Is a request for your ID really an infringement of your rights?

[USM1976]

You are kidding right..you are seriously advocating this? OK..I will vote for your law if you agree to vote for a law that allows an officer to pull over people at random to check to see if they have a drivers liscense....Any officer at anytime, not just during approved taxe revenue check points .geez..What is the difference there?

Nope, not kidding and yes, I do advocate it and to me lots of deifferences...if the legislators can write for one license why not another ? The TABC laws and fishing laws are already in effect...there is no voting for them...and, they have nothing to do with tax revenue checks...the laws have to do with making certain the liquor establishments are properly registered, much like a handgun carrier would be...and, for what it's worth, I belive that if one is driving a car, officers should be able to stop them and check for license...that was the law in effect when I started police work in '77. I was a good law and still would be in my opinion.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[suntzu]

Nope, not kidding and yes, I do advocate it and to me lots of deifferences...if the legislators can write for one license why not another ? The TABC laws and fishing laws are already in effect...there is no voting for them...and, they have nothing to do with tax revenue checks...the laws have to do with making certain the liquor establishments are properly registered, much like a handgun carrier would be...and, for what it's worth, I belive that if one is driving a car, officers should be able to stop them and check for license...that was the law in effect when I started police work in '77. I was a good law and still would be in my opinion.

I really hope you do not speak for other LEO's. Stopping people with out cause. Please sir, your papers........good grief. I thought I would never hear a person on this forum EVER advocate what you just said. Totally UNBELEIVABLE.
A LEO can just be bored and start stopping vehicles to check for liscenss'''

[Fallschirmjäger]

I'm glad you quoted that, Suntzu. Now it's there for future generations to read and to make note of how some people feel.

[wingit]

I think it is like any right. Once we let them ask a out our papers then they always will. OC or CC they shouldn't approach you unless they have probable cause. Only exception is if they have been called by a private citizen. If a cop told me they received a call I would just comply. At that point they have a job to do not just harassing a gun with a gun. Whether the citizen is right or wrong I want the cop to question someone if I call.

[elmacgyver0]

So, you'll tell the officer "no, I don't have to show you anything" ?? The issue of showing proof of driving a car has long been held to be legal. So, what wouldbe the difference witha CHL. He's not searching you, he's asking for you CHL just as if he would ask for identification for any other reason. It is not a violation of your rights.

The difference is: Driving a car is a privilege. Owning and bearing arms is a right.
The second amendment to the constitution, look it up, it is in plain english.

Unfortionately we have elected "rulers" that see the constitution as a hinderance, something to circumvent.

If our so called leaders would do the duty they swore to God they would do, we would not have to grovel to the sheriffs for a permit to exercise a right bestowed upon us by God and protected by the second amendment to our constitution.

[USM1976]

The difference is: Driving a car is a privilege. Owning and bearing arms is a right.
The second amendment to the constitution, look it up, it is in plain english.

Unfortionately we have elected "rulers" that see the constitution as a hinderance, something to circumvent.

If our so called leaders would do the duty they swore to God they would do, we would not have to grovel to the sheriffs for a permit to exercise a right bestowed upon us by God and protected by the second amendment to our constitution.

I've read the U.S.Constitution probably many more times than you have...this debate is very old already...I've stated my opinion and whether anyone agrees or not I really don't care. We all agree the U.S. Constitution's 2nd Amendment for the right to KEEP and BEAR arms...if that were the case why are there regulations in every state in this country concerning carrying them ? Do you believe these regulations are an enfringement to someone's rights ?

[swmft]

Florida's permit applies to guns knives hammers mace pepper spray what have you I have been stopped for a dui checkpoint and had the leos loco about some tool hand them the permit and they scream he has a gun 20 cops to figure out that the permit also covers swards numchucks stars wish they could read but alas only fhp requires a degree

[Fallschirmjäger]

My guess is because there are a damn lot of people who only pay lip service to the Constitution, including a few who believe that random, suspicionless detainments of drivers without a shred of suspicion that the driver has committed any traffic infraction is "proper."

I can only imagine the controversy caused by such. Let's say there's some benighted jurisdiction that has a small prejudicial view towards a certain demographic. Every time, I say again Every Damn Time one of its officers sees a member of that demographic driving on the street he's stopped and made to "show his papers". Not once a week, not once a day, but ten cops lined up in a row and each one making a 5 or 10 minute detainment ".. just to make sure you're legal, compadre."

It may have been the law in '76, it's not the law now and it's not the law now because it was bad law.

[swmft]

I lived in Venezuela 8 years the police did whatever they want the next thing was a president who did whatever he wanted I am still fighting to get money for a farm his brother is now living on. It was in my wifes family for at least 100 years, no guns no rights

[Dumbledork]

I'm thoroughly enjoying reading from folks who talk about freedom, but have no problem dropping their pants for Johnny Law. :D

[carracer]

Sterile carry....

[OldVet]

The difference is: Driving a car is a privilege. Owning and bearing arms is a right.
The second amendment to the constitution, look it up, it is in plain english.

Unfortionately we have elected "rulers" that see the constitution as a hinderance, something to circumvent.

If our so called leaders would do the duty they swore to God they would do, we would not have to grovel to the sheriffs for a permit to exercise a right bestowed upon us by God and protected by the second amendment to our constitution.

Amendment 2 (a)- Seeing as transportation is essential to commerse and personal movement, the right to own and operate horse-drawn wagons on public highways shall not be infringed.

[Dennis1209]

A better question would be...

Without a social security number, how would anyone identify you?

While not specifically required by federal law, you can not exist or live without one, period!

So, your question actually becomes; need I give my SSAN?

[rmodel65]

A better question would be...

Without a social security number, how would anyone identify you?

While not specifically required by federal law, you can not exist or live without one, period!

So, your question actually becomes; need I give my SSAN?

the amish live without socials all the time...


with that said the government has to tell you what a SSN request is and how it will be used or the request violates federal law...

Section 7(b) of the Privacy Act provides that “Any Federal, State, or local
government agency which requests an individual to disclose his social security account number shall inform that individual whether that disclosure is mandatory or
voluntary, by what statutory or other authority such number is solicited, and what uses
will be made of it.” 5 U.S.C. § 552a note; 88 Stat. 1909. Although section 7 of the
Privacy Act does not itself provide for a private right of action, “the rights conferred
by section 7 may be enforced under [section] 1983.” Schwier v. Cox, 340 F.3d 1284,
1292 (11th Cir. 2003). The Plaintiffs say that Officers Nicholas and Milton asked
Raissi for his social security number without providing adequate disclosures. The
Plaintiffs seek compensatory damages, an injunction removing Raissi’s social security
number from MARTA’s records, a declaration that the officers violated the Privacy
Act, and an injunction against future violations

[Compa49]

Police can't legally ask anybody for any kind of ID without probable cause. OC, sure, but CC? Unless you're printing and they want to confirm your CCP, it's an illegal request.

Absolutely correct. Unless the police have probable cause you are not legally required to produce ID upon request. That being said it is not as clear concerning CCL at least in my state. The law in my state reads "Every licensee shall have his or her concealed pistol license in his or her immediate possession at all times that he or she is required by this section to have a concealed pistol license and shall display the same upon demand to any police officer or to any other person when and if required by law to do so." It does not clearly define when you are required or not. At least not that I have come across yet. I am a new CWL holder and am researching all the laws regarding firearms so I can be an informed gun owner.

To avoid any problems I would provide them with the info requested. What does it hurt if you aren't guilty of anything? But if you want to fully uphold your rights then you can do so. Just be ready for the police to take that as confrontational. There are youtube videos I have seen of a guy who goes around photographing various federal buildings, including the white house to make this point when the police ask for his ID. You can watch and see how the police react to him and get a real idea of how the police might react.