It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I draw the line when, and if what the fear mongers say COULD happen happens.
As of right now, it is not required to attend an Oriels game...and if it is, the Oriels run a private corporation, that's their business if they want to ID people before they enter. You know they could require you show your driver license right now if they want?
When I opened my bank account, I had to provide an ID to prove I was me.
I assume when one purchases a gun from a reputable dealer you have to provide your identification, if it is a new one that is. How else do you run a background check?
I'm also pretty damn sure I had to provide ID that I was me when I vote as well...
What's the deal?
All of these things, outside of going to a ball game, makes perfect sense, and if a business wants to ID me before I enter, I either do or don't enjoy their services.
I agree with mnemeth, there should be probable cause. But lets be real, an officer could come up with anything, and if you disobey, you face a real chance of getting taken in.
I'd much rather show my ID and get on with my day. Let the A Hole cops be like that to someone else.
I still don't get it.
So it seems you have a problem with a federally mandated ID, am I correct?
If so, why do you not have a problem with a state mandated ID?
And your remark about murder..come on. Don't be a fool. That wiki article that spoke about opposition spoke of fear mongering. That's all it is.
Originally posted by Nikolam
reply to post by mnemeth1
Compensation should be granted to the activists?
You'll have a great career ahead of you if you decide to become an ambulance chasing tort attorney.
Originally posted by iamsupermanv2
reply to post by Funkydung
I could be wrong but I always though it was an offense to refuse to identify yourself to an officer when they ask.
I don't really see the problem with it in the first place...I am going to go back and read the article...it's having trouble loading right now for me.
Originally posted by Spiro
My dear friend,
From this >
Originally posted by Funkydung
Pete and Adam from Liberty on Tour were arrested in Denver for refusing to show papers.
To this >
this is free talk lives site.....an excellent freedom oriented radio/podcast the best out there that shows the tyranny and police stupidity that is looming over us and what we can do about it...
Could this be the reason they were stopped. It could very well be the case that they are known " free talkers against the police " and this could quite possably have led to them being stopped, questioned and asked to show their papers. Harassment?
It appears so.
Be safe be well,
(1) A peace officer may stop any person who he reasonably suspects is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a crime and may require him to give his name and address, identification if available, and an explanation of his actions. A peace officer shall not require any person who is stopped pursuant to this section to produce or divulge such person's social security number. The stopping shall not constitute an arrest.
Originally posted by Unit541
OK, so here's the actual language of Colorado's stop and identify statute:
(1) A peace officer may stop any person who he reasonably suspects is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a crime and may require him to give his name and address...
Originally posted by mnemeth1
I just did a write up on this for my blog.
And police wonder why people hate them.
Police have no right to conduct a terry stop, demand ID, or otherwise order a citizen to do anything unless they have probable cause that a crime has been committed.
The officers in question should be fired and compensation should be granted to the activists.