[Wolfie]

Slam dunk. Of course you have to identify yourself to police.

[Sweet Land]

Of course you have to identify yourself to police.

Why?

[blanknoone]

I dunno...could go all sorts of ways. Constitution means whatever a coupla people in robes say it means nowadays.

Wasn't there a penumbra of an emanation of privacy at the basis of Roe v Wade? Does that apply?

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Why not have a look at your bank and tax records. Nothing to hide, eh ?

[Centaur]

Er, uh, as of now, no you don't.

[green iguana]

Of course you have to identify yourself to police.

But a name really isn't identification - too easy to give them someone elses. So do we have to provide a drivers license? Those are pretty easy to fake - especially if you use an out-of-state one the officer wouldn't be familiar with. So I guess we have to give any officer who wants it our fingerprint? That would i.d. us - with a national fingerprint database of course.

[from occupied ga]

Slam dunk. Halt! Show papers!

[Centurion2000]

Slam dunk. Of course you have to identify yourself to police.

You may want to live in Nazi Germany .... I don't.

[Servant of the 9]

of course you have to identify yourself to police.

That's just a polite way of saying 'Your Papers, Please' and means the same thing. If your papers aren't 'in order' you are going downtown for 'clarification'.

This is something that happens to subjects, not citizens.

So9

[Old Professer]

Slam dunk. Of course you have to identify yourself to police.

Then why is the SCOTUS hearing it?

[Lloyd227]

"Slam dunk. Of course you have to identify yourself to police"

Well we shall soon find out won't we?

Personally, I find your response to this a little bit frightening. This certainly should NOT be a 'slam dunk' and less than two decades ago, the answer was clearly and legally "No, you do NOT have to identify yourself".

These days, I'm not so sure. What does scare me is that there are a large number of people who believe you ARE required to identify yourself and that believe this is acceptable.

"Your papers please!"

[RonHolzwarth]

reply to: "Slam dunk. Of course you have to identify yourself to police."

You would think! Unless, of course, you have something to hide! Plus, it would make a great alibi just in case someone else was committing a crime, while pretending to be you - that is one hell of a long shot, huh?

I have been detained briefly many times by officers, every single time, the officers involved were very polite, and it never took very long to clear me of any wrong doing. Except for a few speeding tickets. Bummer, huh?

BUT, I'm white, and polite.

If I were of color, or rude, or actually had committed a crime, perhaps I would feel differently. But as it is, I feel that the vast majority of police officers are just trying their best to do a very difficult job.

[harrowup]

Slam dunk. Of course you have to identify yourself to police.

Like hell we do.

Justice Antonin Scalia, however, expressed doubts. He said officers faced with suspicious people need authority to get the facts. "I cannot imagine any responsible citizen would have objected to giving the name," Scalia said.

If the man had been driving it is a fact that he would be required to show his driving license. The officer responding to this dispute only needed to determine if any assault had occured and that would be testimony from the driver...the man's daughter.

This hot shot was annoyed with the rancher's attitude...tough luck, Scalia; I don't like your attitude either.

[Dr.Deth]

Slam dunk. Of course you have to identify yourself to police.

Yeah, under the "Your papers, please" legislation that snuck through after Kristallnacht.

Are you serious?

[AdamSelene235]

Slam dunk. Of course you have to identify yourself to police

Not without Reasonable Articulable Suspcion.

[HitmanLV]

I dunno. You have a right to not incriminate yourself. Identifying yourself can be incriminating yourself. I don't know if its a slam dunk at all.

[Middle Man]

"Of course you have to identify yourself to police."

Is your house decorated in early National Socialism?