The United States vs. Deborah Davis

[Mediocrates]

http://www.papersplease.org/davis/index.html


Meet Deborah Davis. She's a 50 year-old mother of four who lives and works in Denver, Colorado. Her kids are all grown-up: her middle son is a soldier fighting in Iraq. She leads an ordinary, middle class life. You probably never would have heard of Deb Davis if it weren't for her belief in the U.S. Constitution.


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.

DEB DAVIS LIKES to commute to work by public bus. She uses the time to read, crochet or pay bills. It's her quiet time. What with the high price of gas, she saves money, too: a week's worth of gas money gets her a month's worth of bus rides.


The bus she rides crosses the property of the Denver Federal Center, a collection of government offices such as the Veterans Administration, the U.S. Geological Survey, and part of the National Archives. The Denver Federal Center is not a high security area: it's not Area 51 or NORAD.

On her first day commuting to work by bus, the bus stopped at the gates of the Denver Federal Center. A security guard got on and demanded that all of the passengers on this public bus produce ID. She was surprised by the demand of the man in uniform, but she complied: it would have meant a walk of several miles if she hadn't. Her ID was not taken and compared to any "no-ride" list. The guard barely glanced at it.

When she got home, what had happened on the bus began to bother her. 'This is not a police state or communist Russia', she thought. From her 8th grade Civics class she knew there is no law requiring her, as an American citizen, to carry ID or any papers, much less show them to anyone on a public bus.

She decided she would no longer show her ID on the bus.


------

Read the rest and sleep tight.

[Ariksan]

Whats the problem with showing your ID. That's what an ID is there for. It's not like she was asked to strip on the bus. If the US is serious about preventing terrorism then this is one of many meassures that neede to be taken.

Shock horror! You must show your ID to a police officer! lol...

[minusthejihad]

Funny, when I was moving to America's most Liberal State, California, my first experience was to be stopped at a checkpoint and have the contents of my entire moving truck searched for foreign fruits, plants, and animals (nice names for Illegal Aliens) and this was before 9/11. I'm 30 and I still get carded for alcohol. I would think that when using public transport such as planes, subways, and now buses, sometimes you give up your privacy (or ID) for the benefit of society. I don't like it, but thats the way it is.

[genghis_tom]

I will gladly begrudge myself of a few seconds to reach into my pocket and pull out ID if it means I and America can be that much more secure...
On the other hand, does anyone think that this will turn into McCarthyism? "Are you now, have ever, or will refuse to show your ID?"

[minusthejihad]

No, its turning into an ACLU thing. Take an abstract stand, no matter how idealistic and inpractical, and don't budge, making yourself into a true American Patriot Martyr because you know your rights, but only if they are concerned specifically with you.

At the same time I respect her selfishness, as I am a firm believer in the Virtue of Selfishness!

[Mediocrates]

Funny, when I was moving to America's most Liberal State, California, my first experience was to be stopped at a checkpoint and have the contents of my entire moving truck searched for foreign fruits, plants, and animals (nice names for Illegal Aliens) and this was before 9/11. I'm 30 and I still get carded for alcohol. I would think that when using public transport such as planes, subways, and now buses, sometimes you give up your privacy (or ID) for the benefit of society. I don't like it, but thats the way it is.


I was stopped at the California border in 1970 long before illegals was an issue. It's always been an agriculture issue. Same thing as entering the US or Canada.

You were carded for an active motive. You were attempting to purchase something be it alcohol tobacco or firearms. Is an id check because you walk past the liquor store a reasonable act?

Riding a bus is not an active motive. The rider has no control over the bus route and it was done because the bus line happens to go through Federal property where the government can supercede your civil rights at will. Would you like to submit to a urine sample as well?

The government has to demonstrate that a lack of privacy actually is a public safety issue. That's more or less implied in Supreme court cases such as Griswold.

[Mediocrates]

Whats the problem with showing your ID. That's what an ID is there for. It's not like she was asked to strip on the bus.


But legally there would be no prohibition from doing so either.

[minusthejihad]

I was stopped at the California border in 1970 long before illegals was an issue. It's always been an agriculture issue. Same thing as entering the US or Canada.

You were carded for an active motive. You were attempting to purchase something be it alcohol tobacco or firearms. Is an id check because you walk past the liquor store a reasonable act?

Riding a bus is not an active motive. The rider has no control over the bus route and it was done because the bus line happens to go through Federal property where the government can supercede your civil rights at will. Would you like to submit to a urine sample as well?

The government has to demonstrate that a lack of privacy actually is a public safety issue. That's more or less implied in Supreme court cases such as Griswold.

Piss test? Only if I have the Original Whizinator on me at the time! :)

[Mediocrates]

See in my mind what we've lost is any rational sense of the balance between public policy and private rights. I wear a card key, I understand the necessity of these things. I probably wrote some of the more restrictive rules your ISP uses to enforce security. I am in short, the 'NO' guy. But those things have clear boundaries.

The people who say "What's a little inconvenience?" I say "Why are we even talking about whether this is even an issue?" At what point are we willing to stop and have a public forum about who's interest is being served?

[genghis_tom]

Who's interest is being served?
(I think this was what I am supposed to do now...)

[Mediocrates]

But that's just it. Who's interest, if anyone's is actually being served? We submit to governance under the belief that government will enforce the law with only sufficient force to do its job and no more and the 4th ammendment (and by implication the power of the state is limited under the 3rd ammendment as well) actually stand for something, not merely for something convenient. If it is convenient and therefore defacto legal to search people on Federal property because it's convenient (which under Federal law only restricts access specifically with notification not generally) then it's easily extensible to search people on any property at any time for any reason. In other words if the law does not restrict the government because it's just easy to do whatever proscriptions are in the law then the 4th ammendment really doesn't mean anything. The Federal government is supposed to have the burden to demonstrate that some public interest is served by this exception.

For example is there a difference between asking for that information and doing something with it? Can the government punch your SSN into a handheld device on the bus and record where you were and when? Can it check for bench warrants and supercede the local law enforcement powers? Can it simply use this as an intimidation on its face with the assumption that simple intimidation is itself a public good? These are fundamental questions that define the limits of liberty.

[genghis_tom]

And then what's stopping a ballooning of identity theft? Well said.
Also, government could use the wonderful Necessary and Proper clause (1.8.18), and who knows where it would go from there...

[Leon]

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.

I dont have a problem with this. We are living in a time of war where certain war time regulations and procedures need to be in place. Perfectly normal for a civilised society. As US Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson famously remarked: "The Bill of Rights is not a suicide pact. In times of exigent peril, liberty must often be defended by less than liberal means."

Its simple - if your doing nothing wrong, than you have nothing to fear

[Mediocrates]

So where is the cross over point? All we ever hear is a vague justification because we're 'at war'. Of course it's an undefined undeclared war against an unknown enemy in an unknown location for unknown period of time and no way to ascertain whether we've won, lost, retreated or just quit. It's essentially a licence to declare permanent war and an openended curtailment of many civil liberties for an open ended period of time.

[1.5 million]

Wow - Mediocrities - I can see why you posted this...and I am truly shocked by the predominance of opinon here - that this is not a problem - to have to present ID - and why worry if you have doen nothing wrong (??? - what is wrong with this picture? As decendents of people so victimised by State power you should know better...). Well my friends - IMO - with these attitudes - with this acceptance - I believe the terrorists have won. I must say I see lame brain knee jerk security measures all of the time and perhaps like many I just blindly comply...but evey once in a while I stop to think - what good is this really doing? WHo or what will this really stop? And often I cannot even concieve of an answer...yet here we are easily accepting and jutifying such a thing - most sad - as IMO - it violates one of the prime tenants of what this nation stands for - and that so many would so easily make the choice that we can give up (our basic rights such as) the supremacy of the individual and that we are not required to justify ourselves to the state - well this is most troubling. I think I've made my point though I could say much more on this issue...

[1.5 million]

So where is the cross over point? All we ever hear is a vague justification because we're 'at war'. Of course it's an undefined undeclared war against an unknown enemy in an unknown location for unknown period of time and no way to ascertain whether we've won, lost, retreated or just quit. It's essentially a licence to declare permanent war and an openended curtailment of many civil liberties for an open ended period of time.

Yeah very scary...are we really so ignorant (of who we are) in this country and of the cynicism of what is being done in the name of this so-called "War on Terror"? I don't know about the rest of you - but I feel as though I am being terrorized all right...

[KettleWhistle]

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.

Yeah, cr@p like that happens everywhere. In 2001, a friend of mine was charged with assulting a police officer in L.A. for flipping off a cop who asked him what time it was. ACLU was to no-avail.

[1.5 million]

Yeah, cr@p like that happens everywhere. In 2001, a friend of mine was charged with assulting a police officer in L.A. for flipping off a cop who asked him what time it was. ACLU was to no-avail.

I had to laugh at this one...some friend you have BTW...and some lesson as well eh?...he fought the law....and the law won...but yeah your point is well taken and it is somewhat consistent with the jist of this thread....

[genghis_tom]

Yeah very scary...are we really so ignorant (of who we are) in this country and of the cynicism of what is being done in the name of this so-called "War on Terror"? I don't know about the rest of you - but I feel as though I am being terrorized all right...
Then the terrorists have won. Their object is in no way related to military objectives. They are seeking disruption and, more importantly, terror. I sincerely hope our government will realize this and try to tone down the panic over it, they are only helping.
For instance, after the London bombings (my condolences to forum members from the UK, by the way) news in the US was absolutely jammed with "Could it happen here?" stories. Immediately afterward was a massive panic over subways and other transportation in major cities.
"The only thing we have to fear is fear itself..."

[KettleWhistle]

I had to laugh at this one...some friend you have BTW...and some lesson as well eh?...he fought the law....and the law won...but yeah your point is well taken and it is somewhat consistent with the jist of this thread....

Gee, I didn't know that not telling a dirty porker what time it was somehow equivalent to fighting the law.

[1.5 million]

Gee, I didn't know that not telling a dirty porker what time it was somehow equivalent to fighting the law.

Well I find your lack of respect for just any random police on the street to be pretty sad. Perhaps you would also think it is OK for Palestinian kids to throw rocks at Jewish police or at least to taunt them - that this is OK as they are only rightfuly expressing themselves (to "dirty porkers") or such...

I don't discount that we have gotten hyper-sensitve about these sorts of (questionable) security things here in the states - and I would agree that your friend experienced overeaction - however - as I stated - I found the attitude of your friend (and now you) a bit disturbing - though the "fought the law" comment on my part was a bit of a joke...

[KettleWhistle]

Rrright... so not telling a cop what time it was, is about the same as throwing rocks at the police/security forces. Gotcha.

[1.5 million]

Rrright... so not telling a cop what time it was, is about the same as throwing rocks at the police/security forces. Gotcha.

You said she flipped him off - not very smart in any event eh?

[KettleWhistle]

You said she flipped him off - not very smart in any event eh?

It was a "he," but in any case, how exactly is that criminal? Smart? I don't think it is either smart or stupid. Rude? Sure. But personally, after living in L.A. for years, I have little respect for L.A.P.D. and I can relate to that action.

In either case, there are certain civil protections. U.S. isn't Wild Wild West anymore. I don't see any reason to condone hanging people for talking unfavorable about the local sheriff.

[1.5 million]

Two LAPD in their car saw me get hit and knocked to the ground by a car - when I looked up at them they looked and then drove away...still I would not wish ill on just any LAPD as I know that there are good ones as well...just as I would not think to burn members of an ethnic group in ovens because one beat me out in a business deal - or whatever - same thing...generalization - one of the evils/ills that some men inflict on others as is it convenient and easy and cowardly to boot...easy to generalize and see someone in a suit or a uniform and say - I hate all of them...instead of respecting others as human beings as individuals - yeah your friend was stupid and immature and cowardly and I'm glad that they were punished - maybe teach them a lesson...maybe next time those like your friend see me and my dark skin they wont just say sieg heil and go at me - as skinheads did to me in France once - and instead think to show respect and humanity.

[Roland]

What if, say, an elderly lady commuting in a bus would have showed a banana to the officer, instead of completely refusing to obey and show her ID? This banana could be the symbol of the futility of demanding dozens of ID within minutes, everybody knows that if he'd not be Data (http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/series/TNG/character/1112457.html), little information could be aquired by this kind of well paid police activity.
I have never been bothered by the police (except for speeding), but nobody would care about seeing only an ID, except from video-rental-stores.
Now - how would your local police officer react, knowing that she would not pose an immediate threat.
In other words - to you think your police officers have humor?

[KettleWhistle]

yeah your friend was stupid and immature and cowardly and I'm glad that they were punished
Cowardly for not telling the cop what time it was? And punished with a charge of assaulting a police officer when there wasn't even any physical contact?

Personally, if some LAPD cop asked me what time it was, I would told him to take a hike too. And I don't see why cops should be treated differently than civilian jack-a-s-s-es. Or perhaps you'd think that not telling some at a neighborhood bar what time it was amounts to assault and battery.

[Mediocrates]

Ok let me put this in simple terms people can understand. In every state you can be charged with terrorism if you make a threat to more than one person simultaneously. So if you are in a parking lot and you tell a car load of homies that you're going roll up on them and cap them all you can be charged with making 'terroristic threats'. This is where we've wound up.

If you don't like that one, try telling the ex bouncer working the xray at the airport you don't appreciate him forcing you stand there and watch someone else steal your laptop computer. Curse him out. That's felony.

[minusthejihad]

What do you think about the Bi-polar who got capped tonight on an AA plane by an air marshall?

[Mediocrates]

A) He wasn't even on the plane when he was shot.

B) He had already left the plane and was on the jetway.

The fact that he was a mentally disturbed missionary having an argument with his wife is only icing on the cake.

And let me add that we probably won't see a follow up RCA analysis like we do every time there is law enforcement shooting in every police department in the United States.


Bottom-line airlines are service serving the public for a fee. And the public comes in a diverse spread of shapes sizes and temperments. If the airline can't or won't understand this and simply react like the military then we really don't need airlines at all and they can all go broke.

[Northlander]

I dont have a problem with this. We are living in a time of war where certain war time regulations and procedures need to be in place. Perfectly normal for a civilised society. As US Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson famously remarked: "The Bill of Rights is not a suicide pact. In times of exigent peril, liberty must often be defended by less than liberal means."

Its simple - if your doing nothing wrong, than you have nothing to fear

USA has been on permanent war footing since WWII, and even more so today. With 700+ bases in 130+ countries you will always have times of war. You do right in having this debate, actual war or not.

From here, your population having to show "papers" wherever they go, sounds very Soviet. Add to that camps with people are kept without accusations and even more so. The final trick I guess would be to actually get the citizens to support the idea for the security of the "motherland".

I always thought americans of all people would never put up with this. Hope you sort it out.

[minusthejihad]

USA has been on permanent war footing since WWII, and even more so today. With 700+ bases in 130+ countries you will always have times of war. You do right in having this debate, actual war or not.

From here, your population having to show "papers" wherever they go, sounds very Soviet. Add to that camps with people are kept without accusations and even more so. The final trick I guess would be to actually get the citizens to support the idea for the security of the "motherland".

I always thought americans of all people would never put up with this. Hope you sort it out.

You haven't a clue what you are talking about.

[Northlander]

As I said, the trick is to get the citizens to actually think its a good idea.