Posted on 05/07/2017 3:25:53 PM PDT by mdittmar
The Utah Supreme Court has ruled police are allowed to ask for a passenger's identification and run a background check on them during a traffic stop — even without suspecting criminal activity.
In a 5-0 decision this week, justices overturned a 2014 district court ruling that argued such police actions were "beyond the scope of a routine traffic stop."
The ruling stems from a case involving Utah Highway Patrol Trooper Jeremy Horne, who stopped a car for an improper lane change. Horne collected IDs and ran a background check on the driver and the passenger, George Matthew Martinez Jr.
(Excerpt) Read more at sltrib.com ...
I'm glad that the decision went down as it did, I am a 73 year old woman, I drive, and if an Officer wants to pull me over to check my ID and/or background he/she is more than welcome to...
I carry full coverage Insurance, have a Utah Drivers License, since that is the State I live in, have had a CDL and a Motorcycle Endorsement, and ‘knock on wood’ not one ticket in my whole time of driving...
Driving is a ‘privilege’ not a right, and to make an Officer's job easier, it's ‘hands on the steering wheel, and keeping them there until the officer asks to see ID and proof of insurance’ then tell him where they are and ask if you may take your hands off the wheel to attain them for him or her...
Life is as easy as you make it, or as hard as you want it...and thank goodness I make it easy!!!
Yep, ‘no visible means of support’ was the term officers used in the olden days.
Also hanging around an area too long was loitering.
Well crimes are committed all the time. What citizen is not guilty?
Yes, DisCon - disorderly conduct - was another beaut that could be applied to almost anything.
The article is about demanding passenger ID’s. Not the driver. A big difference.
Driving is a privilege, riding is a right. To do otherwise would be to
Inhibit movement.
Exactly. If you give up freedom for security you will end up with neither.
Unfortunately, you don’t seem to have read the article. The problem wasn’t that the operator of the vehicle had to produce documentation - the problem was that the officer was demanding the PASSENGERS had to produce documentation. Since when do I need to carry papers to RIDE in someone else’s vehicle???
Did you actually read the article? It’s about the passengers not the driver.
You woulda made a good Jew in Nazi Germany.
It’s called the right of free passage.
Verifying a valid driver license for the active driver is one thing. Running background checks is entirely something else.
Unless a member of the vehicle can be reasonably assumed to be an active fugitive or the vehicle can reasonably be assumed to have been used in the commission of a crime, my background as a passenger is none of LE business. They are assuming for no logical reason that I am guilty of something and by involuntarily allowing a background search on me I am essentially having to prove I am innocent.
It’s called the right of free passage.
Verifying a valid driver license for the active driver is one thing. Running background checks is entirely something else.
Unless a member of the vehicle can be reasonably assumed to be an active fugitive or the vehicle can reasonably be assumed to have been used in the commission of a crime, my background as a passenger is none of LE business. They are assuming for no logical reason that I am guilty of something and by involuntarily allowing a background search on me I am essentially having to prove I am innocent.
F-NO! We have police in NJ who scan plates and registration on the roll! I am the biggest proponent of war on crime in society and support of police but I see a trend where a certain part of society is getting hosed and it is not that what one would think. I never like government creep. Police are not a Constitutional necessity and law enforcement is becoming a Constitutional detriment. Slippery slope is always slippery.
Thank you for that comment...I hope a thousand ‘ticks’ crawl up your butt!!!
So you think driving without being licensed would be okay?
Afraid I can’t agree. There would be too many legal/medical and insurance ramifications.
Are you kidding? I thought that was against the rules. :)
My apologies.
Were talking about passengers here.
It is EXACTLY like 1941 Gestapo tactics. If your papers are not in order they run you in. If you refuse search of your persons or the automobile, they run you in then search you, impound the car and search it. What is different?
Americans, we are not even close to being free citizens. That is simply a fact. You need an ID to travel, you need a permit for..................... how many things. Ever watch Cops? They run people in for any and everything. Now I know a lot of them have some marijuana on them, but they would do the same to you if they wanted. They just wouldn’t find anything, and would embarrass you and detain you for an hour or so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.