The issue of being able to produce ID when asked by a duly sworn officer of the law is meaningless? And no, it doesn't mean that at all, but it much easier to say that then to have an actual discussion of the law as passed.
::michael Ed Leafe wrote: > On May 6, 2010, at 12:05 AM, Michael Oke, II wrote: > >> Your driver's license suffices are proof and if you don't have one, you >> do have some sort of legal id and that also will be fine. > > And, of course, if you don't have an ID on you, you will be arrested. > > That's "show me your papers". That's not the land of liberty. > > > > -- Ed Leafe > > > > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
