If I get pulled over, can I stay quiet throughout the whole time? Even if the officer is talking to me or asking me questions?
Or does my right only go into effect after they tell me I have it?
Would I get in more trouble if I don’t talk?
You have the right to remain silent. But seeing as your treatment as a result of traffic offenses is pretty much at the discretion of the officer involved, thats guaranteed to make sure you end up with the maximum punishment avaiable (not excluding them finding some reason to search your car and make your life as miserable as possible).
The “Right to Remain Silent” comes from the Fifth Amendment’s prohibition against forcing someone to incriminate themselves. So, as long as the questions the officer is asking don’t require incriminating answers, there is no right to remain silent. If you do so, you could be arrested for Obstructing a Law Enforcement Officer or something similar. Obviously, this all depends on the situation and the laws where you are.
Also, when stopped by a police officer, you are required to identify yourself and provide your current address (Washington state law on this).
Yeah, I had a friend who was a reserve cop, and as nice a guy as he was, he told me about the motorist who pulled over in the big puddle, making him walk in it. Now why he didn’t ask the guy to pull forward, I don’t know, but instead he went all around the car, ticking off as many mechanical violations as he could spot.
I wouldn’t stay actually silent as a general rule. You can answer most questions without giving any reason to suspect that you’re guilty of something else.
Just don’t admit anything when they ask you “Do you know why I stopped you?”
Hmm… Another thought. “You have the right to remain silent” is only told to the public after they’ve been arrested. Does that mean if you’re being detained, you don’t have the right? I’ll bet that after giving your name and address (at least in Washington), you have the right to remain silent, no?
“…nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…” Notice that it says in a criminal case. How exactly does that work here? Is that why it’s only told to arrestees: because if you’re arrested, you are now participating in a criminal case? What are your rights before that? Does it vary any from state to state?
Good advice.
However, being the whitebread guy I am, I actually convince a cop once that he’d pulled over the wrong car. I was convincing because I was telling the truth. I hadn’t bombed through that intersection southbound, I’d turned left from the westbound lanes. It also may have helped that I was one of the “good kids attending the local Christian university”.
I have to disagree with this. My personal experience (and I’ve been pulled over a fair amount of times…) is that every single time I’ve answered the question honestly (ie. “Yes, sir. I was speeding.”) I’ve not been ticketed. The times that I’ve “dummied up”, I’ve been given a ticket.
And don’t say “No, do you?” either. Trust me. 
Same experience here, though I’ve only been pulled over a few times. I wonder if it’s because the cops are so pleasantly surprised by having a motorist sheepishly say “You got me” rather than argue or pitch a fit.
I love the dumbfounded look police officers sometimes get when to “Do you know how fast you were going?” they receive a very friendly “Of course! I pay attention at all times!” and nothing more.
I am so going to use that!
Lawyer friend of mine says “Even a fish wouldn’t get caught if it kept its mouth shut.”
Obviously, you need to provide i.d. and other documents requested. Same lawyer tells me if you’re asked “Do you know why I pulled you over?” the best answer is “No, sir/ma’am, I don’t.”
If asked anything else, a good answer is something along the lines of, “I’d rather not discuss it.”
It also, of course, depends on what the cop says about why he pulled you over.
YMMV.
An even *better * answer is this: “Am I free to go?” Not only is not incriminating, but it forces the cop to tell you whether or not you are (still) being detained.
What a lawyer tells you may vary from what a police officer would tell you. You may be exercising your rights to the letter of the law but copping an attitude and pissing off the cop isn’t going to help you. Your example is polite and probably OK but things like, “My lawyer said not to answer that” could be asking for trouble.
An illustrative story which does not bear directly on the OP but gives some insight as to the mindset of a particular officer which may or may not be representative:
My best friend drove me home late at night, after midnight, when we were 17. We were talking so we stayed in the car instead of going in the house and waking my mother. A neighbor who did not recognize the car called the cops. My friend gets out of the car and says, “What’s the charge?” And the cop says, “Don’t give me that TV shit!” (Cop then sees the address on my driver’s license and told us to go inside.)
It seems that it’s best to see what the potential up and down side is to the situation. If I’m just getting pulled over, I generally try to be a pleasant and honest as possible. In this case, the cop is, by and large, the judge and jury. You might be able to talk yourself out of a ticket by being pleasant and forthright. The down side, a $150 or so, won’t break you.
Now if it was a serious crime (not the op I realize) the down side is much, much worse, so I’d clam up pretty quick.
I don’t know about that. A police officer’s entire job is to incriminate people. I can think of very few, if any, instances where a question from a police officer is completely innocuous. (even “How about this weather?” is probably meant to determine something about the suspect)
When we talk about the “right to remain silent,” we’re usually talking about how refusal to answer questions in a custodial interrogation cannot be used against you in subsequent proceedings. An ordinary traffic stop, without more, generally does not constitute a “custodial arrest” so as to necessitate Miranda warnings.
Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420 (1984).
Sort of. Asking questions related to statistics or booking are generally not considered testimonial in nature, but the Court has also held has also held that asking a DWI arrestee “What was the date of your sixth birthday?” was tesimonial and required a Miranda warning. The questioning has to amount to “interrogation,” which means that the police should know that their words or actions are reasonably likely to elicit incriminating information. I’ll have to write more on it later though, gotta run for a second.
Yes and no and yes. 
In court, on the stand, you may not refuse to answer a question unless it actually incriminates you. You can’t claim the Fifth Amendment capriciously, in other words; when you “take the Fifth,” you must be able to justify your refusal under the Fifth Amendment.
In the field, or at the station, talking to an officer, there’s no such rule. You may be generally required to identify yourself – routine “booking” question such as name and date/palce of birth are per se not incriminating. But if you don’t wish to answer any more substantive questions, generally you don’t have to. This is not intended as specific legal advice; I am not your lawyer and you are not my client. For specific legal advice, consult a lawyer licensed in your jurisdiction.
IMO:
When getting pulled over by the cop, the $150 speeding ticket (or whatever) is the least of my worries. My biggest concern is that the cop might be a “rogue cop.” This type of cop will lie to your face, infringe on your inalienable rights, and (in extreme cases) plant evidence. Rogue cops are nothing more than criminals with badges. How do I know if the cop is a rogue cop or not? I don’t. But for self-defense purposes, I always assume they are. Hence I am *extremely * careful of what I say and do when detained by a cop.