Rocking the Bus - A Colorado woman takes a stand against arbitrary ID checks.

reason magazine ^ | November 30, 2005 | Jacob Sullum

[Gondring]

If she does not like it, she can go around.

Can she get a refund on her taxes going to it? Are the Feds unable to secure a roadway through a facility?

[Gondring]

ping

[Michael.SF.]

I fully agree!

[Atlas Sneezed]

Your incoherent post aside, let me say that I HATE THE ACLU.

However, I have the brains and principles to acknowledge when an organization I hate is taking an action I agree with.

[Sally'sConcerns]

Actually, it's very difficult for a property owner to have trespassers arrested.

It may be difficult to get them arrested but in Texas if it's after dark you can shoot them. Of course, a little common sense has to be used. If they're simply cutting across your front yard you shouldn't shoot them but if they're hanging out in the backyard all bets are off.

[zeugma]

The dead don't have to carry IDs.:-)

I'm glad this woman is challenging this. It does sound a lot like "an obedience test" to me too. Of course FedGov will claim that you automatically waive all your rights by entering "federal" property.

I must say that I was pleasantly suprised that it took 12 posts to get to the first supporter of the ever-expanding police state.

[thoughtomator]

By the mosque they attend.

[ctdonath2]

Small improvement to the situation. It's still just a bus on its route. Does each bus stop indicate whether ID will be required on the route? and that one faces eviction or arrest upon failing to produce ID?

[Doctor Stochastic]

"A policeman's job is only easy in a police state." - Orson Welles.

Wasn't that Charlton Heston's line?

[Doctor Stochastic]

I just love these people who use the "Constitution is not a suicide pact" term as a bases to nullify the Constitution.

I've always thought of them as "Living Document Conservatives."

[ctdonath2]

Show your I.D. and be glad someone's checking.

Why? Atta showed his ID.

I don't understand this delusion that a small piece of paper will protect us, and the RKBA should be restricted into oblivion.

The problem is that the entire premise is built on cooperation: cooperators are ever required to cooperate more, yet non-cooperators can still do pretty much whatever they want. It's stupid, backwards, and done only because it's easier to herd sheep than wolves.

[GovernmentShrinker]

The woman's claim that the Constitution gives her a blanket right "to be anonymous" is what I don't accept. The basic concept is flawed, and this is an area of law that is being exploited by a wide range of criminals, which ends up putting a lot of dents in my freedom.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Any bets she is also opposed to the War in Iraq and the War on Terror?

[Oztrich Boy]

The same thing customs agents are looking for: lack of eye contact, nervousness, something out of the ordinary, something that may set one person apart from the crowd. Plus presence equals deterrence.

In which case, someone attracting attention by standing positively on their constitutional rights not to show ID should be ruled out.

[justshutupandtakeit]

The fourth amendment does not protect one from having to show IDs. Unless it is in the pernumbra.

[gridlock]

Nothing on that page that suggest that the bus does not continue on to peon territory, nor that the report of her working elsewhere is incorrect.

Well, the little yellow line ends at the "RTD Parking Facility", which kind of indicates that the route ends there. I guess it's possible that the map is wrong, but I see no reason to assume that it is wrong.

Please explain how her destination was on the facility, yet you have no evidence that she is a government employee.

Well, I would imagine her destination was the Park and Ride Facility, and from there on to her home in her own car.

You are trying so hard to side with the enforcers, it makes me suspect you are a jackboot-licker who thinks federal government employees can do no wrong.

As for your characterization of me as a jackboot-licker, I really see no need to be insulting. You have stated all sorts of things for which you have no back-up, but you say I am the one making assumptions.

The government has legitimate security concerns and should have latitude when setting up physical security at their own installations. If they cannot demand ID's on this bus, I suspect they will just eliminate the bus route.

[Oztrich Boy]

By her own admission, she was fully aware that she required an ID and was only busted after refusing several days in a row. That would constitute notice, in my book.

As for analysis of the information, you don't think the fella asking for IDs gets to know everybody on the bus after a couple of days, so he can see who is a regular and who is not?

Like "That woman who alwways says she doesn't have ID"?

[Fishrrman]

From the article:
Johnson plans to argue that the ID requirement violates Davis' First Amendment right to freedom of association, her Fourth Amendment right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures, and her Fifth Amendment right not to be deprived of liberty (in this case, freedom of travel) without due process. A civil case raising similar issues in the context of airport ID checks is scheduled to be heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit the day before Davis' arraignment.
"Enough is enough," says Davis. "Our rights are being taken away a little piece at a time, and people are letting it happen."

This story has been getting a lot of play lately, at least on Free Republic, where it's been posted several times, with hot discussion in the followup postings.

Something tells me this case is eventually headed to the United States Supreme Court. It will give us a good idea of where the "Bush appointees" stand [in particular] on such issues, and how well the emerging "conservative Court" will strive to protect the rights of the individuals under the U.S. Constitution in the twenty-first century.

- John

[gridlock]

Can she get a refund on her taxes going to it? (if she has to go around)

Do you get a refund on your taxes if you don't take that bus at all?

The FedGuv is allowing the bus route to be on their property, but makes the minimal demand that they be permitted to check IDs. I guess they could just bar the public buses from their roadways altogether, but what would be the point?

[gridlock]

I must say that I was pleasantly suprised that it took 12 posts to get to the first supporter of the ever-expanding police state.

I always try to stay on the cutting edge..