TexasCHLforum.com

Sorry for asking the question with too much wiggle room...

What if I was walking down the SIDEWALK, minding my own business...?

This is not meant to be an attack on you giga, but if a person is doing nothing more than walking down the side of the road on the wrong side, as a citizen I would prefer that the officers I pay with my taxes pass on by or if that person is actually in danger slow down and for that person's saftey remind them to be on the other side of the road. Unless this is a prelude to to other offenses the person has committed, please, please go find something more productive to do. I have seen far more people put in mortal danger by drivers tail-gaiting than I have from people walking on the wrong side of the road. Just sayin. Additionally if I am out walking in my neighborhood with my kids it is likely that while I have diapers I did not bring a "picture ID." Unless of course I am carrying.


I am sure when they wrote those laws they thought it was a good idea, but really--a law to tell people what side of the road to walk on? I suppose if I look hard enough I will find a law to tell me precisely what side of the bed I should get up on and which leg to stand on first.

Like I said, it's a problem solving tool. It's not something I'm working to combat in my zone, just a way to get figure out who someone is.

With all due respect, until you've worked the overnight shift in an area full of drugs, your good ideas about police work are just that. Come do a ride a long and you'll see how we use simple laws, like the pedestrian statutes to curb drugs, prostitution, burglaries, and thefts. Having a valid detention is a great pre-text to bigger things...

Like I said if it is a prelude to finding out other crimes that that person is engaged in--no problem--good use of resources. I am just thinking about my walks with my kids down the block to a friends house (we live in a rather peaceful area--no overt drug problems/prostitution/gang stuff) and trying to figure out if I am walking on the left side of the road as we have no sidewalks in my subdivision.

gigag04 wrote:Like I said, it's a problem solving tool. It's not something I'm working to combat in my zone, just a way to get figure out who someone is.

gigag04, not to belabor the point, but I still have a question... Do you actually need a physical identification card on you while walking down the street (without a CCW) or if/when a LEO asks you for "ID" is it enough to provide your name, address, etc.?

Even if an infraction occurred, such as the minor ones you've provided, is it illegal to not a physical identification card or will verbally providing the accurate information suffice? I understand that you would be more inclined to arrest for the infraction to verify my identity.

(Edited for clarity of the last paragraph.)

mamabearCali wrote:Like I said if it is a prelude to finding out other crimes that that person is engaged in--no problem--good use of resources. I am just thinking about my walks with my kids down the block to a friends house (we live in a rather peaceful area--no overt drug problems/prostitution/gang stuff) and trying to figure out if I am walking on the left side of the road as we have no sidewalks in my subdivision.

Always walk against traffic. I think the law was written more for safety. Walking against traffic allows you to see what is coming toward you.

hpcatx wrote:

gigag04 wrote:Like I said, it's a problem solving tool. It's not something I'm working to combat in my zone, just a way to get figure out who someone is.

gigag04, not to belabor the point, but I still have a question... Do you actually need a physical identification card on you while walking down the street (without a CCW) or if/when a LEO asks you for "ID" is it enough to provide your name, address, etc.?

Even if an infraction occurred, such as the minor ones you've provided, is it illegal to not a physical identification card or will verbally providing the accurate information suffice? I understand that you would be more inclined to arrest for the infraction to verify my identity.

(Edited for clarity of the last paragraph.)

No- verbal is fine, as long as I don't suspect you're lying. Which, isn't something I think anyone on here needs to worry about.

gigag04 wrote:Like I said, it's a problem solving tool. It's not something I'm working to combat in my zone, just a way to get figure out who someone is.

With all due respect, until you've worked the overnight shift in an area full of drugs, your good ideas about police work are just that. Come do a ride a long and you'll see how we use simple laws, like the pedestrian statutes to curb drugs, prostitution, burglaries, and thefts. Having a valid detention is a great pre-text to bigger things...

Funny, when I use the very same argument on this very board, and others here in TX Im told, No way,, you work for us, the people are in charge and we have as much right to tell you how to do your job as anyone.. We the people voted by law to allow your organization to exist, your LEO leadership is elected, or named. You have no power we the people do not give you.
..
And gigag04 what you speak of doing is a time honored tradition by law enforcement, of that there is no question, most times, on the correct side of the slippery slope.. and with best intentions and ok outcomes.
As well as anyone with an internet connection can tell you, it’s been greatly abused by LEO’s in every county, in every state in the US, thousands of times.. Odds are, at this very moment, someone in your department, right now, is abusing their authority, or running the wrong side of gray area per personal gain.. vs safety of the people..

That is just reality.. Same as someplace in my unit, some dirtbag is targeting a person they should not, running someone off the road there is no need to, or conducting escalation of force when a bit of common sense is all that is needed… We, like you and the rest of the good cops,, seek out these folks, and terminate them with prejudice.


Additionally gigag04.. I understand the requirement to ID myself,, I must not lie, and I must tell you who I am.. I did not / do not think there is a lawful requirement to present you with a form of ID..

That was the question I read above,, and what I poorly attempted to ask… Other then driving.. or carrying a concealed hand gun..

Edit while typing

No- verbal is fine, as long as I don't suspect you're lying. Which, isn't something I think anyone on here needs to worry about.

gigag04 answered the question.. Thanks

bronco78 wrote:

gigag04 wrote:No- verbal is fine, as long as I don't suspect you're lying. Which, isn't something I think anyone on here needs to worry about.

gigag04 answered the question.. Thanks

Perhaps I'm a bit dense today, but I still don't see a definitive answer. I see "You do not have to carry a physical ID unless I think you're lying." So, is there a requirement to carry a physical ID when not driving and not carrying a gun?

MasterOfNone wrote:Perhaps I'm a bit dense today, but I still don't see a definitive answer. I see "You do not have to carry a physical ID unless I think you're lying." So, is there a requirement to carry a physical ID when not driving and not carrying a gun?

From both the discussion with gigag04 and my prior understanding, there is NO requirement to carry a physical ID, but if the LEO suspects that you are lying when providing verbal identification, there will be ample pretense under other statutes to legally detain you and have your identification verified.

Have to?

No.

gigag04 wrote:If you're walking down the street (when there is a sidewalk or with traffic), and refuse to ID, I would take you to jail for it. If you still refuse, I'd add fail to ID, and do a two finger lookup.

Call me crazy, but am I the only one that takes exception to this? IMHO if you are willing to waste your time, my time, and the city/county you work for time to take someone to jail for failure to ID this seems like an extreme waste of resources for all involved.

I get if you are using it as a pre text, and how useful the contact/interaction can be...but to actually take the time to take someone to jail?

steveincowtown wrote:

gigag04 wrote:If you're walking down the street (when there is a sidewalk or with traffic), and refuse to ID, I would take you to jail for it. If you still refuse, I'd add fail to ID, and do a two finger lookup.

Call me crazy, but am I the only one that takes exception to this? IMHO if you are willing to waste your time, my time, and the city/county you work for time to take someone to jail for failure to ID this seems like an extreme waste of resources for all involved.

I get if you are using it as a pre text, and how useful the contact/interaction can be...but to actually take the time to take someone to jail?

gigag04 wrote:If you're walking down the street (when there is a sidewalk or with traffic), and refuse to ID, I would take you to jail for it. If you still refuse, I'd add fail to ID, and do a two finger lookup.

Now, I am not personalizing this about you, just generalizing my response to any generic LEO.

If I am walking down the street and my behavior is legal in all aspects (careful choice of words), and a policeman insisted on asking me to ID myself, several things would flow from that. First, since I habitually carry a voice recorder and and telephone set to speed dial and record the conversation, I would have a recording of the interaction. Second, when asked, I would comply. I am not going to win legal arguments on the side of the road, and my primary objective is to avoid arrest. Third, I would ask him why he wanted my ID. Fourth, I'd file a complaint if I had the slightest whiff of attitude.

I don't mind someone trying to do good police work asking me a question in a conversational and friendly manner. But if I get the hard attitude from a Sheriff Buford T. Justice type, I'll address that after the fact. I've led a predominately law-abiding life for 55 years (except a couple traffic tickets in my younger days) and treat LEO's with respect. I expect to also be treated with respect.

Now, your everyday gangbangers, addicts, and prostitutes? Give 'em heck . . .

55 yo otherwise law abiding citizens need not worry about getting hooked up for walking down the street where sidewalk provided.

Feather-legged charges like that are best saved for special cases. (saying it for the last time)