Skip to main content

She may not be the new Rosa Parks, but Ms. Deborah Davis of Denver is making a stand against our eroding personal rights.
One morning in late September 2005, Deb was riding the public bus to work. She was minding her own business, reading a book and planning for work, when a security guard got on this public bus and demanded that every passenger show their ID. Deb, having done nothing wrong, declined. The guard called in federal cops, and she was arrested and charged with federal criminal misdemeanors after refusing to show ID on demand.

On the 9th of December 2005, Deborah Davis will be arraigned in U.S. District Court in a case that will determine whether Deb and the rest of us live in a free society, or in a country where we must show "papers" whenever a cop demands them.

Ms. Davis has a son in Iraq. Remember how the rightwing nut jobs talk about how it is important to fight for our freedom? Well apparently it is time to fight for that same freedom here as Murrow always put it. has the entire story here, here, and here.

I hope that the Kossack Nation follows her case and turns it in the blog storm that it needs to be, because we know that the MSM will bury this story.

Originally posted to Six Degrees of Aaron on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 01:13 PM PST.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  We have to fight them in Denver.... (4.00)
    so we don't have to fight them at home.

    things are getting kinda scary!

  •  The Law (4.00)
    The law, generally, says that you have to identify yourself to law enforcement when requested.

    It does not say you need to produce an ID.  I know this from a confrontation with a cop while I was on a bike some years ago.  He about blew a gasket when I told him I was carrying no ID.

    OTOH, this was a security guard, so unless the transit agency had a policy saying that failure to show their security an ID would get you tossed from a bus, it seems they're on very thin ice.

    Remember when we were against torture, before we were for it?

    by pshaw on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 01:26:05 PM PST

    •  This is tough. (none)
      I think a few facts are missing in this case. Such as, was Deb provided an alternate route on the public busses that didn't require entering a federal facility (where indeed, it is required that you show ID to enter). If not, then I think Deb's beef should be with the transit authority and she should have requested an injunction from the courts requiring the transit authority to provide an alternate route that did not require her to show her ID.

      The federal facility can not be expected to let anyone onto the facility if they haven't shown ID. Even if the bus never made any stops on the property, the facility still has a responsibility to know who is travelling through it.

      So, as much as I hate to say it, Deb is barking up the wrong tree.

      •  BS. (4.00)
        Whether or not there's any law that says you must have ID in any given place or other, it's a bullshit concept.

        Freedom means you DON'T need internal passports to move around, and any law that says you must carry ID or be arrested is, by default, a law requiring us to live like Soviets.

        She should fight it to the death, and rather than figuring out ways that the feds can make it stick, we should be figuring out ways to get time off work and travel to Denver in support.

        This week's Google-Bomb: Bob Woodward is a White House shill

        by HollywoodOz on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 01:55:24 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, (none)
          this is outrageous - good comment and I very much appreciate the diarist posting this story.

          "When the government fears the people, that is Liberty. When the people fear the government, that is tyranny." Thomas Jefferson

          by RichardG on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 04:54:07 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Hope that she'll come here (none)
          and ask us for help with legal fees if necessary.

          This is patently absurd, that people cannot board public transport and simply ride from A to B.  It's an infringement of a fundamental human right for government to obstruct the movement of people.

          Let alone infringement on a person's right to contract freely (as with a transportation provider, who clearly had no objection with her boarding without ID provided upon boarding), or with a company's right to conduct business (as in losing business because of interference in contracts).

          Or with our rights, if we, the people, have provided any federal funding -- or with Coloradans, if they have provided any state funding -- to subsidize the operation of these buses as we agree with the transport providers.

        •  speaking of Rosa (none)
          will there now be student led organized acts of civil disobedience? College students riding public transit without their papers, singing protest songs in packed jails etc?
      •  Bus shouldn't be there (4.00)
        There should be no public transportation anywhere in this country that passes through any area that requires any kind  of security clearance or proof of ID.  The bus should go past the facility and let the government provide transportation for it's employees from the bus stop on, if need be.  When I get on a bus, I don't NEED to know anything about it's path other than that it goes to my destination.  It would be absurd for me to have to determine if each bus I board travels through any secure federal facility and what appropriate ID I need to be allowed to stay on that bus as it passes through.  So, in fact her beef should  be with the transit authority. In fact, the transit authority should never allow federal officials to board a public bus to demand identification.  The long and short of it all seems to be that the bus should never have been on this facilities property  in the first place. Given that the buses, do pass through such a place, no Transit authority should have to assume the burden of posting signs warning it's patrons.  It's both bad for business and it's assuming part of the responsibility of the federal government.  This whole situation is absurd.
      •  a common sense solution (4.00)
        How about this: Anyone who gets off the bus at the federal facility identifies themselves. People staying on the bus and passing through are left alone. Seems to me that would work and wouldn't be any more difficult for the authorities. I don't see why the government would need to know the identities of people passing through on public transit.
    •  yeah, just a security guard (none)
      what authority did the security guard actually have?  

      Bullshit, Jesus, those are obviously my footprints.

      by als10 on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 02:48:21 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Rent a Cop (none)
      I know the ilk mentioned in this story.  In college, I worked nights as a Security Guard.  I'd often run into this kind that gave security guards a bad name.  One with a cheap badge and an attitude.  We had a supervisor like this and everyone at my post refered to him as a "Rent a Pig".

      Too bad, too.  Most Security Guards want to finish their shift quietly and be relieved on time--that's all.  The others, watch out for.  They are using their jobs as a power trip, to make up for a life they don't have.

      •  That brought back memories (none)
        I worked for pinkerton for a while. There were a bunch of guys that wanted to be cops and could get accepted on any force. Like you say the rest of us just wanted to do our hours and go home.

        The were always playing John Wayne. One guy actually chased people on the public streets with the rent a cop car lights and sirens.

  •  A Visitor from the Future Observes (4.00)
    This is why paper IDs became implanted RFID tags for all citizens in 2014. RFID are now read at a distance by Peace Officers and their accompanying Federal Monitors, and by gate portals at all entrances to public places. UAV drones keep tabs on citizens walking outside. The noncompliant are declared noncitizens and their organs are harvested.

    If we shall fail to defend the Constitution, I shall fail in the attempt.

    by spoon or no spoon on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 01:31:30 PM PST

    •  More Future (none)
      The UAVs were outfitted with Raman spectroscopy capability too if I recall that future correctly.  They used that to "sniff" out all different kinds of contraband materials from explosives to drugs to any other kind of material that they had a spectrographic profile of.  The UAVs were also patched into the streetlight cameras and the worldwide security database.  

      There were independent security and surveillance networks miantained by corporate and other private concerns for their own purposes as well.

      Solar is Civil Defense

      by gmoke on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 02:12:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  reading the DoD site (none)
        Ya know, on a DoD or other gov site a couple of years back I read that there was an open contest to develop smell sense tech like this. Interesing stuff. Like when my cat KNOWS I opened a can of beans...

        The sound oriented stuff is doubly scary. In Basra when Iraq first rolled, people in their houses thought there were many tanks outside- because they were playing tank sounds from stereo speakers on the single tank.

        I've read where the subliminal message "You can not win, go home" was played at street gatherings (or riots...forget which...)

        So anyway- my point is- this stuff isn't so far into the future. The reality is- that rent a cops and such are on the front lines of this. Someone could really get hurt.

    •  Hopefully.... (none)
      the revolution would have started before we had gotten to the point of RFID tags.
    •  ... what? (none)
      you mean this isn't happening now?

      <tin foil hat explodes>

      "Symplerovus vulgaris americanus" - nasty unindicted co-conspirator. -7.63, -9.59

      by shpilk on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 06:23:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  As bad as it sounds... (none)
    I'm not sure how bad this really is.... we need to know WHY they wanted ID

    I hate the idea of having to Identify myself randomly.....but I'm sure there are situations where it makes perfect sense

    it's going to be very interesting to see what happens

    •  that was the prevelant (4.00)
      feeling in germany in the early thirties, too!

      i took the train (amtrak) up the penninsula to pick up my second car - we had to "hand over" our driver's licenses, id prior to being allowed on the bus that connected the stations (due to track repairs.  when i went to retrieve my DRIVER'S license, i asked what would have happened if i had not had id (as the clerk was busily typing ALL of my information into his computer).  his response was this:  you would not have been allowed to ride.

      this was two years ago.  i am STILL furious!  

      this is NOT a free america!

      Voldemart lives again - in the white house!

      by edrie on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 03:43:10 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  To me, the reason is obvious (none)
      It's called "a Power Trip".  That's all!  The woman was minding her own business and ripe for a bully.  When she stood up to him and said no, I'm certain that it filled him with rage.  The rest, you could see coming.  
    •  This is simply random. (none)
      There was no reason pareticular to this woman.

      "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities" -- Voltaire

      by ohwilleke on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 10:58:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Just read the article (none)
    pretty funny that the Federal area has all those "Welcome" signs...then she's charged with failure to obey signs/notices or whatever it was
  •  She was entering (none)
    a federal facility. Is there a requirement to show id before you enter it?  Last time I went into a federal building, I had to show id.

    Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed it is the only thing that ever has. -- Margaret Mead

    by Cordelia Lear on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 01:39:20 PM PST

    •  I retract what I said (none)
      I did not originally realize that her ultimate destination was not the federal complex.

      I'd be interested in knowing whether there was another bus route she could have taken to work.

      Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed it is the only thing that ever has. -- Margaret Mead

      by Cordelia Lear on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 02:47:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  She could have (none)
        RTD website

        You can look at the routes that are around the denver area at the RTD website, the federal center is in Lakewood. It looks like the bus she was taking was the 119X. There are many bus routes around that she could have taken, but depending on her destination she would have to get on 2-4 different buses to avoid the federal center and to go where the 119x would have taken her.

  •  Hmmm (none)
    this seems like a no-brainer:  the bus is entering a federal reservation.  The feds would be within their rights to not allow the bus to cross the federal center at all.  To allow the bus through seems to be a courtesy.  I dont think this woman has much of a leg to stand on here.  

    Republicans - For Saddam until they were against him.

    by calipygian on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 01:47:33 PM PST

    •  The ACLU disagrees with you (4.00)
      given that they have taken up her case.
      •  Yeah I know... (none)
        Usually I am a hundred percent behind what the ACLU does, to the point that I have donated to them through the Combined Federal Campaign, back when they participated in it.  I wish they would target more urgent concerns, such as the Padilla case and the de facto suspension of Habeus Corpus, rather than challenging a rule that says that you have to show ID to enter federal property, even if you are just passing through on public transport.  Seems like a misallocation of resources.  I think their case would be much stronger if the bus were just randomly stopped at a checkpoint and everyone aboard were asked for ID.  That would be more like the "papers, please" scenario that everyone would be upset at.

        Republicans - For Saddam until they were against him.

        by calipygian on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 03:00:06 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Sounds like a law school hypothetical. (none)
          Its clearly not black and white, depends on how the existing case laws interprets the grey.

          Clearly federal installations have the right to request ID from those entering a federal facility. But this wasn't the woman's intent and the facility may have waived the right to check ID by permitting a public bus to ride through. I mean what do they do with 17 year olds with no ID? Eject them from a city bus b/c of the route?

          I'm not a lawyer and there may be precedents that make this very clear. But it would seem that this would grant the executive powers never intended. I mean what if the Dept of Homeland Security were to buy a 5 foot wide cordon of land all the way around Manhatten? Would that give them the right to stop and identify every single person entering and exiting the island?

          Seems if the installation wants to raise security it needs to ban bus routes from through passage. But again if things were so clear lawyers wouldn't have jobs.

          To lodge all power in one party and keep it there is to insure bad government and the sure and gradual deterioration of the public morals. - Mark Twain

          by Windowdog on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 03:27:46 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  That's just what they may do (none)
            Ban public busses from transiting the facility.  How would that inconvenience the public?  Im sure they are just being as acommodating as possible.

            Republicans - For Saddam until they were against him.

            by calipygian on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 03:34:05 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Then they need to tell each rider as they board (none)
              I'd like to know what happens if you just answer 'no, I don't have ID.'  Will they just ask your name, move on, drag you off to their security station?  

              I'd like to see them run that experiment and determine if this was a question of ID or the fact that she refused to follow their directions.

              From the legal documents, the latter is a key part of it.

              If you look at the rest of the site, there is a 'papers request' that went to the SCOTUS in 2004.  U.S. vs Hiibel  Apparently, Hiibel lost that case. I'm not a lawyer, so would love a professional analysis of the differences in the two cases and why Hiibel lost.

              To me, it seemed his lawyer argued that you don't have to even give your name, when the summary on the web site was about how being forced to give papers is a violation of the 4th Amendment.  Also, the police had been told that a domestic battery had occurred, tied to the occupants of the truck, which gives a stronger probably cause than in Davis' case.  The Justices seemed to spend a lot of time tying his defense attorney into verbal knots.

              Davis' case seems to be different because the fact that she refused to show ID was considered the probable cause to force her to show ID.  It is a circular argument.  The SCOTUS have a point, IMO, that if an officer sees someone loitering or acting 'suspicious' that they could ask who they are, and they request ID in order to place the person if it shows that their suspicious behavior did in fact have some consequences.

              However, Davis was on a bus that happened to cross into a Federal Reserve.  I used to work on classified installations and public transpo NEVER came onto the property. They would stop outside the perimeter and staff would walk a ways up to the guard gate.  At installations where the operations buildings were a fair distance, there would be a shuttle van or a bus that ran from the gate to the buildings.

              Do some Air Force bases allow public buses onto the facility?  How do the MPs handle it?  Here, the bus comes as far as the main gate, lets everyone off, then turns around.

              It seems to me the only reason you would have to search a bus is if someone was getting off or your facility is a terrorist target and you're worried about bombings -- in the latter case, it would be flat-out stupid to let public transpo wander in and out of the base.  Any terrorist worth his/her salt is going to have fake ID anyway.

              •  Right. It is a target or it isn't. (none)
                Any terrorist worth his/her salt is going to have fake ID anyway.

                Or real ID. The point is that checking people's ID is not really going to prevent an attack. If there is a real threat, they should not let public buses through, and I believe that would be obvious to a jury after a few moments' thought. After all, a bus could be wired with explosives; or passengers could have guns, or bombs, or grenades, or radioactive substances. Bring in an expert to talk about those threats. Make clear the outlines of the appeal if they disallow that.

                Ask about the specific vulnerability. Then the gov't will probably clam up and say it's all classified. Then ask for dismissal. If the judge looks at classified material and says there is a real risk, appeal based on effectively cancelling the 4th Amendment for all practical purposes.

                Good chance the gov't will cave rather than go up the courts on this one. It's just a little too obvious.

              •  When I was stationed at Fort Meade (none)
                Maryland in the early and late 90's, the base was completely open, no ID required to enter the base.  That changed after 911.  And, oh yeah, Fort Meade is host to the National Security Agency.

                Republicans - For Saddam until they were against him.

                by calipygian on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 09:15:45 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  The obvious solution is to check IDs, (none)
                if you must, only of people who leave the bus (it doesn't go inside any buildings, as the federal center is a typical sprawl situation), and only after giving clear notice before the bus inevitably will stop at a check point that the checkpoint is coming up.

                "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities" -- Voltaire

                by ohwilleke on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 10:57:04 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Camp Pendleton (none)
                Camp Pendleton has buses going through all the time. Basically what happens is that the guard gets on the bus and asks everyone passing through their destination if they are non-military. If all the non-military people are just riding through, he gets off and the driver makes stops through the base as usual.
          •  The fact that has been key in similar cases (none)
            like airport cases and court house cases and border cross cases has been clear notice in advance that you will be subject to suspicionless questioning.  This isn't the case at the entrance to the federal center.  As a result, the feds loose.  

            This is basically what they call in New York, at least, a "Terry Stop", and while it doesn't require full fledged probable cause, it does require reasonable suspicion.  The federal police didn't have a reasonable suspicion.  They didn't have clear notice of a search.  And so, they lose.

            "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities" -- Voltaire

            by ohwilleke on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 10:53:23 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  I went to the ACLU web site and did a search and (none)
          I got 60 hits for "Padilla" and 138 for "habeas corpus"
        •  Couldn't disagree more! (none)
          I want the money I donate to the ACLU to fight this form of intimidation.  It would appear to be that in your book, the authorities have the right to demand your "papers" at all times.

          No, this is a step in the road to fascism that has to be fought.  I appluad the ACLU if they are indeed fighting for this woman.  That act, makes me proud to be a dues paying, card carrying member.

          •  agreed! (none)
            As a card-carrying member of the ACLU - I too hope they are fighting for this woman tooth and nail.  This is the kind of fight that gets me to renew my membership year after year.

            She could be any one of us.  

            Just going to work.  Stood up to the man.  Went to jail.

            Where's the "freedom" in that?

        •  I'm glad and should probably donate to them (none)
          again.  Suspicionless searches and ID requests are bad and should be as narrow as possible.  They affect a great many people, even though not intensely.

          "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities" -- Voltaire

          by ohwilleke on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 11:00:38 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Non-legal mind says she's absolutely correct. (4.00)
    And I hope she wins completely.

    "No ride list" for a public bus?  What a joke!

  •  Proles and Animals are Free (3.83)
    So far I've seen nothing but comments from people who have never been on the recieving end of police harassment.

    Police will ALWAYS act like thugs when given the chance. Most people will back down from the cops and let them walk all over their civil liberties...rather than "get in trouble".

    Deborah Davis is a HERO for standing up to the thugs & having the guts to say No!

    When you wake up and find that your last civil liberty is gone, it will be too late to fight then.

    False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul with evil.--Socrates

    by Ranting Roland on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 02:00:03 PM PST

    •  asdf (none)
      I've seen a couple of encounters with police that ended up with a guy going to jail when he would have walked away if he just caved. I'm not sure if it is a question of cops wanting to act like "thugs" or not, but cops get really nervous when someone doesn't do what they tell them to do.

      It's mostly bluster on the part of the cop, since they are trained to keep "control" of a situation, rather than try to follow some set of complicated procedures and policies that is supposed to cover every eventuality.

      •  Common sense (none)
        I respect law enforcement officers and what they are entrusted to do. While that doesn't mean I'm going to blindly follow whatever directives they hand out, it does mean that I'll generally do ask they ask and say "yes sir, no sir" or "yes Ma'am, no ma'am" in the process.

        When in doubt, ask for further clarification as to what they want, or ask for a superior to be called.

        Once you become stubborn or belligerent with a law enforcement officer, you're pretty much up a creek...they don't seem to respond well to it.

        Bush - the ultimate example of the Peter Principle.

        by PatsBard on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 02:18:28 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Back in the late 1980's, I was busted for (4.00)
        jay walking in San Francisco's Chinatown. Anyone that knows the neihgborhood understand just how ridiculous it was, and I said as much to the cop. He got right up in my face, and from that point I didn't say a word but just remembered his star number. Of course, he fucked up on my ticket, citing me for jay walking but writing the code for a moving violation (perhaps he did this on purpose).

        I filed a complaint about his actions, but was told that it would just go into his file.

        And I'm an average looking white guy. What do those that look more "theatening" experience?

      •  complicated rule or procedure like your rights? (none)
        in this instance she was sitting on a bus, no 'crime' occured or was going to occur until 'security' accosted her.  Now lest say she did not have ID on her. What happens then. Is she arrested? Thrown off the bus?
    •  but...have you been on the receiving end... (none)
      of police protection?

      I've had a cops stand up for me

    •  actually police (3.00)
      aren't ALWAYS thugs.

      You just like to think they are so it proves your point.  I've known many cops, none of whom were "thugs," as you gleefully repeated.

      Bullshit, Jesus, those are obviously my footprints.

      by als10 on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 02:51:20 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Cops (3.00)
        EVERY cop I've ever encountered has been a thug.

        And that's not something I "gleefully" repeated.

        I'm happy for you that you know some cops who aren't thugs. I wouldn't want you to be on the recieving end of the ones I've had the misfortune of encountering.

        False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul with evil.--Socrates

        by Ranting Roland on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 02:58:33 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  where & how do you meet these thugs? (none)
        •  I used to respect cops. (4.00)
          I was raised to respect cops and the job they performed. Then I had a cop for a roomate (from a major metro force). After knowing him and his friends, I will never trust a cop again. He would bluster about "we don't interpret the law, we just enforce the law" but turn around on a regular basis and do exactly that.

          I saw him get off the hook on more than one occasion when he should have been cited for DUI by conveniently flashing his badge as he produced his drivers license. I heard how cavalierly he and his buddies talked about citizens on the street and inmates in the jail. He was the classic case of parlaying an on-the-job injury into a retirement settlement, taking sick days to do major repairs to the house or his RV. More than one of his buddies abused prescription drugs, some obtained illegally, and he was addicted to them. One of his pals was an inveterate shop lifter and had a steroid and oxycontin drug business on the side. And I've seen first-hand how they abuse the system and get away with it.

          Yeah, I know there are honest cops out there and, unfortunately, some are injured or killed in the line of duty. But I sure as hell don't trust any of them. Even the good ones are prone to following their pre-conceived notions. I've encountered cops on more than one occasion struggling to make circumstances fit into their little boxes.

          Tim LaHaye can kiss my "left behind"

          by homogenius on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 04:41:42 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  what (4.00)
            you said.  

            Most cops are dirty.  

            I had a cop actually steal money from my 16 year old son's bedroom.  No doubt he thought it was "ill gotten" gain, so my son wouldn't report it to a parent.  However, it was legitimate money from a legitimate job and I saw it in my son's room moments before cops came to search (on a probation search - no warrant - never found a thing - nothing TO find).  Misdemeanor probation with a warrantless search condition.  How can that be constitutional?

            Because cop figured son was a crook, figured son was a good person to victimize.  

            I have many, many stories of dirty cops in san fran.  I have actually filed complaints and had them sustained at the OCC.  

            Believe me -- office misconduct/corruption - it is RAMPANT and anyone who works in the criminal justice system knows it.

            •  SFPD is well known (none)
              among bay area PD's as a real shithole. Many will not consider a lateral hire if the applicant is from SFPD.

              OTOH, I think this is true of all  big-city PD's. All large organizations eventually devolve int caricatures of themselves :-(

              Come see TV from the reality-based community at

              by MarkInSanFran on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 07:20:05 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  Well then (none)
          It's semantics.  You've switched from "All cops are thugs" to "all the cops you encountered had been 'thugs.'"

          I was just trying to make the distinction that you omitted (purposefully?) from your first argument.

          And I apologize for rating and replying.  I hadn't intended to reply at first, but then I changed my mind, but had already rated.  I know that sounds like bullshit, but I didn't intend to do so.  So yeah, sorry for the misuse of the rating system.

          Bullshit, Jesus, those are obviously my footprints.

          by als10 on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 07:42:51 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  It's easy to dump on cops (4.00)
      But how many of the people here who rant about how terrible the police are would want to do the job they do?

      Policemen (and women) go to work knowing that every day, every hour, could be the time that they are asked to make the ultimate sacrifice to help keep this society functioning.

      It's a hard, dangerous job. And it's not for everyone. Doing a job like that does some bad things to people who aren't able to handle it. And there are definitely bad cops. But this attitude of "screw the cops, they all suck" is just wrong.

      We here at dKos make a big deal of "hate the war, love the troops." Why is it so hard to do the same for the police?

      •  read the link (4.00)

        The cops lied claiming: </</p>

        The second cop said everyone had to show ID any time they were asked by the police

        If you think about the role of the police, they work for the government and thus the citizenry.  If I were to lie to a visiting shareholder of the company I work for and that lie led to a lawsuit I would be fired.  Cops routinely lie about the what the law is and I have NEVER heard of one getting fired or even disciplined

        Arresting people and figuring out the charge later is a violation of probable cause.  How can the cops have probable cause when they don't what the charge is at the time of the arrest

        The two policemen sat in front of their computers, typing and conferring, trying to figure out what they should charge her with

        Now one could argue that this is an isolated incident but it fits completely with how I've seen the police behave on many occasions.  The police unions are ALWAYS opposed to citizen oversight of the police force and even when forced on them, they ALWAYS try to undermine it.  I challenge you to find one police department in the entire nation that has a citizen oversight board that the department hasn't tried to undermine.

      •  the fact that (4.00)
        I don't want to be a cop does not mean cops get carte blanche to abuse the authority that comes with the badge.  They really should have the burden to show they did not abuse their authority.

        Cops are representatives of the government.  They have the power of the state behind them, and abuse under color of that authority is PLAIN WRONG regardless of the fact that many couldn't or wouldn't do the job.  Including me.

        The lack of multitudes wanting to wear a badge bears no relation to the cops' responsibility to wield their enormous authority over ordinary citizens lawfully.

        People who make excuses for them are really just enabling more police misconduct.  It's NOT OK -period.

        It may be trite but it's true:  power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.  When cops' authority is not checked it gets corrupted.  That's just human nature.

        Apologist = enabler.  That's how it looks to me.

        And ...I am a 100% law abding citizen.  Never arrested, detained, questioned, involved in any crime at all.  Never even had a moving violation while driving - and I've been driving for more than 30 years!

        I stand by what I said about the police - at least here in San Francisco (and in many other locales I've read about over the years):

        Most are dirty.  Or they are complicit in the dirtiness of others.  They cannot continue being cops unless they are complicit.  They stand up for each other no matter what.  Rare is the cop whistle-blower.

        •  You say (none)
          "They really should have the burden to show they did not abuse their authority."

          Yeah, they really have time to do that after getting shot at and chasing down some guy who's on meth.

          I doubt you know any actual police officers and choose to make assumptions based on the very few you've encountered doing whatever it is you do.

          Bullshit, Jesus, those are obviously my footprints.

          by als10 on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 07:46:45 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  fact is (4.00)
            I've encountered plenty of police officers.  As I mentioned before, I've filed complaints too.  I rarely comment at dKos, 'cuz what's the point?  I already work about 70 hours a week, with a family and pets too.  But it's a long weekend, so here I am.

            What do I do?  I work with poor people, adults and youth, at peril from the weight of the government's authority on their backs.

            I encounter many police officers.  When I am in my official capacity they sneer, and scoff, and think I'm on the other side of the line since I represent those they despise.

            When I am off-duty, so to speak, and I appear to cops to be nothing more than a nice, white, middle class, petite, middle-aged woman with a wedding ring... they couldn't be more gentlemanly (or ladylike) when they speak to me.  

            The hypocrisy of the two worlds makes me want to puke.  Instead - I just fight harder every day for the people I work for - poor people up against the state.

            •  granted (none)
              it's in your perception that they sneer and scoff.  I commend you for what you do (working with the less fortunate), however I must defend the majority of police officers who aren't corrupt.  I'm not insisting that what you say doesn't occur, but I do take offense to your assumptions that all police officers are corrupt.  You've met a sliver of the police community.  And, yet, you want to demonize the entire bunch.  Frankly, these generalizations are not something I expected to encounter amongst fellow liberals.

              Bullshit, Jesus, those are obviously my footprints.

              by als10 on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 08:18:30 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I understand (4.00)
                that most readers of dKos probably don't have the experience of police as corrupt agents of state authority.  They're pretty selective about the people they pick on -- and it ain't us here bloggers!

                After all, sitting around reading and writing opinions, and gathering news data, and getting informed about the planet's goings on, is time consuming and frankly, a luxury.  The citizens (and immigrants) I see suffer at the hands of police are usually pretty busy eeking out their basic survivial needs.  OTOH, I love reading the blogosphere - it's a good thing I usually work all the time, because I find it quite addictive.

                But - I still say most cops are dirty - either themselves or by knowing of misconduct and not reporting it.  It's the complicity.  And there are shades of (dirty) gray too... there's disrespecting people because they're homeless, poor, or uneducated and there's shoving an arrestee a little too hard; there's stealing from a 16-year-old kid; there's lying on the witness stand, or in a police report; there's planting evidence, etc. etc. etc.  

                Most cops won't do most of the more serious wrongs.  But most will do the least of them, and most probably know other cops who have done all of them.  Those are the generalizations I believe.  Sorry that I can't prove them, but I believe them.  So, if I'm wrong - sue me.  I'm sure there are an awful lot of folks who agree with my assessment.  I talk to those people most days of the week.  

                But I don't expect anyone else to just jump on the bandwagon - why should you?  This is just another perspective for the dKos readership.  Not looking to persuade anyone from their own beliefs.

                As for the cops, I wish the reality were otherwise.  I was raised to respect the police, and I always did - until I saw the "other" side of the line.  I think there is plenty of truth in the statements I made above.  Much of it I've seen firsthand.

                But, we can agree to disagree about cops.  I'm afraid my mind is made up.

                •  So you can't prove it (none)
                  at all, yet you believe it completely.  The intelligent design of social generalizations.

                  Bullshit, Jesus, those are obviously my footprints.

                  by als10 on Sat Nov 26, 2005 at 11:56:28 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  insulting me (none)
                    may feel satisfying to you, but it's kinda pointless.

                    We all believe things we can't "prove".  And I never said I can't prove it at all.  I have lots of firsthand knowledge and observation of the phenomena I described.  Having complaints of plice misconduct sustained through the Office of Citizen Complaints (OCC) is a near impossibility here, but I have succeeded several times.

                    To compare a person like me, with personal knowledge and experience of police conduct in my own city, to those who insist everyone in a public school be taught that I.D. is science - such a comparison is ludicrous on its face.  

                    I explicitly stated that I hold a belief that I don't expect anyone else to adopt.  I think I have a right to that, and a perfect right to express it.

                    As I mentioned, I rarely comment here due to the incessant flaming that has creeped up on dKos recently.  Over at Booman, there is a discussion about why many have stopped posting here.

                    I'm going to stopo posting at dKos and stick to reading only.  Trying to express an opinion here is to expose oneself to illogical thinkers who cannot tell the difference between a PERSONAL belief and a RIGHT WING IDEOLOGY that is being CRAMMED DOWN THROATS of PUBLIC SCHOOL students.

                    Have at it - I quit this place.

                    •  I didn't insult you (none)
                      You may feel it's logical to lump thousands of individuals into your skewed perspective, but I feel it's unfair.  That's all.  And complain about it all you want, but nobody "flamed" you, so get over it.

                      Bullshit, Jesus, those are obviously my footprints.

                      by als10 on Sat Nov 26, 2005 at 02:42:56 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

      •  That is what Feudalism is (4.00)
        the belief that because someone sacrifices to "protect" you from "the bad guys" out there, they're entitled to whatever they can take you for.

        Give it long enough, and it degenerates even farther, from the minimum controls that old feudalism has, to outright tyranny, whether warlordism or fascism or any other sort of police statism.

        That's also the justification, btw, that the Catholic heirarchy gave for covering up and protecting and moving around predator-priests - the Church would be harmed if they were given to justice, and the Church does so much GoodTM for The Poor and The Community, and you wouldn't want to be so ungrateful and destructive as to cripple their ability to go on Serving the Community, would you...?

        It all sounds very well - until you put it into practice. So what it comes down to is this: either you believe that "with great power comes great responsibility" - or you don't. And if you don't, then you are on the side of the Bad Guys and one of them, or their enabling minions, no matter who's wearing a badge.

        You don't get out of responsibility by saying "but I do other good things, honest!" And someone who has that attitude, very swiftly ceases to do any good things. The most feared criminals in Chicago at one point were the Special unit dedicated to catching drug dealers, who were treated like princes, above the law, because their work was "so important."

        They became the biggest, bloodiest drug dealers in the precinct...surprise, surprise - NOT!!!

        "Don't be a janitor on the Death Star!" - Grey Lady Bast (change @ for AT to email)

        by bellatrys on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 08:41:24 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I wish (none)
          you would work this up into a diary as it is so important. I watch from afar and see a population kept so terrified of the terrorists and a government taking all freedoms and liberties away because they are "keeping you safe" [the "Good" they are doing].

          The most courageous act is still to think for yourself. Aloud. -Coco Chanel

          by Overseas on Sat Nov 26, 2005 at 02:25:07 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Transport ID (4.00)
    In order to get a Greyhound ticket (and Greyhound is pretty much a monopoly as a national bus company) you have to present a picture ID.  Americans are presenting passports in order to get a bus ticket to a destination within their own country.

    Solar is Civil Defense

    by gmoke on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 02:04:45 PM PST

    •  Are you sure about that? (none)
      I routinely buy Greyhound tickets for my homeless clients who have no picture ID. My agency pays for the ticket, and I have to show my ID to purchase it, but the client never does... so the actual traveller never has to prove who he is to travel on Greyhound.
    •  Irrelevant in this case though (none)
      The bus company has the right to demand ID from all riders, they own the bus and can probably make you sing the star spangled banner as part of the contract of carriage if they want to, though I imagine that might put them at a slight competitive disadvantage.

      But in this case the company had no such requirement, they just delivered their passengers right to an unannounced Federal checkpoint. Common sense wise it just ain't right.

      To lodge all power in one party and keep it there is to insure bad government and the sure and gradual deterioration of the public morals. - Mark Twain

      by Windowdog on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 03:33:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I think you had to be there... (none)
    there are a lot of situation where ya just had to be there to really understand what happened.

    the article mentions she was chatting on her cell phone & that pissed off the cops...

    there are times when someone is defiant and it gives a much different impression than they think

    I'm glad this was will be verrrryyy interesting to see what happens

    •  It's called... (none)
      calling a friend to let them know you're in trouble...or your boss to let him/her know you're gonna be late.

      "Computer. End holographic program...Computer? Computer?"

      by kredwyn on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 02:57:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's also called... (none)
        telling the cop "I'm just calling my freakin' boss, chill"
        •  When did she place the call? (none)
          Sure, no point in tweaking the tiger's tail, but if she was having a conversation and the guard came onto the bus and asked for her ID, why not say 'no' and continue what you were doing?

          Beyond that, though, I probably would have kept the phone open for the rest of it so someone I trusted could hear what was happening, but I wouldn't have rubbed the actual police's noses in it.  

          I've always been amazed, watching COPS (don't judge me!) and seeing how people get belligerent with the police -- even when sober. It certainly isn't going to make things better.

  •  Depends on what your definition of freedom is. (none)
    •  it's a balancing act (none)
      security vs freedom

      situations like this worry me...but they don't scare me as much as some of the other weird BS that's going on

    •  Freedom's Just Another Word (4.00)
      ... for nothing left to lose.  I think "freedom" as we used to understandit is rapidly going the way of "privacy" and "justice" and "reality".

      Remember... nothing ain't worth nothing, but it's free.

      •  we gotta WIN some election.. (none)
        and restore some sanity
      •  Steven Spielberg called a think tank together... (4.00)
        When he was making Minority Report. These scientists and experts in many areas looked at many developments coming in the next fifty years and debated what directions they were likely to take. The one thing that they agreed on is that there will be no privacy.

        Tim LaHaye can kiss my "left behind"

        by homogenius on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 04:46:03 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  There will also be no cash. (none)
          I had this thought years ago:

          What better way to control a populace than remove their cash. Require that all transactions be made using a card, whether credit, decit, barter - whatever.

          You (meaning Big Bro) will know EVERY place, purchase, meeting - everything a person does.

          This is where we are going. And, like always, we are helping.

  •  In the immortal words of Molly Ivins... (4.00)
    I don't know whether to cry or throw up.

    I can't believe that a majority of you, having been alerted to this menace to your rights, think that a productive response is to question whether Deb ought to have 4th Amendment rights at all if she wants to use public transit.

    The story is a simple one: Someone stood up to a meaningless abuse of power that some small-genitaled cop has gotten used to imposing on the public, with no justification beyond 'I said so'. He couldn't take being defied, and threw the book at this Blue Star mother who asserted her right to travel free of unwarranted search.

    Leaving aside the class and poverty issues that this raises--do you need ID when driving through these kinds of facilities in your own car? not in my experience--does it make sense to assume that 'the authorities' have an unlimited right to search citizens unless we can prove otherwise? I don't think so. There was no notice, so no search is permissible without cause. Give up on that and we're just screwed.

    When I was carded on public transit in Chicago a couple of years ago, with similar non-published justification, I ended up being released but could have been similarly abused for refusing.

    If everyone goes along, everyone goes along or else. Why did we even fight the USSR?

    •  The fact she is a Blue Star Mother.... (4.00)
      .... is totally irrelevant.

      The fact the subject has been brought up to support her "rights" indicative of how terribly far down the fascist police state road you have all come. One little salami slice at a time.

      Think about it....

      "Citizen X has friends/son/connection to the military."

      "This ought to count for something..... surely.... no?????"

      WAKE UP! WAKE DAFUCK UP!!!!!!!

      When dealing with the insane, the best method is to pretend to be sane. - Herman Hesse

      by jpwillis on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 03:10:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Right On! (4.00)
        She has a right to ride the bus without police harassment whether her son is in Iraq or works a crappy job at Wal-Mart.

        False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul with evil.--Socrates

        by Ranting Roland on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 03:22:10 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  personally, I could give a damn (none)
        about her son's service, but I know that part of the decision that the ACLU had to make when deciding to take her case was, Is this an attractive plaintiff? In the sense of being someone that a jury is likely to take seriously as a patriot speaking for many of us.

        Same was true of Rosa Parks: not the first to be arrested, just the first whose demographics and background were such that the organization she worked with could spark the right kind of public attention.

    •  Yes. (none)
      Leaving aside the class and poverty issues that this raises--do you need ID when driving through these kinds of facilities in your own car?
      When I've entered a Federal facility I've always had to check in at the Visitor's Center and show ID.

      What I don't get is why a public bus would be going through there at all, if people without ID aren't permitted.  

      I think it boils down to her refusal to show ID, not that they actually needed it.  That defiance created probable cause by their standards -- and a pissy attitude.  

      If the guards had told her that she couldn't enter the grounds without showing ID and gave her the option of getting off the bus, then I'd tend to blame the transit authority for not avoiding the area, or making it clear to customers that the particular route would require ID and was mainly for those working on the installation.  To arrest her, though, is ridiculous.

      •  The federal center in Lakewood (4.00)
        is a fence, surrounding a lot of vacant land, with a half a dozen or dozen federal buildings on it, all from different civilian agencies, adjacent to a non-federal commercial district.  The bus doesn't enter any of the buildings.  It drives down a semi-public road behind a fence.

        It is full of welcome signs.  It lacks any signs saying, you may be subject to search or required to show ID upon entering.

        A bus dropping people off that the fence would leave people with three quarters of a mile or more to walk.

        The RTD bus is there because it got permission.  The people at fault are the guards who tried to enforce a right that the law doesn't give them, and the U.S. attorney who was dumb enough not to drop the charges.

        "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities" -- Voltaire

        by ohwilleke on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 11:13:51 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  That is what makes no sense (none)
          If someone gets on the bus without being told they are consenting to search and seizure, requests for ID, etc., I don't see how it can be imposed halfway through the trip by an outside agency.

          If they agreed to let the bus through, then....let it through.  

          It will be interesting to see how this progresses.  It doesn't have the legal issues of US v Hiibel to tangle matters and distract from the basic question.

  •  This happened to me in India (4.00)
    I was riding the train to Delhi, sleeping on a top berth when some cop grabbed my ankle, pulled me down, and demanded to see my passport.  I was like, "Alright," and showed it to him.  Then he walked away.

    Later, a bunch of irate passengers came up to me and were like, "You didn't have to show him anything.  This is a democracy!  If that ever happens again, tell the cop to fuck off" (not the exact words, but I do remember the line, "This is a democracy").

    Sure enough, it happened again a few weeks later.  This time they wanted to search my bag, but I didn't let them.  Well, after this bizarre 20 minute stand-off I finally let them, but they didn't even do it.  They just peeked inside and were like, "Oh, OK.  Thanks."  Then they walked away.

    The only reason I let them is I was starting to feel the shame that the people watching were feeling.  I don't think they liked seeing me treated like that, and it didn't seem worth it to press the issue anymore.

    Anyway, I wonder how many people on the bus offered support of Ms. Davis like the people in India supported me?  I'm guessing not many.

    •  Right & Wrong (4.00)
      "Anyway, I wonder how many people on the bus offered support of Ms. Davis like the people in India supported me?  I'm guessing not many."

      ~~I'm guessing zero. Especially after having seen some of the pathetic responses here, in which so many people want to argue the "letter of the law" as opposed to right & wrong.

      If you have to get out a law book to decide what side you're on, then you're going to be on the wrong side.

      False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul with evil.--Socrates

      by Ranting Roland on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 03:07:27 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I see it differently (none)
        Instead of arguing right or wrong, I think most people feel she was treated wrongly and are debating the legalities involved and assessing how this will fare before the SCOTUS.

        Of course, maybe I'm the one who sees it wrong here. ;-)

        I don't know many people who would consider refusing to tell a policeman their name or hand over their ID.  Most of the time you've been pulled over or approached because they think you've done something (or you have) so those cases are different.  But if you have no clue why they want your ID?  I'd like to know if this is determined at a state, city or Federal level.  And if you don't have to hand over ID, do the cops know this?  Because I can't imagine any sheriff or policeman I have ever met seeing that as anything but a challenge to their authority -- and they don't seem to take that well.

        So, is it a law, or just cooperation through fear of repridsal?

      •  Yes..... (none)
        ...this should have occasioned a riot on the bus. We really are going to have to be more assertive and vigilant of our rights,like Cindy Sheehan who has reclaimed the right to protest in front of the White House and is challenging Crawford Texas' right to outlaw protest in a place where the President might actually see you.

        "What luck for rulers that men do not think." - Adolf Hitler

        by Bensdad on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 05:40:53 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  WTF? (none)
    This is just wrong...

    I'm not going anywhere. I'm standing up, which is how one speaks in opposition in a civilized world. - Ainsley Hayes

    by jillian on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 02:54:31 PM PST

  •  asdf (none)
    When I was working in Moscow, I got stopped by the police for no reason almost every day for an ID check.  There was this pair of cops on the Arbat in particular who stopped me at least twice a week for an "ID check".  After a few times, I got a little uppity (protected by my embassy ID, naturally) and asked them why I had to show them.  Because they are the police and they are asking for it, they responded.  What happens if I dont have it?  Well, then you are going to jail, they responded.  You know, in my country, we do not have to carry ID or show it to anybody, even the police if they ask.  Well, you are in our country now, they replied.  But, you have seen me walking down this street every day and you have stopped me a couple of times already, why do you keep doing it?  Because we can, was the reply.  THAT is true tyranny.  Showing an ID in order to transit a federal facility is not, Im sorry to say, tyranny or unreasonable.  Many military bases, including the one I work at, used to be open to the public without an ID because they straddled major roads.  They are not now.  Now you have to show ID, and appropriately so  IMHO.  That said, you are walking down Main Street, minding your own business, or a checkpoint is set up at a town border and everyone is required to show an ID?  Now THAT would by tyrannical.  

    Republicans - For Saddam until they were against him.

    by calipygian on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 03:12:28 PM PST

    •  oh Callipygian? (none)
      nice ass!

      ( had to say it )

    •  How is walking down main street (none)
      and riding a city bus to a place outside the federal center any different?  

      Federal facilities that require you to show id (e.g. the bankruptcy court in Denver) clearly post that requirement.

      For that matter, is there any legitimate basis for requiring people to show ID if you have no list you are checking the ID against?

      "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities" -- Voltaire

      by ohwilleke on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 11:04:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I hope that the entire (4.00)
    Blogasphere goes on a crusade to make the MSM talk about this story.This just the kind of thing that I have been telling people will happen,and it will only get worse until these kinds of abuses are exposed...Anyone who thinks DHS was created to protect the people from terrorists is sadly nieve....Wake up!All of that para-military nightmare was created to protect the regieme from the people...Hello...Wake up.....
  •  I hope she wins (none)
    If the federal government has decided that its facilities will be little Soviet enclaves, fine. Anyone who is intending to enter a federal facility can be ID'd, and who cares about whether immigrants, the poor, or victims of theft have any need for those facilities anyway?

    But this is a bus passing through. It seems to me that there are two choices: Either the bus service can provide advance warning before boarding that an ID is required to ride the bus to or beyond the federal campus in question, or the feds can refrain from putting undue restrictions on members of the public taking public transportation over public roads, or the feds can close off their campuses.

    Ms. Davis walked into a trap. Whether it was designed or intended as a trap is irrelevant. It's completely unfair to demand proof of identification from people in transit without warning. Hypothetically speaking, if she'd just had her purse stolen, should she go to jail just for taking the fastest bus to the police station?

    •  federal enclaves not ok with me (none)
      The federal government should not have the power to ask for ID just because you are on federal land.  Large portions of the west are federal land and to require ID to cross them is the equivalent of an internal passport.

      I'm also disturbed by the idea the government needs ID from it's citizens when the citizens want to get information about their government at one of its facilities.

      Additionally, the federal government is on the weakest ground of all demanding id because of the 4th amendment.  Wingnuts can try to argue that it wouldn't apply to the states enough though the 14th amendment makes the issue clear.   Being on federal property does not strengthen the government's argument, it weakens it.

  •  Just like a war... (none) the name of peace! Pretty soon martially ruled Iraqis will have more freedom than citizens of this nation.

    I wanna thank the right wing imbeciles who support this shit.

    Listen to "The Tzimisce Show" every Thursday night from 8-10 pm only on "The Growl" ( Radio with byte!

    by Koldun on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 04:00:35 PM PST

    •  Don't be silly about Iraq (none)
      This from a generally pro-U.S. article in the Christian Science Monitor:

      "The city remains sealed to all but residents. Draconian rules that include biometric identity cards for some, a curfew, no weapons, and a zero-tolerance policy for anyone who incites violence are paying off, say US officers, and reassures those who have decided to return."

  •  deborah davis speaks for me (none)
    you go, lady!
  •  Holy Fucking Shit (none)
    Having a police officer come on board a bus and ask for your papers?

    What the fuck is this country coming to?  Are we now in Soviet Russia?

    (0.00,-3.13) "I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it."

    by Steve4Clark on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 06:17:20 PM PST

  •  The other day I wrote a check at Meijers (4.00)
    And the cashier whipped out an inkpad and expected me to provide a thumb print.  I told her it was an infraction of my privacy rights and tore up the check. I wound up using a credit card for the purchase.  I found the whole thing creepy. I'm sure the person in line behind me assumed that I had something to hide.  Whatever.  For me it crossed the line.  I don't want my print on file for any reason, especially for merely shopping.  The fact that I don't have anything to be ashamed of doesn't make a whit of difference, it's the principle.  It's bullshit.    
    •  You're absolutely right- but where does it end? (none)
      Wm F Buckley said many years ago that no one should have more than $500 cash on them at any time. He was talking about federally regulating money via money cards (like credit cards). This way there would be no black market- the scare was money going to the drug trade- but the result is that the fed knows exactly where all your money is.

      Yesterday I read that NY State Committe on Banks is "Establishing Fair Practices in the Use of Payroll Cards."
      "Payroll cards increasingly are being utilized by employers as a cost-effiecient method of paying wages. The cards are issued to employees who then use them to make periodic withdrawals from a bank for an amount equal to their pay...
      ...  A.5456 would clarify rights and obligations for employees regarding fees, costs, statements and other issues...

      OK- IF I were paranoid I would think- well that bastard Buckley is getting his wish. From the nearly benign thought: Nothing more to do than pay those banks more fees to handle my money. To the truly scary: There will be no chance for you to increase wealth because the pie is now made of concrete...

      But I'm not paranoid- just vigilant.

      And I don't have anything to hide either- but like this thumbprint thing- the real thiefs are the bastards that have stolen my RIGHTS!

      I owe my soul to the company store? Sounds familiar.

      How did we come forward so very far to have it fold back on us so quickly? Must be some kind of warped tesserect reality going on here...

    •  guilty until proven innocent (none)
      This is ridiculous. I gave a thumb print, for a check I cashed, at a bank, where the money was drawn not only from that bank but that very branch. When I asked the teller why I had to do that, she seemed unable to give me a reason. Probably part of some system of orders from the top down.

      However, in your case, you are essentially doing this chain store company a courtesy by giving them your business. You don't have to shop there. You don't have to give them your money. And yet they then expect you to go along with being treated like a criminal, presumed guilty until proven innocent.

      And whenever a company treats me like I'm presumed guilty until proven innocent, I always innocently tell them to f**k off.

    •  Cost Plus (none)
      A friend told me they had good prices on wine, so I went over. (This was several years ago.) When I went to pay, the gal asked for my license (by no stretch of anyones imagination could I be taken for someone under 21).

      Turned out that she was going to fill out a long form with my name, license number, the amount of the purchase, the number of bottles, credit card info, etc. And then, I spot this sign that says they keep this info on file with no purge dates.

      I walked away and left the wine at the register after telling them they had no need to collect this info and it amounted to harassing their customers. Everyone around me seemed shocked that I was doing this.

      I've never gone back.

      Hiller's (Wayne & Oakland Co. chain) is id'ing all alcohol purchases too now. It used to be my favorite grocery store. As far as I'm concerned, if they can't hire people who can tell if someone truly needed to be carded, they don't deserve my business.

      Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed it is the only thing that ever has. -- Margaret Mead

      by Cordelia Lear on Sat Nov 26, 2005 at 12:09:57 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Imagine (none)
    if starkravinglunaticradical had been on that bus.
  •  *Public* Bus (none)
    The key is Public transit doing a service for Federal workers.
    There is not a law that requires ID be shown unless there is due cause.
    After the Oklahoma City Bombing ID checks were required to enter Federal buildings.
    What if a person riding the Bus did not have any ID?
    Would they arrest them, bar them from riding the Bus?
    Are they doing any bag checks? Could someone with a ID bring a bomb on the Bus?
    The solution to this problem is to reroute the Bus so the Bus does not go on Federal property or IDs are only checked if someone gets off the Bus on Federal property.

    There were a number of steps Bush could have taken,the elderly were drowning, babies were dying, but the President went to bed. Culture of Life?

    by retLT on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 06:54:21 PM PST

    •  asdf (none)
      "After the Oklahoma City Bombing ID checks were required to enter Federal buildings."

      Isn't that a bit of a puzzle. The bombers here didn't enter a building to blow it up. They drove a truck up in front of it. If ID was required to stop something like that, it should be an ID check for trucks passing federal buildings, not for entering a building.

      Things are on thin ice in the US. What if you could no longer even enter a federal building or court without a special ID? No open trials? No access to information?

      The most courageous act is still to think for yourself. Aloud. -Coco Chanel

      by Overseas on Sat Nov 26, 2005 at 02:34:40 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  This will get a lot more exposure now (none)
    It's been greenlighted on
  •  It sounds like it might be illuminating (none)
    to find out what the history of that bus route is. The fact that the actual ID check was extremely perfunctory suggests to me that some kind of compromise had been worked out between the federal employees and clients who rode the bus to the facility, the city bus lines who provide the service, and the federal bureaucrats, who had to cya for shuffling busloads of civilians across a sacrosanct federal reservation. It could be that a pro forma search was instituted as a way to make all concerned content with the route's existence.

    Of course, the assumption was that no one would object to the search.

    Greg Shenaut

    •  Why ask if you aren't looking for anything? (none)
      It is one thing if you have an APB Bulletin out.  It is another if you aren't looking for anyone or anything.

      "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities" -- Voltaire

      by ohwilleke on Fri Nov 25, 2005 at 11:06:13 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Drive Interstate 10 in Texas (4.00)
    There just the fact that you are on the highway some what near the Mexican border is probable cause to search your vehicle. The have stations that look like border crossing station and stop and search vehicles.

    Being from Washington this was a bit of a shock.

    •  I once travelled to Matamoros, Mexico (none)
      via Brownsville, TX

      On the way home via Greyhound, the United States Border Patrol checked my ID four different times.

      I read later that Border Patrol officers can make over $100,000 a year with overtime.

      I have always found Border Patrol officers to be pleasant and devoted to their duty.

Paolo, Alumbrados, paradox, buddhistMonkey, Angie in WA State, Joe Bob, Madman in the marketplace, easong, DeminNewJ, pb, Cowalker, oofer, lesjam, lightiris, jotter, gogol, misha, Hornito, Oregon Bear, greendem, mickT, alisonk, Pandora, TrueBlueMajority, Unstable Isotope, kainah, janinsanfran, PhoenixRising, Maryscott OConnor, Sprinkles, Emerson, Stoy, Shockwave, hubcity, genethefiend, democat, tryptamine, Pompatus, indigoskye, frisco, patski98, technopolitical, Jerome a Paris, 22state, BillyZoom, redtravelmaster, Cecrops Tangaroa, shermanesq, RumsfeldResign, eyeswideopen, dc 20005, mlafleur, Joe Sixpack, Slacker Gal, RichardG, macdust, jem6x, HippyWitch, Time Waits for no Woman, miholo, MonteLukast, mhale85, ksh01, Patricia Taylor, chechecule, threecents, sgilman, k2winters, Kenyan, xeju, Nate Roberts, thingamabob, Jesterfox, Cedwyn, Alna Dem, txdnc3, MamasGun, Mongo1967, Barbara Morrill, SlowToAnger, oldjohnbrown, Subversive, Republic Not Empire, alivingston, exiledfromTN, duncanidaho, badu, cato, wecandoit7, HollywoodOz, Eddie Haskell, sommervr, happiness cat, JayBat, Noisy Democrat, HillaryGore, retired, Bozos Rnot4 Bush, DrReason, rickeagle, BigBite, Shapeshifter, rapala, sharkbite, Karma for All, gradinski chai, Bluesee, Maduin, liberal atheist, Bensch, 12, aitoaster, LarisaW, baccaruda, Russron, alopour, wobblie, Alien Abductee, clammyc, Cake or Death, WeaselWarrior, CinDan, Ranting Roland, yomoma2424, concerned, jimreyn, GreyHawk, LoneStarLefty, Overseas, RickE, Cannabis, Jay Elias, zinger99, SuthernAhia, TimeTogether, martini, Sanuk, Theo McCarthy, Kingsmeg, midvalley, Opakapaka, BlueInARedState, Ellicatt, InsultComicDog, katier, dangangry

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site