Should loosing your wallet be punishable with house arrest?

Apologies if I misinterpreted bobthebuilder’s statement. The cite states that you are required to give your name when asked, but it doesn’t say that you have to produce id, and only when the officer has a “reasonable suspicion” that some crime has been committed. From the bottom of page 2 of the opinion:

“…the Nevada Supreme Court has interpreted NRS §171.123(3) to require only that a suspect disclose his name. See 118 Nev., at ___, 59 P.3d, at 1206 (opinion of Young, C. J.) (“The suspect is not required to provide private details about his background, but merely to state his name to an officer when reasonable suspicion exists”). As we understand it, the statute does not require a suspect to give the officer a driver’s license or any other document. Provided that the suspect either states his name or communicates it to the officer by other means–a choice, we assume, that the suspect may make–the statute is satisfied and no violation occurs.”

The broader question would be, is one required to ever obtain ID? (For driving purposes, yes, but in general, is it a legal requirement for one to have ID?) Is is legally required that one have a social security number (let’s just say for sake of argument that they are not working or paying income tax). Are we required to have “papers”?

To appy for a job with a temporary employment agency, you have to have either a passport or a driver’s lic. or 2 of these: SS Card, birth certificate and something else I can’t remember right now.

This is why we need bar codes on our necks like the guy in Hitman.

:nods sagely:


At one time (in Ohio) you only needed to know your driver license number. Not sure if that holds true today. I have a terrible time searching the laws of ohio on the net.

I was more thinking on an ethical, or the way I wish it was, not a legal way.

Thanks for the note on grammar, one of the reasons I have started posting here is to help my linguistic skills.