hgdf

Many states including WI have what are called "stop and ID laws" which don't require you to carry ID per se, but do require you to identify yourself to a police officer who has reasonable suspicion to believe a crime has or may be taking place.

Here's the WI statute:

Of course, you aren't legally required to tell them anything, however not cooperating will almost certainly prolong your encounter.

Personally, I appreciate knowing I have the right to remain silent and not cooperate, but in practice I don't really mind indulging an officer's curiosity when it's something mundane, particularly if it spares me a more formal interrogation at the police station.

Just remember, it's your choice.

DevilDog438

IIRC, per Hibel, if the law does not require the production of a physical form of identification, providing your name verbally is sufficient to meet the ID standard. I have yet to see a single statute that requires that any citizen of any state be required to have a physical, government-issued, form of identification on their person at all times when out of their home.

QUERY

Think about what you are saying. Are you going to give a cop a BJ just because he requests you give him one. You said anything, right? LEOs are not above the law. Sure, there are gypsy cops and other LEOs who are bad but they are the very small minority and they don't last.

DevilDog438

I said they can request anything they want. I did not say I would comply.

How about that cite I asked you for regarding a requirement to carry physical forms of identification?

bocastephen

You have this backwards - cops that know the law and restrict their actions to remain within it at all times are the very, very limited exception. 95%+ of cops will just push the limit as far as they can go - they have nothing to lose except having charges dismissed on arraignment. They bet you won't push a false arrest suit against them and just keep a bucket of BS handy to justify their catch-all charges of 'disturbing', 'disobeying', etc.

Frankly, I'd like to see fully empowered citizen review boards being given the power of oversight and ability to suspend or terminate any member of their police force who is found to act in a manner which is not fully and completely inside the intent and letter of the law.

stupidhead

Maybe they won't hear that if TSA was competent enough to get all the monkeys at every checkpoint nationwide to do the same thing for once. That blame lies squarely and solely on TSA and TSA alone. The TSA agents have no right to complain about hearing that line-just the fact that they're not relaying this up to their superiors or they're not doing so successfully makes them a party to the incompetence.

QUERY

To reiterate, I said police have 4th amendment privileges for reasonable suspicion and probable cause. As for local regs, hgdf provided that in a post although the link didn't work for me. I agree with what hgdf said. Also, as has been stated in this forum before, if you come upon a CBP checkpoint here in America and you do not possess an ID, you will have an indefinite delay until they are able to identify you.

QUERY

Were that the case, our society would be deep trouble. There is the media and there is the FBI to help out when there is police corruption. Also, no one is bulletproof. We had a case here in Milwaukee many years ago where 2 police officers tried to arrest someone who had not done a thing. This guy knew that and feared that he would be killed so he grabbed one of the officer's weapons and killed them both. He was acquitted of the shootings because the evidence turned out to be in his favor. Like I said previously, the bad ones don't last.

As for citizen review boards, I believe they were tried here but citizens don't deal with police matters on a daily basis so they are unfamiliar with how things work. Race factors in here as well. I'd prefer an out-of-state review board composed of ex-LEOs(retired) that have no ties to the locality where they will be evaluating an incident.

Global_Hi_Flyer

To Boca's point: there are a number of police jurisdictions that use arrest and threat of arrest as intimidation - or as punishment in and of itself even if there is no court appearance. Many police officers know (and some LEOs are trained to know) that *even* if a case has no merit and will be dismissed that the mere arrest and cost of defense for the person arrested will be as much or more than the punishment available under law.

If it costs $10,000 to defend youself against charges (20 hours of lawyer time at $500/hour, or 40 hours at $250/hour) + the value of your time + any loss to you for time off from work (vacation/paid time off/lost commissions/etc) from dealing with trumped-up charges, and all of a sudden you've spent more than the fine for a misdemeanor.

That's punishment in and of itself.

Further, an arrest alone is enough to keep you from getting a new job (or in some cases it's enough to lose your job) as most employers are running background checks. Employers are not bound by the "innocent until proven guilty" doctrine - and many will reject you for a mere arrest.

I'm not sure how well review boards w/ex-LEO types will work. There is a measure of "professional courtesy" granted between SOME LEO types, including retired. It would be like having mediation boards stacked with people from industry...

QUERY

Regarding your 1st paragraph, I don't argue that. However, there will be some reason why they do this, not just because they hate their job or are having a bad day. Granted, some will abuse their authority.

Regarding your 2nd and 3rd paragraphs, I agree with you here.

Regarding your 4th paragraph, no argument there. It's hard to get a job even if you have no criminal history. My sister told me of a Harvard graduate who couldn't find a job. If you are off from work for any length of time, and that includes going to school, you are going to have a real tough time getting a job. It happened to me, even though I had a 4.0 GPA. Before I went back to school, I never had a problem with getting a job. The economy is as bad as I've ever seen it in my lifetime, despite what others may say.

Regarding your 5th paragraph, yes, it can happen as you state. That's why I stated out-of-state where they, hopefully, would have no affiliation and where the board could be completely objective. I saw a news show once where they had hired a LE consultant to comment on a case where police officers had used deadly force and the consultant gave his opinion of the case after reviewing the facts. In his opinion, he stated the officers had used deadly force without cause. Granted, it was just his opinion and it had no legal implications but it showed that it could work.

bocastephen

I guess you haven't spent much time in south Florida where rampant abuse of people by Sheriff deputies in Palm Beach and Broward Counties is the norm. Speaking up down here is a quick and easy path to either getting your face slammed into the ground with a boot on your head or a fast-track into the back of a police car, cuffed and charged with any number of 'obstruction/resisting' offenses because you lacked respect and compliance.

Police should not be policing each other. Citizen review boards need to be comprised of citizens, not cops. Right now, cops have little to fear. They protect each other, and their union protects them as well. Government lacks the cojones necessary to curtail bad cop practices, so they should leave it to citizen groups to make sure someone is policing the police and removing overly aggressive cops from the force.

Kiwi Flyer

Closing this discussion, since the thread has veered off topic somewhat.

Kiwi Flyer
T S/S co-moderator

mikeef

I asked the moderators to re-open this thread as long as we promise to keep it on-topic so I could discuss our experience at BOS the other day.

Five years ago, I couldn't have found anything nice to say about the BOS TSA. Over the past few years, though, they seem to have developed into one of the most easy-going groups.

Anyway, we were traveling with our 21-month old twins on DL on Friday and I went to use the Platinum expert line. As soon as we approached, three rent-a-cops (not TSA, the outsourced line dragons) were on us like white on rice. I mean, virtually yelling at us as soon as we were there. We tried to turn right to use the Platinum expert line and they started screaming at us to go into the family line, since that's what the TSA prefers. I told them that I don't care what anyone prefers, we're using the expert line. We walked around them and one of them literally started chasing us through the rope line. Finally, they just gave up. Meanwhile, the other passengers were all laughing to the point of tears at the ridiculousness of the situation. Not a one of them had a problem with us in that line.

Five minutes later, the rent-a-cop found us and told us that he was "going to have somebody come talk to us." I'm still waiting.

When we reached the front of the line, we mentioned to the TSO that the line dragons needed to tone it down a bit. He apologized profusely, knew exactly which one it was who was causing the issue and told us he would correct the individual. Then, a second TSO pulled us out of line and walked us right to the front (over our strenuous objections; we really didn't want to cut the line, especially since we were near the front, anyway). All in all, kudos to the TSO for good customer service.

BTW, I should mention that the kids don't come with Blackberries, heavy metal objects or laptops, so we are easily able to get through the WTMD faster than just about anyone else.

Mike

jkhuggins

I'm not trying to disagree with you here. I'm glad that your kids are able to move through the checkpoint with ease, and I support your right to pick whichever line is most appropriate for you & your family.

Unfortunately, not every child is as well-behaved as yours are (including my own). For some, parting with a comfort item may cause as much trauma as when an adult has to put their Blackberry down to go through the x-ray. For others, obeying the simple directions to stand here, walk through now, wait here, etc., may be problematic. It shouldn't be ... but there's a reason why we call such behaviors "childish".

So I can understand why the line guardians may have questioned your choice ... though nothing excuses that sort of rude behavior.

It points out the problem with the "choose the line that's most appropriate for you" approach to screening. There's little way to tell the difference between children better-suited to the black-diamond lane and children better-suited to the family lane.

And I speak as the parent of small children here, so I'm as critical of my own kids as anyone. I haven't been through a checkpoint where we've actually had a choice of lines (or, at least, a choice that wasn't being actively ignored by everyone in line) ... but I know that my kids wouldn't qualify as "expert" travelers. I'm glad that yours do.

mikeef

Totally agree with what you are saying and I understand that my kids aren't always angels. They just happen to move through security pretty quickly.

But you hit on the snag in the whole situation. By leaving it up to the traveler, especially one who qualifies for either the expert or the family line, you are clearly slowing things down. Let's go back to the Elite line system.

Mike