Re: Identity, Persistence, Anonymity, and Accountability--Part I of II

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On 12/14/97 6:54 PM, Tim May (tcmay@got.net)  passed this wisdom:

>But note that there absolutely is no requirement in the United 
>States for ageneral form of identification. Non-drivers need not 
>have any form of I.D. And as we have seen in court cases, a la 
>Lawson v. Kolender (where a blackman in dreadlocks used to like to 
>walk the streets of San Diego...the copsstopped him many times and 
>jailed him for not having I.D. on him...the court ruled that people 
>don't have to present credentials issued by the state to walk the 
>public streets). 

  In New Jersey there is a criminal offense called "failure to
properly identify" ... I don't know if its ever been tested, or if it
is still on the books, but as of ten years ago it was there. I think
it was a misdemeanor (in NJ the term is "petty disorderly persons
offense) I cannot imagine it as a felony.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBNJXIij7r4fUXwraZAQEMvAf9FzhcodfycwA3BSV4cB5nPAqyR+6+hguK
9VG1/b7CEvEyZleD1HzRbB7i8+ycwxvtZr959FPpume5LW3eWhSsVGLEb8A9EzW3
FQXqmxa6X6LLUcPIrhfSaO8JQdPV0LXOfXwW7ZZh7s02pUmTRgpXOuM5MdHSf0nG
kKTGntI5JbaEmDgvyANXETV4EomZ/0Zm3zJiGw3M9G4aZpFl3LIgFPcOUSY1MwJI
TMGbNCS/DveeAhmM2J+oa8DbUwqVYGGhA27YHNve5rtxqkDbobsF9OMY8ssU70D0
K0uHEq+ZoobSlNHHrFP+I52RxXiKtP4blGxn8riYmjBp8H4ih6Hsbw==
=41Ml
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Brian B. Riley --> http://members.macconnect.com/~brianbr
  For PGP Keys  <mailto:brianbr@together.net?subject=Get%20PGP%20Key>

  "to be yourself in a world that tries, night and day, to make you just
   like everybody else - is to fight the greatest battle there ever is to
   fight and keep on fighting"  - e.e. cummings

>>But note that there absolutely is no requirement in the United 
>>States for ageneral form of identification. Non-drivers need not 
>>have any form of I.D. And as we have seen in court cases, a la 
>>Lawson v. Kolender (where a blackman in dreadlocks used to like to 
>>walk the streets of San Diego...the copsstopped him many times and 
>>jailed him for not having I.D. on him...the court ruled that people 
>>don't have to present credentials issued by the state to walk the 
>>public streets). 
>
>  In New Jersey there is a criminal offense called "failure to
>properly identify" ... I don't know if its ever been tested, or if it
>is still on the books, but as of ten years ago it was there. I think
>it was a misdemeanor (in NJ the term is "petty disorderly persons
>offense) I cannot imagine it as a felony.

There's an important distinction between a requirement that you identify
yourself accurately, and a requirement that you carry a particular form of
identification. It is constitutional for the police to ask you what your
name is, under certain circumstances - and you can face criminal charges if
you lie. It is not, however, constitutional to require that you keep or
carry identity cards or documents. (Modulo, of course, participation in
activities like carrying a concealed weapon or driving. There are some
people who believe that carrying special credentials should not be required
when undertaking those activities, but very few or none of those people sit
as judges, so their beliefs are comforting or pleasing but also
insufficient to prevent conviction.) 


--
Greg Broiles                | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell:
gbroiles@netbox.com         | Export jobs, not crypto.
http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | http://www.parrhesia.com

At 8:13 PM -0800 12/15/1997, Greg Broiles wrote:
>There's an important distinction between a requirement that you identify
>yourself accurately, and a requirement that you carry a particular form of
>identification. It is constitutional for the police to ask you what your
>name is, under certain circumstances - and you can face criminal charges if
>you lie. 

If you refuse to identify yourself to LE, how long can you be held (assuming their data base check turns up nothing.)

--Steve