Bill Would Allow Arrests For No Reason In Public Place

[DemInDistress]

CLEVELAND -- A bill on Gov. Bob Taft's desk right now is drawing a lot of criticism, NewsChannel5 reported.

One state representative said it resembles Gestapo-style tactics of government, and there could be changes coming on the streets of Ohio's small towns and big cities.

The Ohio Patriot Act has made it to the Taft's desk, and with the stroke of a pen, it would most likely become the toughest terrorism bill in the country. The lengthy piece of legislation would let police arrest people in public places who will not give their names, address and birth dates, even if they are not doing anything wrong.
http://www.newsnet5.com/news/5580743/detail.html

Of all places this is in OHIO

[tom swift]

1. Ohio

Sometimes you should be careful what you wish for,you might get it. Go red,get a law like this. Hey,if you haven't done anything wrong, what do you have to worry about?

[DemInDistress]

2. tom swift...what scares me more is it may spread to

other states...and welcome to DU !!:hi: :hi: :dem:

[Doctor_J]

3. I posted on this yesterday, along with my news about the

Iraq mom's cyber-support group being harrassed. THis is goddamned frightening, and makes me think that OH won't be going blue any time soon.

[OneTwentyoNine]

4. Ready for modern day Kristallnacht??

Yeah sure...sounds silly,far reaching,far fetched. Want to bet? The Bush administration moves closer to Nazi Germany style of Government on a fucking daily basis.

Of course that theory has been laughed at and shouted down for the last couple of years. Wonder what those detractors thought just a couple of days ago when it was learned that Bush uses his modern day SS to spy,evesdrop,wiretap??

[Babastard]

5. Won't pass Constitutional muster

IMHO

[DemInDistress]

9. babastard...thansk for the feedback and

welcome to DU...:hi: :dem:

[brentspeak]

6. Will they come for people at night? Snatch them by car in broad daylight?

Scary.

[Indy Lurker]

7. Supreme Court covered some of this in June 2004

in a 5-4 split

It was Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court of Nev., Humboldt Cty.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/03-5554.ZO.html


The Supereme Court said:

"The present case begins where our prior cases left off. Here there is no question that the initial stop was based on reasonable suspicion, satisfying the Fourth Amendment requirements noted in Brown"

(Stopping a citizen on "reasonable suspicion" is a Terry stop.)

"To ensure that the resulting seizure is constitutionally reasonable, a Terry stop must be limited. The officer’s action must be “ ‘justified at its inception, and … reasonably related in scope to the circumstances which justified the interference in the first place.’ ” United States v. Sharpe, 470 U.S. 675, 682 (1985)"
..................................

So there still needs to be "reasonable suspicion", (which is a step below "Probable Cause") to stop someone and ask for ID.

The Supreme Court said you have to give your name, but didn't cover any other info, like address or DOB.

[rpannier]

8. Go to the Martini Republic Website They have a great post on this

Here's the link:
http://www.martinirepublic.com/item/ihre-papieren-bitte/