Folks - I'm not all that familiar with this particular situation but I can tell you this - the Police have the right to ask you to identify yourself and should you fail to do so, they have the right to take it to the next step.
There are lots of people out ther who believe this sort of Police activity constitutes an infringement on their rights to privacy and push the envelope in the process. C'mon, let's get real, who is foolish enough to argue with a traffic cop............
And, let's consider that since 9/11 things have changed. Prior to 9/11 a cop may just have turned his head and considered the source. Well, things are quite a bit different today and that sort of libertarian perspective sure doesn't go very far with the terror threat listings. I may be a bit 'off' on the dates regarding the 9/11 concerns but this country has changed and so has the perspective of many.
Lots of folks are up in arms about the 'infringements' the Homeland Security rules have placed upon our freedoms. Homeland Security has not changed our freedoms - it may impact our liberty to go about exercising them, such as the right to privacy when stopped or questioned by the Police.
This is not a Police State by any means. Those of us on these forums know full well that a Police State would have taken our 2nd Amendment rights. About the only freedom I have heard about being curtailed was that of a Muslim woman in Florida who refused to have her full facial photograph taken for her driver's license because it violated her religious beliefs (and prolly would have shown her to be uglier than her brother) - well sister, get real - how do I know it is you and not your ugly brother holding the license.
I don't think I'm too far off on this and think we need to exercise some rational thought here. What is is the greater infringement on our lives and liberties - having to tell some LEO what our name is even though we believe in our rights to privacy beyond all else, or extending that right to the point where such is so widely accepted that we continue to be victimized by terrorists entering this country so openly that we never even question their names.
We haven't lost any of our freedoms, or any of our liberties. The 45 automatic in my belt is proof of that - the only thing that might be somewhat curtailed is our opportunity to extend some of our perceived liberties beyond reasonable expectation. Hay, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness does not mean at the expense of others. The pursuit of the liberty of your right to privacy does not mean you can exercise that right, liberty or freedom when it may be at the expense of others - and I think that is the crux of the matter.
However, I may be wrong or slightly 'off', which has happened before and will stand for the critique and/or disagreement. But that doesn't mean I'm going to sit idly by and openly accept an extreme approach.
Look at it this way - here I am sitting on my front porch some lovely morning having a cup of coffee when some hiker walks through my property while trespassing on my private, posted lands . I'll be polite and say 'good morning', ask what he/she is doing, how they came to be here and where they are going - silence or an attitude will merit a stronger approach. If I ask a name and get a 'right to privacy' response then my rights to privacy will be exercised to the point where I will detain the the hiker, by force of arms if necessary, and he/she can tell his/her story to the Police.
The 'I don't have to tell you my name' response simply means that you can either tell me your name or you can spend the rest of the day in the pokey while the Police figure out who you are so I can charge you with trespassing. And, please do not think that just because you want to go about your merry way, where-ever you feel you can go, doesn't mean that some mean old sob isn't gonna stick a shotgun in your face and straighten out your sense of reality. ATV and snowmobilers are like that sometimes......
Years ago I had a buttsniff 'lunching' on my posted property because he thought it was a nice place to eat and he didn't believe in posted signs. He also left his litter when he was through because he didn't believe biodegradables constituted litter. He soon became a firm believer in the right ot keep and bear arms, or as the Brits were fond of saying, British Rule Number 303, the notion of cleaning up after yourself, and that the right to privacy meant the same for everyone, not just he.
Ok, I've flapped enough. Who's up next? Mikey.
