- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Indiana cops bust window and use stun gun on passenger in seatbelt stop
Posted on 10/8/14 at 12:45 am to northshorebamaman
Posted on 10/8/14 at 12:45 am to northshorebamaman
quote:Nice to see another one holding the views that it is only a 1 way street.
Show respect and chances are you will not be mistreated.
What applies to us peons doesn't apply to the guards.
1
Posted on 10/8/14 at 12:46 am to Flame Salamander
quote:
You do not have to carry with you or present an ID in the US.
There is no federal requirement.
But yes, of the several states that have stop and identify laws, 4 of them require physical ID. LA is one.
Its not saying you are legally required to carry ID.
It is saying that if a cop thinks you are guilty of a crime...can he ask for you identity. And can be obligated to offer some kind of proof in those states.
If you can't, the officer has the option to arrest you.
This post was edited on 10/8/14 at 1:01 am
Posted on 10/8/14 at 12:46 am to KosmoCramer
quote:
Umm, no.
Annnnnnnd why would someone from Ohio be so well versed in LA state law?
Posted on 10/8/14 at 12:47 am to Volvagia
quote:
If you can't, the officer has the option to arrest you.
Arrest you because you don't have an ID?
Posted on 10/8/14 at 12:47 am to Scruffy
Cop get's paid vacation. Isn't that how it usually works?
Posted on 10/8/14 at 12:47 am to tjohn deaux
That mother fricker came out of the window though didn't he. You don't disrespect a man that can punish you by law. Posted on 10/8/14 at 12:48 am to Volvagia
I think the word you're looking for is detained, not arrested.
Posted on 10/8/14 at 12:51 am to KosmoCramer
Actually, the word I am looking for is arrested.
Because if you refuse, it is an resisting an officer charge.
As in, the same as striking an officier.
I'm not saying it isn't stupid, I am just saying what they can do according to actual law.
So again, why is someone from Ohio speaking so certainly about a state's laws a thousand miles away?
Because if you refuse, it is an resisting an officer charge.
As in, the same as striking an officier.
I'm not saying it isn't stupid, I am just saying what they can do according to actual law.
So again, why is someone from Ohio speaking so certainly about a state's laws a thousand miles away?
Posted on 10/8/14 at 12:53 am to Volvagia
quote:
Actually, the word I am looking for is arrested.
Because if you refuse, it is an resisting an officer charge.
As in, the same as striking an officier.
I'm not saying it isn't stupid, I am just saying what they can do according to actual law.
So again, why is someone from Ohio speaking so certainly about a state's laws a thousand miles away?
quote:
§108. Resisting an officer
A. Resisting an officer is the intentional interference with, opposition or resistance to, or obstruction of an individual acting in his official capacity and authorized by law to make a lawful arrest, lawful detention, or seizure of property or to serve any lawful process or court order when the offender knows or has reason to know that the person arresting, detaining, seizing property, or serving process is acting in his official capacity.
B.(1) The phrase "obstruction of" as used herein shall, in addition to its common meaning, signification, and connotation mean the following:
(a) Flight by one sought to be arrested before the arresting officer can restrain him and after notice is given that he is under arrest.
(b) Any violence toward or any resistance or opposition to the arresting officer after the arrested party is actually placed under arrest and before he is incarcerated in jail.
(c) Refusal by the arrested or detained party to give his name and make his identity known to the arresting or detaining officer or providing false information regarding the identity of such party to the officer.
(d) Congregation with others on a public street and refusal to move on when ordered by the officer.
(2) The word "officer" as used herein means any peace officer, as defined in R.S. 40:2402, and includes deputy sheriffs, municipal police officers, probation and parole officers, city marshals and deputies, and wildlife enforcement agents.
C. Whoever commits the crime of resisting an officer shall be fined not more than five hundred dollars or be imprisoned for not more than six months, or both.
I was just going by the statute in the State of Louisiana.
This post was edited on 10/8/14 at 12:55 am
Posted on 10/8/14 at 12:56 am to KosmoCramer
Okayyyy.
That doesn't argue with anything that I said.
An officer may be willing to just take you at your word.
But he wouldn't be stepping outside of the law asking for further verification.
That doesn't argue with anything that I said.
quote:
Its not saying you are legally required to carry ID.
It is saying that if a cop thinks you are guilty of a crime...can he ask for you identity. And you can be obligated to offer some kind of proof in those states.
An officer may be willing to just take you at your word.
But he wouldn't be stepping outside of the law asking for further verification.
This post was edited on 10/8/14 at 1:01 am
Posted on 10/8/14 at 12:57 am to Volvagia
quote:
Okayyyy.
That doesn't argue with anything that I said.
Where in the statute does it say this:
quote:
But yes, of the several states that have stop and identify laws, 4 of them require physical ID. LA is one.
Posted on 10/8/14 at 1:00 am to KosmoCramer
Bad phrasing.
See above quote
See above quote
Posted on 10/8/14 at 1:01 am to KosmoCramer
These pigs are out of control. I'm surprised they didn't punch the daughter.
Posted on 10/8/14 at 1:02 am to Volvagia
quote:
But he wouldn't be stepping outside of the law asking for further verification.
It is a slightly grayer area since they say you must identify but you certainly can't be arrested just because you can't provide an ID, that's ridiculous.
Posted on 10/8/14 at 1:04 am to Volvagia
quote:
Bad phrasing. See above quote
You didn't mean to say it was law to show physical identification or face arrest even though you just said so explicitly. Hahaha.
This post was edited on 10/8/14 at 1:05 am
Posted on 10/8/14 at 1:06 am to KosmoCramer
Well true.
There is a cascade of events that must occur to get to that point.
But getting back to the original point: Its gray enough that if you are asked to provide ID....you can't really say "You can't ask me that" in these states. Its easier to just give him the damn ID rather than being an a-hole over such a minor thing that you might actually be in the wrong standing over anyway.
There is a cascade of events that must occur to get to that point.
But getting back to the original point: Its gray enough that if you are asked to provide ID....you can't really say "You can't ask me that" in these states. Its easier to just give him the damn ID rather than being an a-hole over such a minor thing that you might actually be in the wrong standing over anyway.
Posted on 10/8/14 at 1:08 am to The Third Leg
When someone says ID, they mean a government or institution issued one.
That was what I said was not required to carry.
But you can offer proof of your claim that isn't ID.
A credit card, a vehicle registration, etc etc etc.
See the difference?
That was what I said was not required to carry.
But you can offer proof of your claim that isn't ID.
A credit card, a vehicle registration, etc etc etc.
See the difference?
Posted on 10/8/14 at 1:09 am to Volvagia
quote:
But getting back to the original point: Its gray enough that if you are asked to provide ID....you can't really say "You can't ask me that" in these states. Its easier to just give him the damn ID rather than being an a-hole over such a minor thing that you might actually be in the wrong standing over anyway.
It's not really a gray area at all, you don't need to provide a physical ID at all just identifying information aka name, DOB and address.
quote:
Its easier to just give him the damn ID rather than being an a-hole over such a minor thing
It's also easier to just let the police trample over your rights in other areas as well, but that doesn't mean I have to allow them to do it to me.
Posted on 10/8/14 at 1:13 am to Volvagia
quote:
That was what I said was not required to carry.
But you can offer proof of your claim that isn't ID.
A credit card, a vehicle registration, etc etc etc.
I don't think you understand the law in your own state. You MUST provide identifying information when requested. Failure to do so is resisting arrest.
Identifying information doesn't include a physical ID.
Posted on 10/8/14 at 1:14 am to KosmoCramer
quote:
It's not really a gray area at all, you don't need to provide a physical ID at all just identifying information aka name, DOB and address.
You do realize there is actually legal precedent of just that
Lots of times.
And the couple of times where it went to the Supreme Court, they sidestepped actually saying it can't be enforced that way
When opponents can cites the same case law for opposite new points, it is the very soul of "grey area."
This post was edited on 10/8/14 at 1:16 am
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News