Man Arrested While Picking Up His Kids: 'The Problem Is I'm Black'

If a person is walking down the street is he required to carry ID on his person?

 

maybe we need to change the law then, say that within a 1000 feet of a school, you have no rights to privacy?


.

 

when cops and criminals know they are being recorded.. BOTH seem to act better most of the time...

 

In most jurisdictions....YES!

 

never heard of anywhere where ID was mandated in public.. unless your operating machinery

 

uh... no. This is just wrong. You are not required to carry identification on your person if you are not operating a vehicle. This includes if you are just a passenger of a vehicle. You are not required to carry your papers.

- - - Updated - - -

Nope .

 

States with "stop and identify" laws

Alabama Ala. Code §15-5-30
Arizona Ari. Rev. Stat. Tit. 13, §2412 (enacted 2005) & Tit. 28, §1595
Arkansas Ark. Code Ann. [1]§ 5-71-213 - Loitering
Colorado Colo. Rev. Stat. §16-3-103(1)
Delaware Del. Code Ann., Tit. 11, §§1902, 1321(6)
Florida Fla. Stat. §901.151 (Stop and Frisk Law); §856.021(2) (loitering and prowling)
Georgia Ga. Code Ann. §16-11-36(b) (loitering)
Illinois Ill. Comp. Stat., ch. 725, §5/107-14
Indiana Indiana Code §34-28-5-3.5
Kansas Kan. Stat. Ann. §22-2402(1)
Louisiana La. Code Crim. Proc. Ann., Art. 215.1(A); La. Rev. Stat. 14:108(B)(1)(c)
Missouri (Kansas City Only Mo. Rev. Stat. §84.710(2)
Montana Mont. Code Ann. §46-5-401
Nebraska Neb. Rev. Stat. §29-829
Nevada Nev. Rev. Stat. §171.123
New Hampshire N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. §594:2, §644:6
New Mexico N.M. Stat. Ann. §30-22-3
New York N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law §140.50
North Dakota N.D. Cent. Code §29-29-21 (PDF)
Ohio Ohio Rev. Code §2921.29 (enacted 2006)
Rhode Island R.I. Gen. Laws §12-7-1
Utah Utah Code Ann. §77-7-15
Vermont Vt. Stat. Ann., Tit. 24, §1983
Wisconsin Wis. Stat. §968.24

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_identify_statutes#Obligation_to_identify

There's a handful of them.

 

All of those require a reasonable suspicion. A cop cannot ask for identification without first having a reason to suspect you for a crime.

 

Like sitting outside a bank entrance?

 

Is that a crime?

 

It creates a reasonable suspicion of casing for a bank robbery. Are you familiar with the Hobbs Act?

 

No. It doesn't. Simply sitting in front of a bank does not give an officer reasonable suspicion that you're planning on robbing that bank. Not to mention casing a bank is not a crime.
No one has ever been arrested for casing a bank.

 

no, we do not arrest people for thought crimes in this country, you need proof a crime has occur, not that one may occur in the future

sitting on a public bench outside a bank is not a crime



.

 

You're changing gears and moving the goal posts. While sitting on a public bench outside a bank is not a crime, it creates a reasonable suspicion of casing for a bank robbery and makes asking for ID legitimate request. If he was sitting outside a key making kiosk that would change things. I believe this guy was arrested for resisting arrest for Obstructing an officer's investigation. he's guilty on both counts.

- - - Updated - - -

It does when you're asked to move on and refuse.

 

Not true in a public area. Unless there is a crime scene or a cop is otherwise conducting an investigation on an area you are allowed to stand in a public area and are under no obligation to obey and officer's demand to move on. Officers do not get to make up the law and are not allowed to tell you where you can and can't stand in a public area.

 

Bill, in that scenario outside of a bank an officer has enough reasonable suspicion regarding anyone just hanging out to ask for an ID. They would not have that same latitude outside a shoe store. In 2011 the U.S. averaged about 20 bank robberies per day....every day. Sorry, that's just the way it works. By all means try it for yourself.

 

No. It's not. It is not a crime to sit in front of a bank. And a cop is unable to reasonably speculate why someone would be sitting in front of a bank. Reasonable suspicion would be if he were sitting in front of a bank while taking pictures of cameras and security guards.

You can't just make up stories about people and call it reasonable suspicion. It doesn't work that way. The keyword is reasonable. You cannot reasonably conclude someone is about to rob a bank because they're sitting in front of it.

99% of people sitting in front of a bank have no intention of robbing it.

 

I live only a mile away - Mayor Coleman had a public hearing on this matter in order to diffuse the situation. Several whites voluntarily came by and testified that they use that open area every day and never once has a cop or security guard ever bothered any white person who goes there.

As always, the cops selectively question or hassle anyone who is black. Had the man been white he would have gone untouched. That is a fact. The whites who voluntarily came by said so. It is time for police here and everywhere else to treat everyone alike. Then we will no longer have racial discord in this society.

 

He claimed to waiting for his children. He has an obligation to show ID. Its a simple and lawful request under the circumstances.

 

Sure, you can thank the likes of Rev Al and Jesse Jackson for that. Not white people.

 

Not really, you may not have to show ID, but if an officer reasonably suspects that a crime is, has or is about to be committed than he can ask for ID, and if you do not provide it you be be taken to the precinct to be fingerprinted, especially in cases of trespassing where who you are could make the different of whether or not your allowed to be there or not.

That is NOT true, reasonable suspicion means that an officer reasonably believes that a crime is being, has been or is about to be committed.

You don't have to be under arrest to be stopped. You can be detained for a reasonable amount of time. You can be handcuffed if the officer can articulate that he/she felt the need to. (usually for safety).

That about sums it up.

I think it's reasonable to assume that a security guard, who is paid to be there, would know if a particular area is private or public.

Also not true, that depends on the municipality. You can be summonsed for a number of reasons where I live. Three quick examples would be blocking pedestrian traffic, blocking vehicular traffic or refusing to disperse.

If the cops are called to somewhere to investigate a situation how the hell could they selectively do anything then? they are called there, they did not just decide to go there and investigate this gentlemen. Cops have an obligation to investigate every call, even the ones that they know are nonsense.

 

^^^^ It was a public mall during regular hours. Trespassing is off the table.

 

Rev Al and Mr Jackson are responsible for white police selectively enforcing the law against innocent black men in full view of whites who are left alone.

Brilliant answer. Just beautiful.

 

That made no sense whatsoever.