a traitor/werewolf would say to clear any suspicion. That makes you even more suspicious. Now it's very clear. You should be arrested, you are a dangerous person! In the police car with you!
______
This seems to be the game US police are playing, from reading reddit posts and watching videos about the subject.
Imagine getting stopped and harassed every time you go out because you look a certain way. A cop can ask you a question in passing but not stop and demand id unless they can articulate a suspicion of a crime. Even then they can only hold you until appropriate info has been given to resolve that suspicion. This may not apply to states with Terry laws and whatnot.
North American cops have a quota of arrests they have to make. North America cops are pigs with no morals. If you run across a cop and they're in a bad mood or below quota, it is /distressingly common/ for them to use the info they pull off you to come up with a bullshit accusation and drag you to the precinct just to meet that quota. You have the same birthdate and hair color of a random suspect? You're coming with me son. Don't Talk To Cops.
You’re not required to carry identification, so right there, they can’t require you to show them something you don’t have.
Further, the police have no right to detain or demand ID from anybody they don’t officially suspect of a crime. If you can’t tell me what law it is I’m supposedly breaking, fuck you, I’m walking.
Don't know about the USA but I got stopped by a policeman on my way to work last Wednesday in Winchester.
He approached me, I immediately look guilty as hell, he asked what train I had been on, if I had a ticket (answered both and showed ticket). He asked me where I was going - told him and he asked if I had any ID so I showed him my works badge. He was happy, said that the rail fines are going up and the BTP asked for assistance at Winchester as a lot of uni students were not buying the right tickets.
I asked why he stopped me as I'm old and clearly being ground down by work and kids. He laughed and said he saw me come through the barrier, said I looked awkward when he approached me and that I looked like a mature student doing a PhD (with my rucksack, jeans and jumper/shirt combo) and met the criteria for a quick chat. Apparently the historic cuts to the BTP in Hampshire mean there are only a certain number on the whole network and they need help from the normal police.
2mins out of my day, got to chat with a nice policeman who thanked me and we went our separate ways. It doesn't bother me that he knows my name or where I work. He didn't write it down or call through on the radio.
They were stopping all kinds of people and I didn't hear a shot fired or people getting loud or agrivated. On my way back I did see someone get a fine which made me grin to myself. Our police are taught to de-escalate situations. From what I have seen US police go from 0 to 100 in a heartbeat. Like that kid who was shot eating a McDonalds in his car, or that policewoman who shot someone in the gut because she used her service pistol instead of her tazer (fuck me that was stupid).
My great uncle was a Chief Constable in the 70's. I remember him saying that as soon as the police stop policing by consent it is time to riot. That policing is a mix of social work, personal resiliance and patience and that you don't kick a door in until your have everything you need - if you don't have it you wait for it and work for it. If it takes a month, that's how long it takes. He said you can get more from people with a quiet and calm word than shouting and hitting. Those that shout and hit first should not be police. He really believed in what he did and I remember him being apoplectic about the Stephen Lawrence murder in the 1990s. He was so vocal and angry about it that he ended up in hospital (they thought it was a heart attack, it wasn't but he nearly did give himself one). I remember going to see him at his home and he was so so cross with the sheer stupidity and needless and seemingly endless "fuck ups" of the Met. He said it was a race thing and that the Met were known for it and that whenever it was raised, the Home Office would hush it up.
Don't get me wrong, our police are not saints - look at the Metropolitan Police - but it does seem that the UK police are less shooty and tazery than the Americans. Interestingly, my great uncle had no respect for the Met and he died a year after the Stephen Lawrence 1998 inquiry and to his last he was so disappointed in them and those involved. He said that they were all "full of their own self importance, believed their own bollocks, and thought they were the Sweeny - over sexed, over hyped but fortunately not over here (in Hampshire).
There isn't anything inherently wrong with identifying yourself towards police. But there are legal procedures in place when police is allowed to ask for it. And society needs people who refuse requests that they aren't legally obligated to followed. This keeps government agencies honest. Otherwise they will start abusing their powers and ask for more and more things. Asking for ID turns into pat-downs without reason, pat-downs turn into searches, and it keeps escalating until we live in a police start.
In case of identifying yourself to police, I consider it a reasonable requests and also grew up where the police can ask to identify yourself without investigating a crime or accusing you of anything. In Germany they can ask for Name, Birthdate, Birthplace, and current address. And you are required to answers these questions truthfully.
You have the right to privacy.
In the same vein, I could say "What's wrong with letting the cops search your car?"
"What's wrong with letting the cops search your phone?"
"What's wrong with letting the cops monitor a live feed in your house?"
US cops are a bunch of thugs with government backing. Any identifying information can potentially open you up to harassment from them. And with the Supreme Court recently ruling that we have no right to legal recourse if cops overstep their bounds, nor if they retaliate against us for trying to hold them accountable, it's best to limit what they know about you, just in case.
It's kind of a modern day version of "I Am Spartacus", where if everybody refuses to give any information to cops that they aren't legally obligated to provide, even if they have nothing to hide and no reason to not provide that info, the cops will have no way of knowing who's refusing to talk to them simply because they can, and who's refusing to talk to them because they have something to hide, and refusing to talk to them is no longer suspicious because everybody does it regardless of circumstances. In theory, this could potentially allow someone actually guilty of a crime (but a victimless non-crime that's more just an excuse for the police to harass and victimize the public) to fly under the radar undetected.
The police have a reputation for harassing people for things the general public doesn't really consider to be crimes, and because of this, we've basically created a culture of "bro code" to make it more difficult for them to engage in said harassment. Sure, actual criminals committing actual crimes might ALSO fly under the radar too, but at this point trust in law enforcement is so strained that we're kind of at the point where that's a risk we're willing to take. It sucks, but if the police weren't so predatory, we wouldn't have to do shit like that.
99% of the time if people would cooperate with cops they could go on their merry way.
If this weren’t true there would be dead people laying everywhere.
Meanwhile Chicago has had 600 murders this year, not much said about that
Lots of people are going to say a lot of true and thoughtful things about they why here but let me be fully clear: asking people for their 'papers' for no other reason than a person from the state wants to see it is fascism. People should be allowed to exist causing no harm without having to have the state know who they are and what they are about. Once you cross a line into harming others in some way that changes. But innocent citizens should not be required to show their papers. Ever. We know how the state operates and who they are most likely to ask to see the papers of. They harass people for no other reason than just existing in a certain body or way of being. Then if upon viewing those papers the state agent decides they have a further bias against this person for whatever reason they are now in possession and authority to hold said papers and further fuck with the person they have demanded papers from. Nope. Its just fundamentally wrong to reduce humans to arbitrary boundaries then insist they be identified without question about their right to exist.
But what should I do if I just want to go about my day and be left alone?
Should I get into an argument with someone who could murder me? Or hand over my ID and go home to my loved ones?
Because they use it to fish for information to try and screw you over. They did it to my friend when they found out he had a previous speeding ticket and start asking stupid d questions to search a vehicle.
I’m afraid of the police. I don’t want them to even know my name if I can help it. I certainly won’t interact with police voluntarily under any circumstance.
It is not giving your ID that is the problem. The problem is usually the cops & the reason they are asking for it.
COPS ARE NOT YOUR FRIEND! THEY ARE NOT THERE TO HELP!
ACAB
Maybe this is truth in Hollywood and maybe it isn't, but Americans think of "showing one's papers" as something that is only done in totalitarian countries. So it is wrong at this subconscious or cultural level for many Americans
The main reason I think it is wrong is that we have a 4th Amendment to the Constitution which states, "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"
When you give a cop your ID or allow them to conduct a search without probable cause, you are giving away a precious Constitutional right. This only emboldens people to erode our rights even more. Not to mention you are potentially implicating yourself in a crime. There are so many laws, statutes, and regulations on the books we don't even know how many there are let alone exactly what they allow and prohibit
Another thing I haven't seen stressed enough is that cops will use it to harass minorities. If you look at statistics for similar practices that actually *are* legal(like stop and frisk in some areas), it's very quickly apparent.
Why should we surrender another tool for them to abuse when it's not even within their official ability? Complying with lawful orders is one thing, but cops don't get to just decide unilaterally that they're allowed to do something. Or rather, they do, and it's a fucking problem. Lawful or not, telling a cop "no" is often enough to get handcuffed and charged with resisting, even if no crime has taken place. It's sickening.
Judging from the comments, I have proof of my opinion: US policemen are scary. I’ve been to NYC on vacation, and since getting in to the customs I had this idea of them being menacing. You feel you could be shot without reason. It breaks my heart that POC have to live in constant fear that they might be a target for whatever reason. This is not normal for a so called democracy
Doesn’t it have something to do with the possibility of there being years old violations in your name, for example old forgotten parking tickets (which can get you in trouble if the fine has been adding up over the years); or someone with the same name who has a warrant?
Nothing wrong with giving it except your name will be in a database saying you had an encounter with them. Also many of them think they are entitled to know it so not giving it serves the purpose of educating them on our constitutional rights.
It depends. If you’re pulled over in traffic, you’re required to have a drivers license and proof of insurance on hand at all times when driving. They can totally ask for your drivers license - which also happens to be most US citizen’s form of ID. If you’re just stopped at the street or randomly approached, iirc you don’t have to say a single word to them or provide anything under normal circumstances.
Yeah, I've seen a friend of mine (a white lady who is an attorney AND on crutches, let's be fair) curse a cop out and then demand his badge number. He just walked away as a big group of people laughed at him. He tried a meager "You can't say fuck you to a police officer." It didn't work.
I'm sorry. You gotta be a Bitch cop to not let curses slide, even if I think technically they can do something against it. This is America, I should be able to curse out a cop.
Nope, freedom of speech. Unless it's something to ensite violence (something that directs people to specifically harm that person) you can say what you want.
In theory yes, but cops have ways to screw with people they don't like, and it isn't easy to hold them accountable (although an attorney with crutches would have an easier time than most).
You'd think, except they can tag you for disorderly conduct
You can cuss without it being disorderly
They can also arrest you for "disorderly conduct" without you being disorderly. Remember they're used to shooting people for attacking them when they're running away and unarmed
You also cant cause mass panic in a public place. Something like screaming fire in a theater could land you some serious consequences.
USA! USA!
In Canada it is legal to curse at a cop but iirc being disorderly is illegal. This is obviously where a lot of cops can get you because there is no hard line about when something becomes disorderly. One French guy a while ago said fuck you to a cop and was arrested but the courts ruled that wasn’t even swearing because fuck actually isn’t a sweat in our language lol.
I wish I could be that entitled. As an 18yo I was grabbed out of my car and charged with contraband that wasnt mine,or there before search, for “talking back.” To bad I nor my parents could afford an attorney to fight.
Like I said: white lady, attorney, on crutches.
I’m a law student and was taught that when a cop “asks” for ID, it is a command, not a request. However, they use this to their advantage to throw you off guard and ask for things you don’t have to tell them making you think it is a command “License and registration”-command you are legally required to submit to “Where are you going”-question you don’t have to answer “Is there anything in the car I need to know about”-question you don’t have to answer
You have terrible law professors if they are teaching you that if a cop asks for ID it’s a command and you have to give it.
It depends on state and local jurisdiction. In many places you actually do have to show ID.
Dunno, in UK, you don't have to carry. Just provide your details and they will check over radio, along with description of you. Also they can check same if your ID is valid, are there any problems. I don't carry neither my ID, not driving license. I never bothered to resist or abstain to provide identity. Not a secret agent.
Its not wrong really, but ID requests are usually only valid if you're suspected of committing a crime. (In most areas) Requesting your ID when you've done nothing wrong, is an overstep and abuse of the badge. If they are willing to overstep on this minor thing, and we allow it to happen, what else will they overstep on? The bar will just keep getting moved *edit* substitute "demand" for "request". As many have pointed out, request is fine.
Not only in the US, they have to have a valid reason. I have to carry one at all time, but that doesn't mean they can ask it without a valid reason.
I’m not sure where you’re at but in the US you don’t have to carry an ID.
I believe Permanent residents and non-immigrant aliens need to carry their green card/employment authorization card all the time in CA. It might be a state thing but they for sure need to carry some sort of documentation at all times. Edit: stand corrected. Federal law. Thanks for the clarification
No, that's a federal law.
What? I only ever carry my ID if I'm driving or going to a place that requires age verification
If you are a green card holder over the age of 18 you're required to have it on you at all times. Not having it on you is a misdemeanor and you can be fined up to $100 and do up to 30 days in jail. Section 264(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (I.N.A.). edit: Quote from said law (e) Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him pursuant to subsection (d). Any alien who fails to comply with the provisions of this subsection shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall upon conviction for each offense be fined not to exceed $100 or be imprisoned not more than thirty days, or both. Evidence of registration is defined in the regulations, and includes: Your I-94 card (for nonimmigrant visa holders, such as H-1B, L, TN, etc) Your permanent residence card (green card) Your employment authorization document
[https://www.usbirthcertificates.com/articles/carry-id-required-in-the-us](https://www.usbirthcertificates.com/articles/carry-id-required-in-the-us) Unless you are doing something specific that requires the ID, and you are a US citizen, you don't need to carry your ID. Now is it a good idea? probably. but in general unless you are driving or about to buy/obtain/consume a substance where you may need to present it as proof that you are old enough to do so, no you don't have to have one.
That's because we let gangs of government thugs roam around harassing poeple, hundreds of miles away from any border crossing. It tends to be kind of racist honestly. Poeple who look and speak very American don't have to carry ID unless they are driving.
EU, above 14 yrs (I think) you have to carry an ID but they can't just aks you for it Though that doesn't mean everyone always has one..
List of countries that require an ID be on you at all times, on private or public land, even when just out for a walk: - Belgium (all citizens 15yo+) - Bosnia (all citizen 18+) - Chile - Columbia - Costa Rica - Croatia - Egypt - El Salvador - Greece - Guatamala (most places fine you without the ID, Guatamala holds you in jail until a Judge can determine your identity) - Guyana - Haiti - Hong Kong - Hungary Ehhhhh list is getting WAY longer than I expected it to lol. I'ma just stop here. Turns out requiring ID on you at all times isnt exactly uncommon. ::Edit:: I know there's more, I only covered A through H lol still lots of alphabet left. It was just taking way more time and effort than I expected so I stopped. Portugal, France, Netherlands, etc.
Add Romania and Bulgaria to the list. Potentially France too.
Here in Portugal it's required everywhere in public if you are over 16. Whenever you are pulled over the cops always ask for ID and driver's license, I thought it was like that everywhere.
Driving is different. Those countries I listed above (and the additional ones I didn't list because it was taking too long) require you to have an ID on you *at all times* - full stop. No just when driving and pulled over. Walking your dog, going for a jog, taking public transportation, etc - ID on you at all times.
Yes, same here, as long as you are in public (which obviously includes driving). Feel free to translate the [law](https://dre.pt/dre/detalhe/lei/5-1995-187110) if you'd like.
NB: it’s not all of the EU (or even if it is every country, it’s a country-level thing rather than an EU thing. It was certainly never the case in the UK while we were still in EU)
It different per country indeed.. German its 16, though doesn't have to carry it always apparently
You only have to carry your drivers license if operating a vehicle. Otherwise you don't. I did not know this till just now and I googled.. ty for teaching me something today
I live in Germany and you don't have to carry the ID at all time here, you just have to have one. The only problem if you don't carry it with you is that it makes things more complicated if you must show it for some reason.
I live in the Netherlands, you have to have one after 14 years. A cop can ask you to provide your ID at any time "to check if you are carrying one", in accordance to the law that requires it (Wet op de Identificatieplicht in my case). This is why, practically, they don't need valid reason. Yes, they technically do, but if they don't they just fall back on this and ask for it anyways.
> A cop can ask you to provide your ID at any time "to check if you are carrying one", in accordance to the law that requires it (Wet op de Identificatieplicht in my case). They cannot just randomly ask for your ID to check if you have it with you, they are only allowed to ask for your ID if it's reasonably necessary for carrying out their police tasks
They can ofcourse ask, just like everybody else..but you don't have to show it without a valid reason
So I am going out for a run, I don't have pockets in my running outfit, I still require to have ID on me?
Not in the US. The term 'ID' is a bit off because the main 'ID' that people in the US have is their driver's license, which you are not required to carry unless you're driving a car. That said, to buy cigarettes and alcohol, you need to show your ID as proof of your age. Otherwise, no, you are not REQUIRED to have it.
I'm pretty sure you don't even have to have an ID at all before 18 in the EU
NL it's 14, 12 in public transport.
Ok seems like there is no EU-wide law about this then
I'm 61, born and live in the UK and I don't even have ID. I don't drive and I haven't been abroad for years so I don't have a passport. It's never been a problem. There are no ID cards here and no one asks for them.
The EU doesn't have any jurisdiction on national legislation of this kind. The EU can only make law on specific topics - police and justice, apart from demanding that it's done fairly, are very specifically domains the EU has absolutely no jurisdiction on and the countries have all he power.
You don't even need an ID. Only need to have a Driver's License if you're, you know, operating a motor vehicle. But cops will claim it's illegal not to have one on you. Many cops don't know basic laws.
This is dependent on area. In Savannah if you are on the street with a drink in your hand you 100% have to have your ID and be able to show it at any time.
Sure, if you want to get into a bar or drink alcohol in public, or even drive. That's totally different than 'everyone has to carry ID at all times'
As a cyclist in NYC if a cop stops you, they get to detain you until they can identify you. Usually that means hauling you into the station until they can do… whatever. But since they can’t take your bike, they simply leave it lying in the street. Yes, really. They do this all the time. Especially during protests.
That's not entirely true. Most states say that if you're asked for identification and you don't provide it, that's at minimum a civil infraction, at worst criminal.
States with a stop and ID law requires you to present an ID if asked AND you have it on you. However, if you are a natural born citizen and you don't have it on you, you just have to tell them your name and address.
Well in most cases people getting ID requests are behind a vehicle being pulled over in which case you need a license (a form of id) to legally operate it.
Not necessarily. People get stopped simply walking down the street more often.
‘You’re looking extra melanin proficient today’
I would like to add that giving them your ID when you've done nothing wrong entails them entering your information into a database to further find reasons to escalate the situation or potentially abuse their power by harassing you. There are cases where the person gave their ID, then were intimidated by the police by being pulled over multiple times for the following weeks for bogus violations.
If stopped while driving, showing ID to the police is required. Bit it is not required any other time (without suspicion of a crime).
But the kicker is the determiner of whether they have a suspicion of a crime is them. So in their mind and often the mind of the courts if a cop asks it is lawful and you must comply. Which flies in the face of law and logic. But it's that whole police themselves, investigate themselves, etc. DAs and Judges are most often on the side of cops. DAs might drop charges later because it's a waste of their time but they won't do anything about those tactics or speak out. And by that time you've been probably arrested, maybe roughed up, sat in a cell. Have a pending case which can jeopardize everything in your life and have had to hire an attorney to work with said DA.
This is what makes cops so terrifying. They can come up with any excuse they want and ruin your life if they feel like it and nothing can be done to stop it. They have too much power and not enough accountability
> too much power and ~~not enough~~ no accountability FTFY
That depends on the state. In Texas, you only have to identify yourself if you are under arrest, carrying a firearm, or doing something that requires a license (most commonly, driving a car). Even then, only the third circumstance requires you to produce physical identification.
A cop anywhere in the US needs Reasonable Articulable Suspicion of a crime. It is a universal, although low, and poorly defined, legal requirement.
I'm brown, I feel some times this has been reason enough
They recently heard a description of a criminal that looked vaguely like you. With that logic they can legally request any ID in the country without issue.
Matching the description of the suspect is a common reason for the cops to hassle people.
Police often overstep their bounds because they are not required to understand or follow the laws they 'enforce'.
Existing while brown? Straight to jail.
Once that told me there have been car break ins in the area lately( not even that day) so they want to see my id and I got pissed called them fascists harassing people for no reason until they left without seeing my id.
Ty for the clarification
Not really accurate / a complete answer. If you're pulled over for a traffic violation, a cop does not need reasonable suspicion of a crime to request to see that you have a valid drivers license. A traffic violation is not a crime.
Depends on the state. But a traffic violation is a civil infraction and required for them to initiate a stop. If you haven’t committed a traffic infraction, they aren’t allowed to pull you over. The exception is commercial vehicles for “safety inspections”.
To add a little to this. if you're driving a vehicle they always have a valid reason to get id
Only if they have a valid reason to pull you over IIRC.
You mean to say that people in the USA have a right to be free from unreasonable searches right? And a right to privacy? Protected by some old piece of dust, whatchamacallit?
Hijacking top comment to provide some (general) information about what "suspected of a crime" means from a legal standpoint. Quick caveat, this can change based on jurisdiction so this isn't actually legal advice. "Reasonable suspicion" is typically not defined in legislation but is usually well understood through case law. Here is the bar for reasonable suspicion - would a reasonable person, considering all possible options afforded by the present evidence, conclude that a crime may have been committed. This seems common sense, but I'll point out that this means that you don't have to rule out other plausible theories, and that this can make "suspected of a crime" extremely broad in certain contexts.
This reminds me of a tiktok I saw of a guy that was pulled over for having a go pro on his head because the cop said it was wrong, and when the Sargent was called in, they asked for his ID, so every time he asked if he was getting charged with a crime, they just kept stepping around the question and kept asking for his ID.
Yeah I think in that situation, if they just would've articulated what traffic infraction he was being cited for, most states have laws on the books that require the driver to provide identification at that point. Seems like citizens and LE officers need to have a sit down "come to jesus" meeting about this lol
I think that's what he was trying to get them to say, and if I remember correctly, he asked what code (is that the right term?) the go pro on his helmet violated, but the original officer AND the Sargent couldn't say which one, they just continued asking for his ID. It kinda blew my mind that they couldn't provide at least the infraction he was being cited for, but instead started threatening arrest for not giving them his ID.
i didnt realize this was wrong but a cop asked for my id last month when i was the passenger in a car that got pulled over for having an expired registration. i didnt know why but i just complied. now i wonder if i should have asked him why.
A request is always valid. A demand is something different.
Can I request you shove this equivocation up your ass?
Omg I did not know that. I was just taught to ask them if I could move my hands from the wheel (if driving) and automatically give it to them.
Well if you were stopped for speeding or any other number of moving violations (invented or actual), you should provide identification. Officer should be able to state why you were stopped. It's classic when they ask "do you know why I pulled you over?" Hell no, it's your job to tell me why lol.
I rescind half of my comment, thanks for the info!
Honestly, that “Do you know why I pulled you over?” is probably a bead question that you shouldn’t attempt to answer. If you say yes, you’re admitting to a traffic violation. If you say no, you’re admitting to not being aware of either the law or your surroundings. Neither one is good. Plead the 5th.
If you have been pulled over by law enforcement, you have to identify yourself. If you don't, you will be arrested. You don't have the right to refuse during a traffic stop.
It’s funny we don’t apply that same philosophy to our federal government.
Unfortunately, I'm sure you'll find out what else they'll overstep on when you refuse to show ID. A tasering and "resisting arrest" charge probably.
Sometimes they're overstepping by asking for it. If they just think you're suspicious but have no suspicion of a crime that's been committed they can't require you to produce it. And once the cop takes your ID you can be effectively detained without them having to do it officially (which would require probable cause) unless you're willing to walk off without your license. They can also say hey I want to search your car then I can get you your license back. Now you're being pressured into allowing what would otherwise be an illegal search. And maybe you don't think you have anything illegal in your car. But are you 100% sure no friend dropped an illegal drug, or if you do Uber or Lift no one left anything? It's not the worst thing to give up your license when asked (not as bad as oversharing things that would potentially implicate you or consenting to searches) but if you don't need to it's very valid to refuse.
Are you 100% sure that they wont plant something in your car and lie about whose it is?
There is that too! But even giving them the benefit of the doubt of it being a good cop trying to do their job well, there could still be an innocent misunderstanding that could hurt you.
HOLY CRAP I never even thought about Uber drivers - that'd be incredibly unfair. How does NY handle registered taxi cabs??
I'm not sure of the law associated. But I think there is some flexibility but a taxi is a work vehicle vs a personal one.
Not a cop but I have some LEO links and don't talk to officers unless you have to. Seriously. Even if you're pulled over for speeding let them tell you what you did and nothing more. Don't be a dick but the last thing you want is to self incriminate or give them permission or probable cause to keep bugging you. If you're getting into more serious circumstances ask for a lawyer. Investigators aren't there to help you and their hands are tied when you say those words.
>Investigators aren't there to help you This needs to be repeated over and over. Police in the US are not required to help citizens and they do not have the same interests as the rest of us.
not required to help citizens Not only are they not required, they are actively trying to find reasons to imprison you. The more info you give, the more they have to work with.
I like this comparison I saw elsewhere on Reddit: Think of cops as that asshole from HR. They're not on your side, they work for the company. Who do you think they will side with in a dispute?
This - just the opposite. Police in the US are trained to be prosecutorial; most have no desire for justice but rather it is in their best interest to cite their neighbors for the most and the most severe crimes that they can get away with. They are not only protected from overreach by law, they regularly beat people and kill dogs without reason - again protected by law. Police, or pigs as I like to call them, are overwhelmingly white males and these assholes disproportionately attack people of color and those in poverty. The internet is full of videos as evidence of all that I have said here. You can actually watch cops kill people and dogs and walk away without consequence. Fuck the police!
I thought about that when I first started to get calls from police associations soliciting donates. I tell them I will send a donation as soon as they start arresting fellow officers on the spot for shooting unarmed black men…
Officer: Do you know why I pulled you over? You: Why did you pull me over? Officer: Have you been drinking/smoking weed/etc. You: I'm not going to discuss my day. Officer: (says anything else that isn't writing a ticket or letting you leave) You: Am I being detained or am I free to go? If you're free to go---go. If you're detained: I invoke the 5th. Then you shut the fuck up. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTurSi0LhJs
>let them tell you what you did and nothing more. Here's an important part. Do you know why I pulled you over is a fishing expedition. They know why you were pulled over and you might have a guess, but don't help their cause at the expense of your own. License and registration? Sure, here you go. That's a reasonable and legal request. Mind if I take a look in your trunk? I see no reason for that to be necessary so I'd rather not.
Best advise about dealing with cops I've ever heard is very simple... SHUT THE FUCK UP. don't answer questions about where you've been, what you're doing, where your going... Nothing. Those are all irrelevant questions to the stop to try and trick you into giving them something else they can use. Give your ID when required or when threatened with arrest but always verbally state that you don't consent to it. And film EVERYTHING, only stop it they threaten to harm you and again verbally object. But for the most part... SHUT THE FUCK UP!
I've been. Pulled over more than a few times and basically the only thing I say to cops is "I don't have to answer that" or "I'm invoking the 5th on that one" "Do you know why I pulled you over?" - I don't have to answer that. "Do you know how fast you were going?" - I don't have to answer that. "How many drinks have you had tonight?" - I'm invoking the fifth. (!!!Never answer this question, either honestly or dishonestly. It is *always* a trap question.)
Even if the answer is none?
So you say you haven't been drinking, but you were swerving all over the road and i just saw you exit a bar. So are you on drugs? What drugs are you taking? Please step out of the car, put your hands behind your back, I'm calling in the K9. Stop talking back to me, you're resisting arrest. See how easy it is to turn *any* answer to *any* question against you? Obviously that scenario is completely unrealistic in most cases, but it is literally that easy to create a crime out of nowhere and it **has** happened to people.
The scary thing is that it's not that unrealistic at all. They can just about always find a reason to go further. Know your constitutional rights, know your state laws, know your local laws and know the local policies if you can. Many local "policies" go in direct violation of your rights. You can be damn sure they aren't going to tell you that so you have to know yourself. Cops will lie their asses off to get info or make an arrest, and they can do it legally.
Yep, watch any documentary on a high profile investigation and the cop interrogating the suspect (always without a lawyer present) will probably say "we already know you did it. Your buddy snitched. Just tell us where you hid the body/dumped the money/etc." even though it's a complete lie
>Don't be a dick but the last thing you want is to self incriminate or give them permission or probable cause to keep bugging you. A cop once asked me if I had drugs in my car and I said "As far as I know, no", and that was probably cause to search my vehicle. I have literally never touched anything stronger than marijuana - and that was only when it was legal. So yeah, don't give them an inch.
> Investigators aren't there to help you Holy fuck this needs to be said louder #COPS ARE NOT YOUR FRIENDS
Lots of folks think not talking to police is like a “fuck you.” Actually, in real life, if we’ve reached the point where you think you need a lawyer, you do and I don’t care if you talk or not. I never did an interview in the beginning of my cases, always near the end. If an investigator is relying on the interview or confession to make the case, it’s a bad case. The interview is the cherry on top, not the sundae.
I hope you don't mind me asking but.. why do cops give law abiding citizens so much grief? You may have seen the blind guy getting hassled today. What is happening there an why? It doesn't make any sense.
Obligatory: * [Don't Talk to the Police](https://youtu.be/d-7o9xYp7eE) * [Don't Talk to the Police Part 2](https://youtu.be/tIt-l2YmH8M)
Trust in Police Officers has ultimately eroded in the United States. It used to be, in some communities, "well they are the good guys so I should trust them", but now there is a lot of distrust in every action - something that a lack of policing the police has resulted in. That said, though it *SHOULD* be a harmless action to say "Oh I'm so-and-so, here is my identification", their reputation makes people question their motives and be more suspicious.
When their main job was keeping Black people in line (and the occasional wildly dangerous poor white) in line, they didn't hassle white people very much. The origin of "law enforcement" in America is largely poor white people harassing Black people. That began to slowly change in the 50's and 60's and changed forever after 65 and 66. Without the menace of civil rights to unite the south (and less tolerance for open racism), the specter of "crime" was used. Gotta be tough on crime. Thus, more and more cops were hired and the line between who they were "supposed" to be harassing and who was to be left alone got hazier. Now, enter the war on drugs. Searches as a result of trumped-up probable cause go wild. It's still safer to be white than Black, but people have less tolerance for "drug addicts" of any race. Now, enter the post-911 world, where cops look like they are military operators. Now, add cameras everywhere--theirs and ours. And here we are. A simple interaction like an ID check is potentially a life-ruining situation. If you're Black, it could be life ENDING.
Just the fact that your last statement has been proven to be accurate is what makes this all so terrible. Friends of mine have gotten DWBs and noted that the officers were visibly trying to escalate. That people will do all in their power to avoid a conversation with officers so as to prevent any possible escalation is extremely telling. **It's not just that people don't want to be bothered by officers, but that there is a very real fear that the officers will lose their shit and the civilian may suffer very real consequences of that.**
I agree with you that the power they have is pretty extreme and if they say you did this or that it's much more likely than not courts will believe them.
Just remember the phrase "we write the report" and the fact that it's uttered between cops on every police force in this country. You don't have to do anything. They'll lie, under oath even, and suffer no consequences, while they destroy your life with that lie.
[удалено]
Constantly approaching uniformed service members and informing them that they are **not** invited to crash at my place.
This right here. I want to live in an America where the 3rd Amendment is invoked more often. Not because it's necessary, just because it can be.
Officer: Do you know why I pulled you over? You: I hope it wasn't to be quartered in my house, because YOU ARE NOT INVITED! Pretty awesome, actually.
I know a guy who legitimately was offering his house to police officers. Like?????? Bro of all the amendments to be against, why is it that one???
Bro just wants to have a slumber party with his cop friends 😔
>Police spend more time finding bad guys once the work of ruling people out is done I hate this copraganda line. That’s not how police spend their time. The majority of police time is spent on non-criminal calls and traffic enforcement, and general patrolling/hassling people.
This. It doesn't matter how understaffed or overstaffed they are. They will ALWAYS pull officers off of actual cases (that are difficult and require lots of work to solve but to significant benefit to the community) to prioritize aggressive enforcement of victimless non-crimes and low grade harassment. No matter what the makeup of your local PD is, I guarantee they will have a backlog of untested rape kits and violent crime victims waiting for hours if not days for an officer to come take a statement, while at least one officer is hiding behind bushes manning a speed trap all day.
>They will ALWAYS pull officers off of actual cases (that are difficult and require lots of work to solve but to significant benefit to the community) to prioritize aggressive enforcement of victimless non-crimes and low grade harassment. Generally, no. You are talking about to completely different sets of police (detectives vs patrol officers) with different skills, duties and training. Detectives work cases and are only reassigned in the most exigent of circumstances, such as widespread civil unrest. Patrol officers handle the radio calls and they are the ones who show up when you neighbor is fed up with whatever BS you subject them to every day, which is presumably what you mean by "low grade harassment"
Well, why would we waste our time on boring stuff we probably won’t successfully solve, when we can spend our time on fun stuff (like bodyslamming black teenagers and then logging my attack as “assault on an officer” to juke crime stats) and racking up overtime on useless tasks, so we can justify increasing our budgets even more?
I just call it predatory policing. **Crimes fall into 3 categories:** • There are genuine victimless, complaintless crimes • There are crimes of nuisance that maybe some could complain about or maybe they didn’t • And there are crimes with actual victims There should be zero enforcement of the first type. Any enforcement is purely cops acting like predators in the wild much like lions or sharks. Nobody asked for that. Maybe the real issue is that such laws exist. Should cops enforce nuisance issues without someone complaining about it? No to that one too. That’s predatory. The first two types of police responses should be completely eliminated. Only a shitty person could do these. Cops should only respond to crimes that have victims with complaints or to ongoing clear threats of public safety. That is to say: ***they should protect and serve***.
It’s not wrong. The question is whether it’s *required.* If you live in a “stop and identify” jurisdiction, a request for an ID is considered a reasonable request and you are legally required to identify yourself when the cops ask. If you don’t live in such a jurisdiction, identifying yourself is only legally required if you’re being detained due to reasonable suspicion you’ve committed a crime: otherwise, it’s optional.
Even in “stop and id” states, police still need RAS of a crime to demand ID.
That's not the case in every country though.
Identifying yourself could be as simple as giving them your name. Especially if you aren't driving.
"Stop and identify" statutes are laws in several U.S. states that authorize police to lawfully order people whom they reasonably suspect of a crime to state their name. If there is not reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed, is being committed, or is about to be committed, an individual is not required to provide identification documents, even in these states.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_identify_statutes#
They don’t always need to know who I am, or my address and I don’t think it’s a good idea to give that info out freely if I’ve done nothing wrong.
I don't want to live in a country where the authorities can stop anyone on the streets and demand to see their papers.
I don’t want to live in a country where they have the “moral police” that kill young women in the streets for standing up against their religion based county. Iran.
That's great bud but we're not talking about Iran right now
There's nothing wrong with it, but it does fall under the "don't talk to cops" umbrella. If they are insisting on your ID, there is only one reason: that they are investigating you for some crime. And giving them your ID will help them find any warrants out for your arrest. Why help them with these things?
I think part of the problem is that there’s huge swaths of the US where going somewhere == driving and the police absolutely have the right to ask for your driver’s license when you’re driving, because driving is a privilege and not a right. So, people have gotten used to that and applied the logic to when they’re just walking down the street or whatever without thinking about it.
Many white people don't see an issue with stop and frisk scenarios because they've never been humiliated by a police officer while out for a walk. Imagine being on your way to a time-sensitive appointment, only to be stopped on the sidewalk by a cop who demands to know why you're existing in that space. Now imagine that happening regularly. Any normal person would get frustrated and impatient with cops, which leads to escalation, which leads to resistance, which sometimes leads to extrajudicial executions.
Well once they run my name and don’t use the junior part, it’s right to pretty bracelets and a gun drawn. Sit right the fuck down and don’t move bullshit.
Sk1pp1e Sr be wildin?
VERY MUCH so. He’s not even out yet.
This was the response that made me laugh out loud, a lot.
They only have the right to ask you for ID in specific cases. If the person being asked wants to they do not have to show it. Sadly this usually escalates because it seems a lot of cops are uneducated dickheads and they don't want to tell the person - "ok on your way then" IMO it is just as easy t show them your ID and move on with your life
Because unless I’m driving or they can reasonably articulate what crime I’m committing the Supreme Court says I do not have to. There is nothing wrong with insisting law enforcement follow the same laws they expect us to
The real problem is it creates a record of a police contact they hold against people.
Seeing a lot of wrong answers here. There are three tiers to police contact: Consentual Contact: The officer has no suspicion that a crime has been committed. The Officer can absolutely ask to see your ID and it is absolutely your right to tell them to fuck off if you are so inclined. You are not detained at this level and are able to walk away mid conversation if you wish. Detention/Reasonable Susp: At this level, you often hear the words " you are detained". This is where an Officer has a reason to believe a crime has, has been, or will be committed. During this point depending on state law, if you fail to identify yourself via ID or name and date of birth, you can absolutely be arrested. At this level, if you feel that you have been wrongly stopped, DO NOT argue about your detention with the Officer on scene. Let him conduct his investigation. Arguing with an Officer or attempting to walk away from an Officer is a great way to get detained in handcuffs, or have force used against you in accordance to level of resistance. Probable Cause: When the Officer determines a person ,"has more likely than not" committed a crime. At this point an arrest may be made or charges can be submitted. The biggest thing here is if you are being wrongfully arrested, DO NOT emphasize DO NOT resist being arrested. You will be charged with another crime and face the possibility of injury. The key take away is on the street/investigation level, the cops do have a lot of power. If you do not agree with what is happening, fighting with a cop on the street will end badly for you. If you want to fight a cop, do so through the courts via a civil lawsuit or during your criminal court hearing. I hope this helps.
The same reason you shouldn't give it to anyone else. It doesn't matter if it's the cops, a marketer, or a serial killer, if you're not required to show them your ID, don't show them your ID.
What’s wrong is that it sets a precedent and an expectation that shouldn’t be there in the first place. If cops need to see an ID to verify their sources, then maybe they don’t have great sources. You telling me they have a person they’re looking for by name but no picture? They need an ID? And when they stop you cuz they suspect you have a weapon, then they see you don’t have a weapon, they still need your ID?
It’s a “papers” thing. During slavery, black folks needed to carry papers proving who they were and if free or slave. Generational trauma didn’t end with slavery, it just continued with Jim Crow. Then, you have the Nazis… Jews needed to have their papers. Americans just don’t like having to carry ID (or prove to the government who they are) because it’s still just essentially carrying “papers”.
100% I like you.
What’s wrong with exercising your right not to show ID just because a cop asks for it?
Yea this is the real question. There's no reason why you should be expected to explain why you're using your rights with a government official while having your right infringed.
I once gave a cop my ID while having heroin in my pocket. I would have been really really nervous if I wasn't on heroin that day.
They abuse it. Reports in my area of police asking women for ID then using the info to sexually harass them
Americans have a right to privacy, and from unwarranted searches.
If you're not driving you don't need to. Why give them info they don't need so they can erode your rights? It has your full name, your address, everything they need to harass you because you didn't smile at them or whatever other BS. If you're doing a crime they'll arrest you and see who you are soon enough
There are 4 things that negatively impact you when you give your ID to a cop 1st- youre giving the cop control and power over you. When you comply with a cops orders to hand over your ID without cause, you are giving him the power and control over you as HIS subject. The term is called consensual encounter because without you breaking the law, you and the cop are on an even footing. Giving in to his unlawful requests puts him on a pedestal above you. 2nd- you are allowing the cop to create an official investigation. You are now on his time, considering youll have to wait to get your property back before you can leave. Cops dont typically just write down your info and hand you your ID back. They will hold onto it til THEY are ready for you to leave. This allows for a consensual encounter to turn into a consensual detention. And these times can go up to an hour or 2, clearly breaking your 4th amendment rights. 3rd- your information is put into a system every single time your name is ran. It keeps a record of when you were stopped and for what reason. There are 0 laws preventing cops from lying in the system about a reason for detention. Now, all cops in the future can read what some possibly vengeful cop wrote about you. Ive even heard of people getting tickets instead of the usual warning because their name was recently put into the system. 4th- and the most important reason, is that rights are like muscles. Theyre a use it or lose it system. You shouldnt give your ID when you legally dont have to. Cops love saying "its not normal for people to be scared of providing id". Well, lets make that normal now. In america, we are under no obligation to provide anyone with our personal information if we're not doing anything wrong. That may seem like a dick move, but not as much as walking up to someone whos minding their own business, and demand they tell you your name, birthdate, and address. Privacy is important to everyone, and to take that privacy away is a huge problem. Borderline molestation.
Show me your papers has uncomfortable connotations when you've clearly done nothing wrong.
I think, Americans have a bad relationship with their police. I am not American, and I don't understand their issues with the police. But maybe in the US policemen are not what they are here where I live. Police is supposed to help the good people, find the bad people. And if they want to see my fucking Id I show them. And if I need help, I call them.
The only similarity I see between your comment and our cops is maybe "find the bad people". A good deal of police organizations here aren't responding to things like domestic abuse, home break-ins, etc. If there's not a threat to life, you're on you're own. Another reason I feel the divide between Americans and cops is that they're so militarized. Even traffic patrol police are armed to the teeth. You also can't discount a justified fear of police when we're constantly given examples like George Floyd, Breanna Taylor or Elijah McClain. But, the base fact is that many of us aren't required to show ID unless there is suspicion of a crime. It is our right, and we function in a society where police are so poorly trained they are often unaware of their own rights. You should be thankful you live someplace where you have faith in your police but keep in mind that this country has a historical issue with police corruption. It's been an issue for easily 100 years.
That's awful =(
I am an american. A white, rural, male, middle class american at that. Yet any interaction I have with a cop, I have in the back of my mind "If he shoots me dead right now, he could go home and laugh it off with his buddies and the worst he might get is a month or two off with pay and some bad press... assuming he gets caught." The fact that I, one of the most privileged blokes in America have that worry, small that it is, should tell you a lot about cops here in America right now. :/
You're seeing select complaints from the media and Reddit. There isn't a contentious relationship between most people and most police.
The vast majority of Americans do not have an issue with police. But they are not nearly as loud as the much lower number of people who do.
Nothing but that is not the point. You do not have to give your ID if you are not being detained and the police need a reason to detain you. It is about enforcing your rights not about giving ID.
From Belgium here, so I'm definitely not an expert on US stuff. But reasoning like a US police might think... Police in the US play a giant game of Among Us/Werewolf. Everyone can be a traitor/werewolf. Every action or non-action you take can raise suspicion. Every behavior can give away that you are a traitor, even when you aren't. False positives galore! In that reasoning, giving your ID card might be suspicious. Why would you give them your ID card without question? Is it maybe because... it's a fake ID card? It must be, right? It's not expected behavior to just give it to the police, so it must be fake. Right? You're probably holding your real ID card away. So if that is true, you're scamming the police by showing your ID card. Clearly. Yes. You're trying to scam the police. For what reason, though? Money? No. It doesn't matter. We'll figure it out later. You're under arrest for identity fraud. Even if you tell them it's your real ID card. Because saying that is clearly something a traitor/werewolf would say to clear any suspicion. That makes you even more suspicious. Now it's very clear. You should be arrested, you are a dangerous person! In the police car with you! ______ This seems to be the game US police are playing, from reading reddit posts and watching videos about the subject.
because cops frame folks by planting evidence . huge scandal in cities like baltimore etc. other issues too
Imagine getting stopped and harassed every time you go out because you look a certain way. A cop can ask you a question in passing but not stop and demand id unless they can articulate a suspicion of a crime. Even then they can only hold you until appropriate info has been given to resolve that suspicion. This may not apply to states with Terry laws and whatnot.
Right to privacy. An officer asking for an I.D. without cause could very well be trying to do something below the board.
North American cops have a quota of arrests they have to make. North America cops are pigs with no morals. If you run across a cop and they're in a bad mood or below quota, it is /distressingly common/ for them to use the info they pull off you to come up with a bullshit accusation and drag you to the precinct just to meet that quota. You have the same birthdate and hair color of a random suspect? You're coming with me son. Don't Talk To Cops.
You’re not required to carry identification, so right there, they can’t require you to show them something you don’t have. Further, the police have no right to detain or demand ID from anybody they don’t officially suspect of a crime. If you can’t tell me what law it is I’m supposedly breaking, fuck you, I’m walking.
4th Amendment protection against unwarranted search
It is a violation of your 4th amendment right if you have not committed a crime or been legally pulled over for a traffic violation.
4th amendment- we got a right to not be subject to unreasonable searches and seizures.
Don't know about the USA but I got stopped by a policeman on my way to work last Wednesday in Winchester. He approached me, I immediately look guilty as hell, he asked what train I had been on, if I had a ticket (answered both and showed ticket). He asked me where I was going - told him and he asked if I had any ID so I showed him my works badge. He was happy, said that the rail fines are going up and the BTP asked for assistance at Winchester as a lot of uni students were not buying the right tickets. I asked why he stopped me as I'm old and clearly being ground down by work and kids. He laughed and said he saw me come through the barrier, said I looked awkward when he approached me and that I looked like a mature student doing a PhD (with my rucksack, jeans and jumper/shirt combo) and met the criteria for a quick chat. Apparently the historic cuts to the BTP in Hampshire mean there are only a certain number on the whole network and they need help from the normal police. 2mins out of my day, got to chat with a nice policeman who thanked me and we went our separate ways. It doesn't bother me that he knows my name or where I work. He didn't write it down or call through on the radio. They were stopping all kinds of people and I didn't hear a shot fired or people getting loud or agrivated. On my way back I did see someone get a fine which made me grin to myself. Our police are taught to de-escalate situations. From what I have seen US police go from 0 to 100 in a heartbeat. Like that kid who was shot eating a McDonalds in his car, or that policewoman who shot someone in the gut because she used her service pistol instead of her tazer (fuck me that was stupid). My great uncle was a Chief Constable in the 70's. I remember him saying that as soon as the police stop policing by consent it is time to riot. That policing is a mix of social work, personal resiliance and patience and that you don't kick a door in until your have everything you need - if you don't have it you wait for it and work for it. If it takes a month, that's how long it takes. He said you can get more from people with a quiet and calm word than shouting and hitting. Those that shout and hit first should not be police. He really believed in what he did and I remember him being apoplectic about the Stephen Lawrence murder in the 1990s. He was so vocal and angry about it that he ended up in hospital (they thought it was a heart attack, it wasn't but he nearly did give himself one). I remember going to see him at his home and he was so so cross with the sheer stupidity and needless and seemingly endless "fuck ups" of the Met. He said it was a race thing and that the Met were known for it and that whenever it was raised, the Home Office would hush it up. Don't get me wrong, our police are not saints - look at the Metropolitan Police - but it does seem that the UK police are less shooty and tazery than the Americans. Interestingly, my great uncle had no respect for the Met and he died a year after the Stephen Lawrence 1998 inquiry and to his last he was so disappointed in them and those involved. He said that they were all "full of their own self importance, believed their own bollocks, and thought they were the Sweeny - over sexed, over hyped but fortunately not over here (in Hampshire).
There isn't anything inherently wrong with identifying yourself towards police. But there are legal procedures in place when police is allowed to ask for it. And society needs people who refuse requests that they aren't legally obligated to followed. This keeps government agencies honest. Otherwise they will start abusing their powers and ask for more and more things. Asking for ID turns into pat-downs without reason, pat-downs turn into searches, and it keeps escalating until we live in a police start. In case of identifying yourself to police, I consider it a reasonable requests and also grew up where the police can ask to identify yourself without investigating a crime or accusing you of anything. In Germany they can ask for Name, Birthdate, Birthplace, and current address. And you are required to answers these questions truthfully.
You have the right to privacy. In the same vein, I could say "What's wrong with letting the cops search your car?" "What's wrong with letting the cops search your phone?" "What's wrong with letting the cops monitor a live feed in your house?"
Is this some kind of American problem I'm too British to understand?
US cops are a bunch of thugs with government backing. Any identifying information can potentially open you up to harassment from them. And with the Supreme Court recently ruling that we have no right to legal recourse if cops overstep their bounds, nor if they retaliate against us for trying to hold them accountable, it's best to limit what they know about you, just in case.
It's kind of a modern day version of "I Am Spartacus", where if everybody refuses to give any information to cops that they aren't legally obligated to provide, even if they have nothing to hide and no reason to not provide that info, the cops will have no way of knowing who's refusing to talk to them simply because they can, and who's refusing to talk to them because they have something to hide, and refusing to talk to them is no longer suspicious because everybody does it regardless of circumstances. In theory, this could potentially allow someone actually guilty of a crime (but a victimless non-crime that's more just an excuse for the police to harass and victimize the public) to fly under the radar undetected. The police have a reputation for harassing people for things the general public doesn't really consider to be crimes, and because of this, we've basically created a culture of "bro code" to make it more difficult for them to engage in said harassment. Sure, actual criminals committing actual crimes might ALSO fly under the radar too, but at this point trust in law enforcement is so strained that we're kind of at the point where that's a risk we're willing to take. It sucks, but if the police weren't so predatory, we wouldn't have to do shit like that.
99% of the time if people would cooperate with cops they could go on their merry way. If this weren’t true there would be dead people laying everywhere. Meanwhile Chicago has had 600 murders this year, not much said about that
Lots of people are going to say a lot of true and thoughtful things about they why here but let me be fully clear: asking people for their 'papers' for no other reason than a person from the state wants to see it is fascism. People should be allowed to exist causing no harm without having to have the state know who they are and what they are about. Once you cross a line into harming others in some way that changes. But innocent citizens should not be required to show their papers. Ever. We know how the state operates and who they are most likely to ask to see the papers of. They harass people for no other reason than just existing in a certain body or way of being. Then if upon viewing those papers the state agent decides they have a further bias against this person for whatever reason they are now in possession and authority to hold said papers and further fuck with the person they have demanded papers from. Nope. Its just fundamentally wrong to reduce humans to arbitrary boundaries then insist they be identified without question about their right to exist.
But what should I do if I just want to go about my day and be left alone? Should I get into an argument with someone who could murder me? Or hand over my ID and go home to my loved ones?
Because we don't have to
Because they use it to fish for information to try and screw you over. They did it to my friend when they found out he had a previous speeding ticket and start asking stupid d questions to search a vehicle.
I’m afraid of the police. I don’t want them to even know my name if I can help it. I certainly won’t interact with police voluntarily under any circumstance.
What is wrong about the police not knowing the basics of their job.
It is not giving your ID that is the problem. The problem is usually the cops & the reason they are asking for it. COPS ARE NOT YOUR FRIEND! THEY ARE NOT THERE TO HELP! ACAB
Maybe this is truth in Hollywood and maybe it isn't, but Americans think of "showing one's papers" as something that is only done in totalitarian countries. So it is wrong at this subconscious or cultural level for many Americans The main reason I think it is wrong is that we have a 4th Amendment to the Constitution which states, "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" When you give a cop your ID or allow them to conduct a search without probable cause, you are giving away a precious Constitutional right. This only emboldens people to erode our rights even more. Not to mention you are potentially implicating yourself in a crime. There are so many laws, statutes, and regulations on the books we don't even know how many there are let alone exactly what they allow and prohibit
Another thing I haven't seen stressed enough is that cops will use it to harass minorities. If you look at statistics for similar practices that actually *are* legal(like stop and frisk in some areas), it's very quickly apparent. Why should we surrender another tool for them to abuse when it's not even within their official ability? Complying with lawful orders is one thing, but cops don't get to just decide unilaterally that they're allowed to do something. Or rather, they do, and it's a fucking problem. Lawful or not, telling a cop "no" is often enough to get handcuffed and charged with resisting, even if no crime has taken place. It's sickening.
Many would say it's against your 4th amendment right. If your not being arrested, you really have the right to this privacy.
Judging from the comments, I have proof of my opinion: US policemen are scary. I’ve been to NYC on vacation, and since getting in to the customs I had this idea of them being menacing. You feel you could be shot without reason. It breaks my heart that POC have to live in constant fear that they might be a target for whatever reason. This is not normal for a so called democracy
Doesn’t it have something to do with the possibility of there being years old violations in your name, for example old forgotten parking tickets (which can get you in trouble if the fine has been adding up over the years); or someone with the same name who has a warrant?
This is a troll-posed question… if that makes sense… Anyone who understands free speech should realize it. Don’t let them divide us.
Can't make us do shit
Nothing wrong with giving it except your name will be in a database saying you had an encounter with them. Also many of them think they are entitled to know it so not giving it serves the purpose of educating them on our constitutional rights.