Supreme Court hears privacy case

A.B.Normal said:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4580000/


I don't believe the authorities should have the right to arbitrarily demand ID however ,from suspects :confused: .Come on thats just f@cking stupid.
Click to expand...




in the US they can ask for ID but I dont think you have to give it unless there is reason to. I am not sure though. I think they have to have a reason to ask.
 
then yes but if it is random there has to be a reason. even if it is something like trespassing or out after curfew for kids(some areas have legalised curfew), or if there is an illegal weapon(or concealed in some cases)
 
BeardofPants said:
*pulls out chewed gum on sticks it on Gonz' forehead* Anyone got a DELUSIONAL sign I can stick on this? :p
Click to expand...


If I were delusional, this wouldn't be in court.

Define "suspects".
 
Gonz said:
If I were delusional, this wouldn't be in court.

Define "suspects".
Click to expand...


Deputy Lee Dove of the Humboldt County Sheriff's Department came on the scene - siren a-wailing - in response to a domestic violence report. Someone saw Mimi arguing with her dad and thought it had come to blows. The witness said that he saw "a man with a black cowboy hat" who "slugged the female".
Click to expand...

Domestic violence is one of the most dangerous calls for a police officer ,so asking for ID to get a background check on the "suspect" isn't a bad thing.
 
It has very little to do with this particular case at this point. Once they head to the Supreme Court it's about law & precedent.

They will have to define exactly what a suspect is since they aren't allowed to drive down the road & just ask anybody for ID all willy nilly.
 
freako104 said:
in the US they can ask for ID but I dont think you have to give it unless there is reason to. I am not sure though. I think they have to have a reason to ask.
Click to expand...

Probable cause, freako. In the case in question, I think they had it.
 
freako104 said:
yes I know chcr. I said that just not those words. but probable cause=reason
Click to expand...
That's the whole question here Freako, what constitutes a reason?

"Because I wanted to know who he was" That's a reason.

Probable cause is much different. Probable cause is that you have reason to believe the person commited a crime, whether that be statements from bystanders, or witnessing the event yourself. To allow police officers to ask for ID for any reason could be bad. But then again, is it? Why wouldn't you want to identify yourself?
 
warrants


if you had nothing to do with the incident they are resonding to, showing your ID would get you arrested. Paramount to testifying against yourself. :shrug:
 
Squiggy said:
warrants


if you had nothing to do with the incident they are resonding to, showing your ID would get you arrested. Paramount to testifying against yourself. :shrug:
Click to expand...

I see your point there, would come close to the 5th. I guess I just figure that's the type of people that should be arrested, no?
 
Oh, like the sending out announcements that they've won some kind of prize and then showing up to get it?
 
PuterTutor said:
I see your point there, would come close to the 5th. I guess I just figure that's the type of people that should be arrested, no?
Click to expand...


Getting arrested on a hold warrant for a stupid running a red light ticket you forgot to pay 4 years ago? Happens all teh time.
 
Gonz said:
Getting arrested on a hold warrant for a stupid running a red light ticket you forgot to pay 4 years ago? Happens all teh time.
Click to expand...
Are you not still guilty even if it happens four years ago? Should you not have to pay the consequences if you manage to evade the police for a certain length of time?
 
That was more in response to
I just figure that's the type of people that should be arrested
Click to expand...

Pay it - yes. Arrested for minor traffic offenses - questionable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top