Papers, please. - Page 2

**CingularDuality** · 01-18-2006, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pokerface

No. She was a bus passenger. If $1.50 and a forged ID are enough to gain access to a federal facility, "secure" is not a word I'd be using to describe it.

The effectiveness of the ID checks and the sloppiness of the guards on other occasions are not the issue here. We all know that IDs can be faked. Are you proposing that we stop checking IDs before serving alcohol to young looking people because they might be fake?

Quote:

Either 1) the bus shouldn't have been there, as the facility is "secure" or 2) the bus should be allowed passage as a bus.

Says who? The law and logical practicality indicate otherwise.

Buck Fush · 01-18-2006, 02:01 PM

This RTD route was in place well before 9/11. The mistake the city has made is that the route wasn't changed when it was decided that the DFC needed tighter security. Checking the IDs of passengers is not security. Not allowing a public bus to enter a federal complex is security. I agree with this lady that this was more of a lesson in compliance.

The not requiring ID for beer purchases is actually supportive of the idea that ID is not security. How many minors do you think purchase beer every weekend using some sort of faked ID? I used to. My fake ID was made by blowing up a real ID on the wall behind me using a positive projector and taking a Polaroid of me standing in front of it.(We didn't have Photoshop in my day.) Faking IDs is very simple.

I can picture the day that every American citizen is required to have traveling papers to move between work and home and this is how it starts.

edited to remove redundant statements from opp (other people's posts)

ScratchMonkey · 01-18-2006, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buck Fush

I can picture the day that every American citizen is required to have traveling papers to move between work and home and this is how it starts.

Smells like frog soup.

IceCold · 01-18-2006, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buck Fush

The not requiring ID for beer purchases is actually supportive of the idea that ID is not security. How many minors do you think purchase beer every weekend using some sort of faked ID? I used to. My fake ID was made by blowing up a real ID on the wall behind me using a positive projector and taking a Polaroid of me standing in front of it.(We didn't have Photoshop in my day.) Faking IDs is very simple.

So you think we should just stop checking ID for alcohol sales?

(Glad to see that you're down with OPP, btw...)

JMJ · 01-19-2006, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokingTarpan

This brings to memory an situation that I was involved in several years ago.

I work on a college campus and help run a network of computer labs. One day I was sitting in my office in the back of one of our labs, and as the lab worker came in they messed up the code for the alarm, and the alarm went off. I went out and helped the guy to turn it off, and as usual police showed up about 15min later to make sure everything was okay. He came into the back office where I and several others were sitting at our desks working, and asked if all was well. Since I was the closest, I spoke up and said yea, it's all good. He asked me for ID, which is fairly understandable given the whole alarm thing. But after seeing my ID, he took out a notebook and proceeded to grill me. He wanted my SSN, height, weight, all sorts of stuff, even to know if I had any tattoos or distinguishing marks on my body. He was a bit overbearing, and made it seem like this was absolutely required (I routinely answer alarm calls in the middle of the night, and I've only even been asked for ID one other time). At the time I thought nothing of it and complied, but a short while later I became quite angry; I felt like I was treated as if I had done something wrong. I'm still pissed about that to this day, and have done what I can in the meantime to learn what I'm required to do in a situation versus what an official would like me to do.

This is one of the reasons I worry about things in this country done for "security" purposes. We go from making sure terrorists don't get onto planes with bombs to (basically) rent-a-cops getting an everyday citizen on a bus arrested.

I would've told Mr. Powertrip to go pound sand. He had no PC on your guys, he shouldn't have been asking for anything.

**leejo** · 01-19-2006, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Addict

This statement concerns me. There is no caveat, no "cirumstances" or anything with your statement. Were you just talking about THIS case, where a bus is entering a federal area? 'cause from your statement without any qualifiers, it seems to follow that you'd support a police officer(and even a private security guard?) being able to, at anytime in any public space (since we were talking about a *public* bus) and without any specific or probable cause, demand IDs. I believe that falls into unreasonable and unwarrented searches. Am I reading you wrong? I'm not really trying to tell you what you said, just the impression that statement made on me.

I liked Cing's summary because it removed the woman's rude actions and the security's (imo) over zealous physical reaction, both of which clouded the issue for me. That helped me see the side of the security guard's that my gut reaction to protect citizen's privacy had obscured. From one point of view, they were entering a federal area, and when security is heightened anyone who has an ID must show it. That is security there(however effective or ineffective seems imaterial to the discussion so far), wether they are entering by bus, car, or on foot, so be it. But it DOES seem completely unfair(not to mention idiotic) that they would allow people WITHOUT id to stay on the bus, but people WITH ID that won't show it, they say can't enter?

HOWEVER, I think the city was dumb(well, it might not have been an issue when the line was set up) to run a public bus line through a secure(sometimes) area, and I don't think anyone on a public bus should have to show ID to ride(the same as I don't think you should have to show ID to walk down a public sidewalk, for instance), so I think the lady that was refusing had a point. But I think it all came off badly. Not sure how better to draw attention to the issue though!

I don't really care about the legal issues because I believe that law-abiding citizens who refuse to show their IDs will, in the end, not suffer terribly if they refuse to display that ID. They may have the occasionaly bus-ride inconvenienced, but of course they have chosen with their non-complaince to disrupt an operation designed to intimidate and impair terrorists. Yes it is legal to decline to show one's ID, but there may be relatively mild consequences for that refusal and it's kind of an a-hole thing to do. At one end of the spectrum, there's the personal liberty concern but at the other end there's a dude on a bus whose boss told him to check everyone's ID and he doesn't need the hassle either, so just show the damn ID and get on with life. Right? It's just polite to show the ID, we do it all the time anyway.

Anyway, all of that stuff will sort itself out. Should citizens be forced to display their IDs on a public bus? Maybe, maybe not. But it's relatively painless to do so, and it might be very helpful so why not?

The main issue to me is that LEOs are taking such *active* and *public* steps to improve security on busses. I have long wondered when we'd start seeing domestic bus-bombings in major metropolitan areas or suicide bombers at strip-malls, and it troubles me that LEOs have started this sort of activity because it indicates to me that they think the threat has gone up.

So I'm glad to see them doing something about it.

**Pokerface** · 01-19-2006, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by leejo

Yes it is legal to decline to show one's ID, but there may be relatively mild consequences for that refusal and it's kind of an a-hole thing to do.

No. No no no no no.
If it's legal, there should not be consequences. Breaking a law has consequences. Compliance should have none.

Quote:

It's just polite to show the ID, we do it all the time anyway.

Polite, maybe (we can argue that elsewhere if you choose), but still, not an obligation. To act as if it is is to misrepresent the law.

Quote:

Anyway, all of that stuff will sort itself out. Should citizens be forced to display their IDs on a public bus? Maybe, maybe not. But it's relatively painless to do so, and it might be very helpful so why not?

It's also painless to let police into my house without a warrant, or to let them swab my cheeck for DNA. But you know what? Ain't gonna happen, painless or not.

**leejo** · 01-19-2006, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pokerface

No. No no no no no.
If it's legal, there should not be consequences.

Where is that written? If I refuse to show a cop my ID I may not be prosecuted but I may need to have a long chat with them down at the station. Suppose for example that John Q Public had just killed a few coworkers down the street. Wouldn't it be reasonable for the fuzz to canvas the area looking for him? If they hadn't received a good description by that time, they might ask simply to see IDs. People who show their and who aren't John Q are immediately excluded and people who refuse or cannot comply because they left their IDs at home may still be suspects and the police may need to detain them.

What freedoms I have are not necessarily consequence-free...doms. If you really want to get right down to it, a cop can decide he doesn't like me and toss me in the slammer for 72 hours for no reason at all. It doesn't happen often but LEOs have this power.

I don't think it's fair to compare showing my ID on a bus to tolerating a warrentless search of my home. Of course I don't agree with the latter.

**Wyzcrak** · 01-19-2006, 02:42 PM

I'm all for passing laws before we make people do stuff. If Officer Man suspects leejo of having done something illegal, then Mr. Man hauls him off and asks him lots of questions. Fine, whatever.

But the fact alone that he's failed to show his ID doesn't give Mr. Man cause (by law?) to suspect him, right? So, without some other reason to suspect him, Mr. Man's out of line (out of law?) by hauling him off?

Does that sound reasonable?

That is, why have you been forced into a government facility when you're not a suspect?

I'm all for security and all, but I hope there's something I'm missing here.

Buck Fush · 01-19-2006, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IceCold

So you think we should just stop checking ID for alcohol sales?

The Jeopardy category is:
Arguments I Didn’t Make for $100

The answer is:
He left a life of protecting crops from birds to
travel with Dorothy in the search for a brain.

The question:
Who is the straw man?

My point was that a security measure (ID checking) that can’t even prevent minors (who aren’t particularly known for being overly clever) from obtaining beer illegally is worthless in the effort to stop a terrorist from blowing up a city bus. It’s nothing more than a warm fuzzy feeling generator.
Circle one:
1) I agree completely.
2) I agree mostly.
3) I agree.
4) I agree somewhat.
5) I only agree a little bit.

Those of you who aren’t offended by this, are you really comfortable with an American citizen being treated in this manner for failure to show ID to some gung ho rent-a-cop? Are you really comfortable with a person on their way to work being thrown face-down on a nasty bus floor, hand-cuffed and taken away in the back of a cop car for nothing more than failing to produce ID?

Route 100 is the only way to work for some people. American citizens are not required to carry ID. Is it right to tell an American citizen that they are not allowed on public transportation with out some form of ID?

Quote:

Originally Posted by IceCold

(Glad to see that you're down with OPP, btw...)

Yeah, you know me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by leejo

Where is that written?

Let’s see, you could look here, or here for the answers you seek.

Quote:

Originally Posted by leejo

People who show their and who aren't John Q are immediately excluded and people who refuse or cannot comply because they left their IDs at home may still be suspects and the police may need to detain them.

Note my emphasis. It is legal for the police to detain you in that circumstance, sure, but would it be acceptable if that officer threw you to the ground, cuffed you and carried you off in the back of a cop car? If so, then I hope you find that perfect police-state you’re looking for some day, but that’s not going to be America.

**leejo** · 01-19-2006, 03:57 PM

See and I'm all for pitching in to help make the neighborhood safer, provided it's no skin off my back. Flashing my ID at a cop just doesn't strike me as particularly intrusive.

My refusal to show ID doesn't give Mr. Man probably cause to suspect me, but if Mr. Man is looking for someone else and I refuse to show ID, then he is unable to exclude me from his list of possible matches. So long as I remain confident that Mr. Man is in fact working to nail a real criminal and just needs me to help him, we're cool. If someone starts demanding that US Citizens show ID and they cannot correlate that to a real, ongoing threat, then I'll have a problem with that.

It's all very practical in my mind: if there is a real threat, I'm happy to help, and if there is not a real threat, then I should be left alone, generally. When there is debate about which threats are real or manufactured, that's a political discussion, so we vote.

**Wyzcrak** · 01-19-2006, 04:06 PM

Can't be excluded?

How did you come to be included in Mr. Man's list of possible matches to begin with?

**leejo** · 01-19-2006, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buck Fush

It is legal for the police to detain you in that circumstance, sure, but would it be acceptable if that officer threw you to the ground, cuffed you and carried you off in the back of a cop car? If so, then I hope you find that perfect police-state you’re looking for some day, but that’s not going to be America.

Some of your points in the above post are a little too cute for me to follow.

With regard to the above quote, if a cop threw me to the ground, cuffed me, and carried me off in the back of a cop car, I would make it my mission to have his job unless I deserved to be treated in that manner.

Is it OK for a cop to do these things? Depends on the perp. Did she say, simply, "sorry officer but I decline to show you my ID and doubt your legal authority to demand it" or was she causing a significant disturbance and behaving in a non-compliant and aggressive manner? That bus was full of witnesses. Is there any review of the officer's actions under way or any disciplinary action under consideration?

Or are you relying on her version of events to categorize the officer's conduct? I'm just asking.

With regard to the 5th and 14th amendments, I don't see how they apply to a woman's right to decline showing ID to a police officer conducting a lawful search and security operation without being arrested. The Constitution doesn't say I have the right not to be arrested, it says that I'm entitled to due process before the government can take my property, freedom, or life. As in, I get my day in court.

**leejo** · 01-19-2006, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wyzcrak

Can't be excluded?

How did you come to be included in Mr. Man's list of possible matches to begin with?

Proximity? Another example, a murderer escapes from a jail. Is it illegal for the police to set up roadblocks and search passing vehicles? Perhaps demanding to see some id? Deputy Joe out on exit 59 of highway 231 only knows that a murderer has escaped and probably that guys name, age, height, and other descriptive characteristics, but he may or may not have had time to see a picture. The only way he has to tell that escaped murderer is not in one of the vehicles he's been charged with checking is by determining that the occupants are NOT the guy he's looking for.

Asking the good citizens to help out by not turning a very practical matter into a freaking Constitutional Crisis is really his only option.

**Wyzcrak** · 01-19-2006, 04:35 PM

I quote Tantor, from Disney's Tarzan: "Mom, are you sure this water's sanitary?"

Anyway, I like the question mark at the end of your first sentence. It certainly fits there.

Asking folks to show ID doesn't create the crisis. Forcing them to? To again quote the unsure pachyderm: "It looks questionable to meeeeee."

01-18-2006, 02:01 PM	#17 (permalink)
Buck Fush Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Littleton, CO Posts: 602	Re: Papers, please. This RTD route was in place well before 9/11. The mistake the city has made is that the route wasn't changed when it was decided that the DFC needed tighter security. Checking the IDs of passengers is not security. Not allowing a public bus to enter a federal complex is security. I agree with this lady that this was more of a lesson in compliance. The not requiring ID for beer purchases is actually supportive of the idea that ID is not security. How many minors do you think purchase beer every weekend using some sort of faked ID? I used to. My fake ID was made by blowing up a real ID on the wall behind me using a positive projector and taking a Polaroid of me standing in front of it.(We didn't have Photoshop in my day.) Faking IDs is very simple. I can picture the day that every American citizen is required to have traveling papers to move between work and home and this is how it starts. edited to remove redundant statements from opp (other people's posts) Last edited by Buck Fush; 01-18-2006 at 02:25 PM.

01-19-2006, 02:42 PM	#24 (permalink)
Wyzcrak Join Date: May 2003 Location: Memphis, TN Posts: 14,139	Re: Papers, please. I'm all for passing laws before we make people do stuff. If Officer Man suspects leejo of having done something illegal, then Mr. Man hauls him off and asks him lots of questions. Fine, whatever. But the fact alone that he's failed to show his ID doesn't give Mr. Man cause (by law?) to suspect him, right? So, without some other reason to suspect him, Mr. Man's out of line (out of law?) by hauling him off? Does that sound reasonable? That is, why have you been forced into a government facility when you're not a suspect? I'm all for security and all, but I hope there's something I'm missing here. __________________ Steam Community? Add me. \| Join #tacticalgamer \| Search Results Legend \| New Posts Forum Filter \| Postbox Toggle \| Live Thread Review \| One Line Results \| Free Remote, Encrypted Backup Darkilla: In short, NS is pretty much really fast chess. With guns. Apophis: I haven't seen anyone say that SM's are better than non-SMs. Nordbomber: This is THE first server I've seen where either side can comeback from out of seemingly nowhere with the right teamwork. en4rcment: I have NEVER experienced the type of gameplay that I have found here. Nightly I am amazed at the personalities and gaming talent. Root: Welcome to TG. Feel free to punctuate your sentences correctly. Monkerz: Its gonna take all my skills to beat those boys off in the future.

01-19-2006, 03:57 PM	#26 (permalink)
leejo Join Date: Sep 2003 Age: 39 Posts: 7,667	Re: Papers, please. See and I'm all for pitching in to help make the neighborhood safer, provided it's no skin off my back. Flashing my ID at a cop just doesn't strike me as particularly intrusive. My refusal to show ID doesn't give Mr. Man probably cause to suspect me, but if Mr. Man is looking for someone else and I refuse to show ID, then he is unable to exclude me from his list of possible matches. So long as I remain confident that Mr. Man is in fact working to nail a real criminal and just needs me to help him, we're cool. If someone starts demanding that US Citizens show ID and they cannot correlate that to a real, ongoing threat, then I'll have a problem with that. It's all very practical in my mind: if there is a real threat, I'm happy to help, and if there is not a real threat, then I should be left alone, generally. When there is debate about which threats are real or manufactured, that's a political discussion, so we vote.

01-19-2006, 04:06 PM	#27 (permalink)
Wyzcrak Join Date: May 2003 Location: Memphis, TN Posts: 14,139	Re: Papers, please. Can't be excluded? How did you come to be included in Mr. Man's list of possible matches to begin with? __________________ Steam Community? Add me. \| Join #tacticalgamer \| Search Results Legend \| New Posts Forum Filter \| Postbox Toggle \| Live Thread Review \| One Line Results \| Free Remote, Encrypted Backup Darkilla: In short, NS is pretty much really fast chess. With guns. Apophis: I haven't seen anyone say that SM's are better than non-SMs. Nordbomber: This is THE first server I've seen where either side can comeback from out of seemingly nowhere with the right teamwork. en4rcment: I have NEVER experienced the type of gameplay that I have found here. Nightly I am amazed at the personalities and gaming talent. Root: Welcome to TG. Feel free to punctuate your sentences correctly. Monkerz: Its gonna take all my skills to beat those boys off in the future.

01-19-2006, 04:35 PM	#30 (permalink)
Wyzcrak Join Date: May 2003 Location: Memphis, TN Posts: 14,139	Re: Papers, please. I quote Tantor, from Disney's Tarzan: "Mom, are you sure this water's sanitary?" Anyway, I like the question mark at the end of your first sentence. It certainly fits there. Asking folks to show ID doesn't create the crisis. Forcing them to? To again quote the unsure pachyderm: "It looks questionable to meeeeee." __________________ Steam Community? Add me. \| Join #tacticalgamer \| Search Results Legend \| New Posts Forum Filter \| Postbox Toggle \| Live Thread Review \| One Line Results \| Free Remote, Encrypted Backup Darkilla: In short, NS is pretty much really fast chess. With guns. Apophis: I haven't seen anyone say that SM's are better than non-SMs. Nordbomber: This is THE first server I've seen where either side can comeback from out of seemingly nowhere with the right teamwork. en4rcment: I have NEVER experienced the type of gameplay that I have found here. Nightly I am amazed at the personalities and gaming talent. Root: Welcome to TG. Feel free to punctuate your sentences correctly. Monkerz: Its gonna take all my skills to beat those boys off in the future.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links