From: Duncan Frissell <frissell@panix.com>
To: Ian Goldberg <iang@cory.EECS.Berkeley.EDU>
Message Hash: d413d207762c11b6c0bc8f1cd7e9f40910bd60460130694391ef498b95d5ef09
Message ID: <199510251617.MAA23789@panix.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1995-10-25 16:20:01 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 25 Oct 95 09:20:01 PDT
From: Duncan Frissell <frissell@panix.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 95 09:20:01 PDT
To: Ian Goldberg <iang@cory.EECS.Berkeley.EDU>
Subject: Re: Mandatory ID in California?
Message-ID: <199510251617.MAA23789@panix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
At 08:45 AM 10/25/95 -0700, Ian Goldberg wrote:
>"The officer, in accordance with police policy, arrested Burton
>for refusing to properly identify himself."
><snip>
>
>That last sentence seemed ominous to me...
This has been chatted about for years. Under California law, failure to
identify yourself is a minor violation. They always dismiss the next day at
your hearing. You don't have to carry ID, you just have to identify
yourself (there's a difference). "my name Jose Jimenez." You still don't
need ID unless you are operating a motor vehicle on public streets and roads
(or maybe catching a plane).
DCF
"The average seasoned citizen pays a higher percentage of his income for
medical expenses today than he did in 1964 before the passage of Medicaid."
Return to October 1995
Return to “Rich Graves <llurch@networking.stanford.edu>”