[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Lawsuit Reveals CDC Has ZERO Evidence Proving Vaccines Don't Cause Autism

Trumps DOJ Reportedly Quietly Looking Into Criminal Charges Against Election Officials

Volcanic Risk and Phreatic (Groundwater) eruptions at Campi Flegrei in Italy

Russia Upgrades AGS-17 Automatic Grenade Launcher!

They told us the chickenpox vaccine was no big deal—just a routine jab to “protect” kids from a mild childhood illness

Pentagon creates new military border zone in Arizona

For over 200 years neurological damage from vaccines has been noted and documented

The killing of cardiologist in Gaza must be Indonesia's wake-up call

Marandi: Israel Prepares Proxies for Next War with Iran?

"Hitler Survived WW2 And I Brought Proof" Norman Ohler STUNS Joe Rogan

CIA Finally Admits a Pyschological Warfare Agent from the Agency “Came into Contact” with Lee Harvey Oswald before JFK’s Assassination

CNN Stunned As Majority Of Americans Back Trump's Mass Deportation Plan

Israeli VS Palestinian Connections to the Land of Israel-Palestine

Israel Just Lost Billions - Haifa and IMEC

This Is The Income A Family Needs To Be Middle Class, By State

One Big Beautiful Bubble": Hartnett Warns US Debt Will Exceed $50 Trillion By 2032

These Are The Most Stolen Cars In Every US State

Earth Changes Summary - June 2025: Extreme Weather, Planetary Upheaval,

China’s Tofu-Dreg High-Speed Rail Station Ceiling Suddenly Floods, Steel Bars Snap

Russia Moves to Nationalize Country's Third Largest Gold Mining Firm

Britain must prepare for civil war | David Betz

The New MAGA Turf War Over National Intelligence

Happy fourth of july

The Empire Has Accidentally Caused The Rebirth Of Real Counterculture In The West

Workers install 'Alligator Alcatraz' sign for Florida immigration detention center

The Biggest Financial Collapse in China’s History Is Here, More Terrifying Than Evergrande!

Lightning

Cash Jordan NYC Courthouse EMPTIED... ICE Deports 'Entire Building

Trump Sparks Domestic Labor Renaissance: Native-Born Workers Surge To Record High As Foreign-Born Plunge

Mister Roberts (1965)


Immigration
See other Immigration Articles

Title: Cops not allowed to request ID? An absurd notion that's never been true
Source: .
URL Source: http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x- ... -notion-thats-never-been-true#
Published: May 29, 2010
Author: .
Post Date: 2010-05-29 17:10:20 by Artisan
Keywords: None
Views: 1894
Comments: 105

LA County Libertarian Examiner

With seemingly never-ending angst and bickering over Arizona's recent immigration law SB 1070, proponents and supporters of the law have used several arguements in defense of it. ''It's 100% Constitutional, it simply mirrors existing federal law'', they insist. They will go on to assure that no 'racial profiling' is involved, that people won't be stopped based on race, and that people can only be asked for ID after they are stopped for legitimate and legal just cause, such as an alleged traffic violation.

This brings me to my question which addresses the very crux of the issue. Do supporters of this law believe that police were, until passage of SB 1070, legally and legitimately prohibited from demanding ID from those whom they lawfully detain?

If so, that is quite an outrageous and absurd contention. The fact is that police have always been lawfully allowed to request identification after legitimately detaining a suspect.

'But they had to do SOMETHING', they'll reply, 'the feds refuse to halt the hoards of illegals!'

While true, that the feds have purposely allowed massive illegal immigration for decades, please stick with the point at hand and simply address the question I am asking. Do you actually believe that cops across the United States have no authority to ask for ID unless each state legislature passes a 'special law' allowing them to do so? If you belive this, why do you believe it? Who taught you such nonsense? [article continues here

Related links:

Ron Paul "has some reservations" about Arizona SB 1070

Judge Andrew Napolitano speaks against SB 1070

Tom Tancredo to be keynote speaker at Arizona SB 1070 rally

Arizona's infamous Russell Pearce shills for traffic cameras, sought to bar photoblocker spray

Does race pimp 'Machete' have the cojones to 'send a message' to U.S. Congress?

Rep. McClintock gives lip service to sovereignty after endorsing open border globalists for years

Obama propagates myth that police 'duty' is to 'keep Americans safe'

Criminalizing the natural right to work, gesture, or nod in Arizona

Illegal immigration opponent Terry Anderson bars mention of 'new world order garbage' on radio show

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 29.

#2. To: Artisan (#0)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kol ender_v._Lawson

Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352 (1983), is a United States Supreme Court case concerning the constitutionality of laws that allow police to demand that “loiterers” and “wanderers” provide identification.

Edward Lawson was a law-abiding black man of unusual deportment (he wore his hair in long dreadlocks). Lawson was frequently subjected to police questioning and harassment in San Diego County, California where he lived when as a pedestrian he walked in so-called "white neighborhoods." He was detained or arrested approximately 15 times within 18 months, was prosecuted twice, and was convicted once (the second charge was dismissed).

Lawson challenged California Penal Code §647(e),[1] which required persons who loiter or wander on the streets to identify themselves and account for their presence when requested by a peace officer to do so. A California appellate court, in People v. Solomon (1973), 33 Cal. App.3d 429, had construed the law to require “credible and reliable” identification that carries a “reasonable assurance” of its authenticity.

Using the construction of the California appellate court in Solomon, the Court held that the law was unconstitutionally vague because it gave excessive discretion to the police (in the absence of probable cause to arrest) whether to stop and interrogate a suspect or leave him alone.[2] The Court hinted that the California statute compromised the constitutional right to freedom of movement.

noone222  posted on  2010-05-30   4:06:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: noone222 (#2)

thanks for the references. i have also studied the cases outlined at papersplease.org which deal with cops demanding id when their is no valid purpose. in the case of sb 1070 however, proponents keep insisting that EVEN WITH VALID CAUSE, cops were prevented from demanding id until the passage of magic 1070. unadulterated bs nonsense. government is not going to help arizonans or stop illegals. once they realize this they will see a clearer picture.

Artisan  posted on  2010-05-30   12:35:47 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: Artisan (#26)

Some say that since the "Patriot Act" things have changed ... I don't even have any I.D. ... good thing I know who I am.

noone222  posted on  2010-05-30   13:17:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 29.

        There are no replies to Comment # 29.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 29.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]