Why Is Passenger Asked For I.D.?

Topics that do not fit anywhere else. Absolutely NO discussions of religion, race, or immigration!

Moderators: Charles L. Cotton, carlson1


Topic author
Abraham
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 8385
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:43 am

Re: Why Is Passenger Asked For I.D.?

#31

Post by Abraham » Fri Apr 20, 2018 9:42 am

From what I see on the particular LE show...it is Nazi Germany.

Certainly the driver must produce, DL, proof of insurance, reg. etc., but barring any obvious criminal activity demanding the passenger produce I.D. is exactly the kind of thing done in Nazi Germany pre-war.

Many time on this show I've seen LEO, after being told 'consent to search' is NOT granted, the officer states no problem, but due to your lack of cooperation, they'll call a tow truck, impound your vehicle and it WILL be searched. In essence, you are now out your vehicle, the search will happen, except it's now really going to cost you. So, Mr.Citizen, are you certain you want to refuse consent?

Now, to be fair, often the search is granted, criminality is discovered, and you get to go to jail and the passenger is often let go. But, at times, no criminality is discovered, though your car has been completely disorganized and you inconvenienced by time and embarrassment.


67N20
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 9:55 pm

Re: Why Is Passenger Asked For I.D.?

#32

Post by 67N20 » Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:23 pm

"Many time on this show I've seen LEO, after being told 'consent to search' is NOT granted, the officer states no problem, but due to your lack of cooperation, they'll call a tow truck, impound your vehicle and it WILL be searched. In essence, you are now out your vehicle, the search will happen, except it's now really going to cost you. So, Mr.Citizen, are you certain you want to refuse consent?"

I watch Live PD pretty much every weekend. I've never seen the police tow the vehicle away if a search is refused, however, I've seen many times if the search is refused they have a drug dog go around the car and if he "alerts", that seems to give them probable cause to search as they go ahead and do it right then, without a warrant.

User avatar

warnmar10
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 517
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 11:57 am

Re: Why Is Passenger Asked For I.D.?

#33

Post by warnmar10 » Tue Apr 24, 2018 10:08 pm

Liberty wrote:... a passenger has no obligation to produce an ID when stopped, Unless they are carrying and have an LTC/CHL, ...
What obligation do they have if they are carrying and have an LTC?


RicoTX
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 213
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:35 pm

Re: Why Is Passenger Asked For I.D.?

#34

Post by RicoTX » Tue Apr 24, 2018 11:30 pm

warnmar10 wrote:
Liberty wrote:... a passenger has no obligation to produce an ID when stopped, Unless they are carrying and have an LTC/CHL, ...
What obligation do they have if they are carrying and have an LTC?
None in my opinion. If you have a legal obligation to show an id, then you should show LTC. If not, I don't bother. Otherwise any leo could see u carrying and demand an id for just that reason. They can't use u carrying as the only reason to demand id . That's the way I see it... someone feel free to correct me though . Put it this way... If a leo wanted to see my id and the only pc was he saw my gun while in its holster... I'm probably not going to show it...Id turn into one of those dudes on youtube...but I don't go around trying to get their attention either.

Why? Because where does it stop? It may seem like no big deal... but it's a very slippery slope to a total police state. I have lots of respect for the men and women in blue...but I also expect the same in return.
NRA Endowment Life Member
TSRA Member
GOA Member

User avatar

ScottDLS
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 4419
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 1:04 am
Location: DFW Area, TX

Re: Why Is Passenger Asked For I.D.?

#35

Post by ScottDLS » Tue Apr 24, 2018 11:39 pm

Why do they ask passengers for ID? Well because when they stop you for a dim license plate bulb or failing to signal for 2 seconds before a turn...that means that you have 3 uncapped needles, two stems, a burnt spoon and an 8 ball of meth in the car! After they arrest you for the paraphernalia and possession with intent to distribute, they need to spell your name right on the report....duh. :biggrinjester:
:smilelol5: :smilelol5:
4/13/1996 Completed CHL Class, 4/16/1996 Fingerprints, Affidavits, and Application Mailed, 10/4/1996 Received CHL, renewed 1998, 2002, 2006, 2011, 2016...). "ATF... Uhhh...heh...heh....Alcohol, tobacco, and GUNS!! Cool!!!!"

User avatar

ScottDLS
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 4419
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 1:04 am
Location: DFW Area, TX

Re: Why Is Passenger Asked For I.D.?

#36

Post by ScottDLS » Tue Apr 24, 2018 11:43 pm

RicoTX wrote:
warnmar10 wrote:
Liberty wrote:... a passenger has no obligation to produce an ID when stopped, Unless they are carrying and have an LTC/CHL, ...
What obligation do they have if they are carrying and have an LTC?
None in my opinion. If you have a legal obligation to show an id, then you should show LTC. If not, I don't bother. Otherwise any leo could see u carrying and demand an id for just that reason. They can't use u carrying as the only reason to demand id . That's the way I see it... someone feel free to correct me though . Put it this way... If a leo wanted to see my id and the only pc was he saw my gun while in its holster... I'm probably not going to show it...Id turn into one of those dudes on youtube...but I don't go around trying to get their attention either.

Why? Because where does it stop? It may seem like no big deal... but it's a very slippery slope to a total police state. I have lots of respect for the men and women in blue...but I also expect the same in return.
You mean you don’t have the cell phone shaped block of wood, with 4th Amendment painted on one side and Probable Cause painted on the other to hold in your hand while driving through school zones? :anamatedbanana That’s like leaving your house unarmed. :evil2:
4/13/1996 Completed CHL Class, 4/16/1996 Fingerprints, Affidavits, and Application Mailed, 10/4/1996 Received CHL, renewed 1998, 2002, 2006, 2011, 2016...). "ATF... Uhhh...heh...heh....Alcohol, tobacco, and GUNS!! Cool!!!!"

User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 24019
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: Why Is Passenger Asked For I.D.?

#37

Post by The Annoyed Man » Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:38 am

Grundy1133 wrote:
rotor wrote:Grundy1133, I know you are relatively new here but I think you need to get some legal books about LTC and what you can and should not do in anytime you are involved with a LEO contact or worse, a shooting incident. I believe a lawyer would tell you to shut up and not give any info beyond the minimum and not consent to searches. Actually, this is not just for LTC but any police-citizen interaction. There is always the urge to talk (look at Trump saying he wants to talk to Mueller) but then there are smart lawyers telling one to shut up. You really need to know your legal rights a little better from what I have seen about your posts. I am not saying this in a derogatory manner but I am trying to be helpful.
It seems kind of borderline paranoid conspiracy theory mentality lol. I understand if you're involved in a shooting to keep your mouth shut. don't volunteer info etc. but if a LEO says "do this" as long as its not something illegal, you do it otherwise things could get out of control and you'd end up in cuffs. And if it's in violation of your rights, then you take action. like if a LEO asks if he can see your ID and you say no and then he says GIVE me your ID. do it. If you don't do it and he says step out of the car and you refuse, then I'm sure you'd end up in cuffs... just do what the LEO says and then afterward do something about it if he/she has violated your rights... I don't see how this is "sheeple" mentality. its just being smart. do what they say and take action afterward so you can avoid having handcuffs thrown on you.
I’ll take a stab at it.....

Grundy, I think you’ll find that even the most die-hard “sovereign citizen” type on this forum backs the blue as a matter of general principle. It is the fact that we are law-abiding and have a healthy respect for the law that made it possible for us to qualify for an LTC in the first place. None of us is seeking or desires a confrontational interaction with LEOs when stopped. I also get your point about not having anything to fear from being searched, etc., etc. Indeed, I used to feel and say exactly the same things you’re saying now before I moved here from California. I figured, “I’m one of the good guys, so I’ve got nothing to fear from submitting to a search without cause”. Moving to Texas (at age 54) taught me some things about the proper relationship between the governed, and government.....which governs ONLY with our consent. “Consent” is an important principle, and this is about consent, not paranoia.

The problem is this: a man who won’t stand for his principles is not a citizen, he is a subject. That is an important distinction between Americans, and say the British, or the French, or [insert citizen of almost any other country here]. We are one of the very few - indeed, possibly the only - countries in the world in which citizens are said to have rights that are absolute; rights which are not granted by the Constitution, but protected by the Constitution. The principle is that these rights preexisted our government, they preexisted the Constitution. They are OUR rights, and accrue to us for no other reason than we exist and draw breath. Our Constitution codifies those rights strictly as a warning to gov’t that its power over the lives of our citizenry is limited.

Those are our founding principles.

It is the very nature of public servants to begin to want more and more authority over our lives, justified (in their minds) by the need to do their jobs better or more effectively. They begin to think it unreasonable when a citizen stands their ground on principle, because they are “just trying to do their jobs”, and we should want to make that job easier. I understand that. It’s human nature. That doesn’t make that “need” Constitutional.

The very reason we have a society today in which it is said that the average American citizen unknowingly commits on average of three federal felonies a day - without ever intending to behave criminally - is because we have collectively acquiesced to surrendering more and more of our self-determination to the scrutiny and oversight of public servants who are “just trying to do their jobs more effectively”. We have the “Terry Stop” doctrine precisely because of that slippery slope. It has to stop somewhere.

The “stopping place” is the point at which every citizen of this country lawfully and politely, in so far as it is possible to be polite about it, and peacefully stands his or her ground when it comes to asserting their rights in the face of officialdom.

In this light, police ask to search your vehicle as a routine thing, only because people routinely submit to the search. IF people did not routinely submit, police would give up asking. Since it is possible - no matter how remote that possibility is - that there is evidence in your vehicle that you (or someone else who has been in your vehicle) committed some kind of crime of which you may not even be aware, it is foolish to expose yourself to that liability.

What kind of risk, you ask? Well..... let’s say that one of your friends is a weed-smoker, and while a passenger in your vehicle, he or she stashes some weed under the passenger seat of your car.....and then refuses to own it when your car is searched and says it is yours. Buh-bye. OR..... Let’s say that your weed-smoking friend isn’t even in the car with you, but accidentally left some weed in your car on a previous trip. You’re the person in control of the car. You’re in possession of something of which you didn’t even know you were in possession. That won’t matter to the cops. They’re going to bust YOU for that. What if one of your kids is the guilty party? Are you willing to take the rap for a wrong committed by your child? And if so, what kind of life lesson is that? (BTW, I think that weed ought to be legal, and it will probably be legal in Texas some day - but that doesn’t change the fact that, right now, it is illegal, and we are supposed to be law-abiding.)

Alternatively, you could assert your right to refuse a search without a warrant; and then police would have to obtain and produce said warrant. Said warrant is not obtainable without a probably cause. If you haven’t given them that probable cause, then you have nothing to fear by insisting on their obtaining of a warrant.

Not only that, but you’ll probably find that it won’t make a difference to most cops. They won’t be offended by your insistence on standing up for your rights. They completely understand that they’re just fishing when they do this; they understand that fishing is not illegal; they also understand that you are completely within your rights to refuse permission to search; and they understand that your insistence on your rights is NOT. AN. ADMISSION. OF. GUILT! Some will even chuckle and say, “well, you know.... I had to ask”, and then go on about wrapping up the stop. They won’t dislike you, and they won’t think you’re an unreasonable blankety-blank. In fact, in their minds, many of them will concede that it was the right thing for you to do in that situation. Their opinion of your character is going to be dependent entirely on how respectfully, politely, and peacefully you interact with them - not on whether or not you insist on protecting your rights. But they’re not going to stop fishing unless you put an end to it, because fishing is sometimes profitable for them.

And all of the above applies to the request for identification. That doesn’t mean that you should never produce ID. In fact, even though there is no more penalty for refusing to do so, LTC law still requires producing your license if you’re carrying, when asked for ID. If you’re going to comply with the law, then you’ll comply with that part of the law. Further, I can think different kinds of situations in which a law abiding citizen would be well served by volunteering their ID to police. When I lived in California, my house was located in a neighborhood quite close to the Rose Bowl, and whenever there was a game or other big event there, Pasadena police would close off access to that neighborhood streets with checkpoints, to try and funnel the traffic coming into the Rose Bowl parking area into main thoroughfares, to keep it from clogging up small residential streets. On such occasions, I would have to show my ID at the checkpoints to be able to get to my own house. I didn’t mind it so much because they had no way of knowing otherwise that I lived there, and I needed to be able to come and go as needed, plus it helped to make my neighborhood easier for local residents to move about in during those events. But absent situations like that, if you feel like this is a completely unnecessary “show us your papers” moment, you should consider declining to cooperate. Then they can either find a reason to arrest you, or to let you go. You shouldn’t make oppression easier for an LEO who does not have a proper appreciation for your rights as a citizen. Fortunately, most do, and they’re not going to push a simple fishing expedition into a confrontation if you insist on protecting your rights.

Sadly, the more that officialdom forgets whom they work for, the more and more necessary it is for the individual citizen to take a stand in defense of their rights - NOT just in the political arena, but in the everyday ‘where the rubber meets the road’ world.
Give me Liberty, or I'll get up and get it myself.—Hookalakah Meshobbab
I don't carry because of the odds, I carry because of the stakes.—The Annoyed Boy

User avatar

Liberty
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 5885
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:49 pm
Location: Galveston
Contact:

Re: Why Is Passenger Asked For I.D.?

#38

Post by Liberty » Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:58 am

The Annoyed Man wrote: Further, I can think different kinds of situations in which a law abiding citizen would be well served by volunteering their ID to police. When I lived in California, my house was located in a neighborhood quite close to the Rose Bowl, and whenever there was a game or other big event there, Pasadena police would close off access to that neighborhood streets with checkpoints, to try and funnel the traffic coming into the Rose Bowl parking area into main thoroughfares, to keep it from clogging up small residential streets. On such occasions, I would have to show my ID at the checkpoints to be able to get to my own house. I didn’t mind it so much because they had no way of knowing otherwise that I lived there, and I needed to be able to come and go as needed, plus it helped to make my neighborhood easier for local residents to move about in during those events. But absent situations like that, if you feel like this is a completely unnecessary “show us your papers” moment, you should consider declining to cooperate. Then they can either find a reason to arrest you, or to let you go. You shouldn’t make oppression easier for an LEO who does not have a proper appreciation for your rights as a citizen.
Another instance is when you are involved with an event resulting in a police report. While the officer makes his notes on the incident giving him your ID helps make sure that the information is accurate, and that your input isn't dicarded because your name and/or address was mispelled.

One tip:
If stopped and asked to leave your vehicle .. roll the windows up and lock the car behind you.
Liberty''s Blog
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy


Rex B
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 3558
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 3:30 pm
Location: DFW

Re: Why Is Passenger Asked For I.D.?

#39

Post by Rex B » Wed Apr 25, 2018 4:45 pm

Rule #1 is Never consent to a warrantless search. Never. There is no chance it can be a positive experience, but a non-zero probability it could be very negative. If it looks like they are going to do it anyway, state loudly and clearly “I do NOT consent to this search”.
Rule #2 is never give a LEO information you are not legally required to give. Be polite, comply to any legal request. Learn their legal limits and don’t let them exceed it. Keep your mouth shut

Watch this. Seriously. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
-----------
“Sometimes there is no alternative to uncertainty except to await the arrival of more and better data.” C. Wunsch

Post Reply

Return to “Off-Topic”