YouTube Shorts is throwing me in a rabbit hole of policeman seemingly overstepping the boundaries when stopping citizens for a routine check. The discussions often revolve around asking and not wanting to show their ID (“unless you can tell me what crime you accuse me of”). Is there a particular reason why they’re so hesitant to present their ID to the police officer? It only seems to escalate the situation. In Belgium I don’t see the harm in showing my ID when I’m stopping by a police officer. (added url as an example)
You technically don’t have to present your ID unless you’re being detained, and everyone wants to get all “MAH RIGHTS” when confronted and believing they’ve done nothing wrong.
It usually blows up in their face for sure
If by blows up in their face, you mean they get arrested and later get a nice payout for wrongful arrest.
If you can afford the representation and legal battle to prove wrongful arrest in the first place, then yeah
If it’s blatant and on video then the lawyers will come to you and probably only ask for a percentage of the settlement.
So your solution is to just let the police continue to harass people?
If the people have done nothing wrong then the cop should just fuck off and leave honest hardworking people alone.
Maybe the cops could learn a little on how to be honest or hardworking either one.
I didn’t say anything about a solution, and I agree that’s what the cop should do. That just ain’t what happens a lot of the time.
Lots of states do have “stop and ID” laws. So…
Example with the actual statute? Even Terry V Ohio doesn’t allow for identification. Just an external pat down if there is RAS. As shitty and unconstitutional as that ruling happens to be.
Roughly half of the US has these laws. Here’s Alabama for example.
Appreciate the reply. It is important to note that even those states require reasonable articulable suspicion of an actual crime and that the person is detained under such articulable suspicion. If you invoked your 4th and 5th amendment right even under those circumstances, they would have the burden to articulate in court the specific crime and why they believed you were involved in that crime. Stop and ID is a bit misleading as it still requires specific narrow suspicion that is tied to an actual crime and the person is detained under that context.
That’s true, but they have “qualified immunity” so there’s basically no consequences for them to just make shit up to get your ID anyway. When it’s their turn in front of the judge they’ll play the “glassy/bloodshot eyes + odor of alcohol/weed” card, and the most you can really hope for is them getting suspended with pay.
It’s a bullshit RAS and everyone knows it, but it gets them past the “reasonable” part of “unreasonable search and seizure” so no 4th amendment rights are technically violated and it’s practically impossible to prove otherwise. Until bodycams can capture smell, there’s really no way around it.
You’d be risking a misdemeanor charge, jail time, and time/energy/money spent on dealing with court just to avoid a small inconvenience. And refusing to ID in those states is basically begging them to search your car too, so despite how blatantly unjust it is, it’s really not worth it.