A person doesn't always have to be Mirandized before being questioned. The interrogation has to be custodial, i.e., they actually have to be in custody and their movements restricted. For practical reasons, most components of a traffic stop are not considered custodial, either.
Do you hear SSN# on your scanner
- Thread starter lucky43113
- Start date
- Status
A person doesn't always have to be Mirandized before being questioned. The interrogation has to be custodial, i.e., they actually have to be in custody and their movements restricted. For practical reasons, most components of a traffic stop are not considered custodial, either.
ecps92
Member
Same with the III as well as the CHRI to/from other states via NLETS
SSN will still be used, over the air, either in full or as you say last 4
SSN will still be used, over the air, either in full or as you say last 4
Has been and probably always will be.
lucky43113
Member
I was in custody and spent 8hrs in jail never read my rights but they didn't have to according to the judge
They won't Mirandize you if they don't question you. The questions have to be of a nature that the answers may be incriminating. "How's the family?" or "What's your name?" or "What's your date of birth?" for instance, don't require Miranda.
lucky43113
Member
The questions were related to why I was being arrested and the answers could have been incriminating it was a firearms charge. Violation of a gun free zone ended up with just non-reporting probation and I kept all my rights.
skinnyb82
Member
Yup Miranda only required when a reasonable person would conclude that the questions could elicit an incriminating response. Also, it's absurd that they needed 8 hours to identify you unless your name is John Smith.
Under ORC Section 2921.29, only info required to disclose under your stop and identify statute is name, address, DOB. I see nothing about SSN and they cannot arrest for refusing to disclose SSN (unless the law existed before 1975 or...a bunch of exceptions but none qualify here for purposes of traffic stops, contact, or calls for service). It's also unlawful for the State of Ohio to mandate disclosure (unless they've been mandating disclosure since 1975, which I sincerely doubt) according to Section 7(a)(1) of the Privacy Act of 1974:
"It shall be unlawful for any Federal, State or local government agency to deny to any individual any right, benefit, or privilege provided by law because of such individual’s refusal to disclose his social security account number."
The Privacy Act goes on to state that disclosure is voluntary. They cannot deny you your civil liberties (such as placing you under de facto arrest) simply for not providing an SSN when asked. Further, Ohio Statute, specifically ORC § 2921.29(C), expressly states:
"Nothing in this section requires a person to answer any questions beyond that person's name, address, or date of birth. Nothing in this section authorizes a law enforcement officer to arrest a person for not providing any information beyond that person's name, address, or date of birth or for refusing to describe the offense observed."
Also, the section states it's only a crime if you refuse to provide the above information to a law enforcement officer if you are in the commission of, have committed, or are intending to commit a criminal offense, are complicit in the criminal act, are conspiring to commit a crime, or are a witness to a felony (verbiage is a little bit more thorough). It's a personal choice whether you want to disclose your SSN. May make your life easier, but at what price. Not worth it to me, go ahead and take me into custody for that and then we can hash it out later. If law enforcement truly cannot identify someone without their SSN (which isn't even photo ID) and that person has not gained 100 lbs and dyed their hair blue since the DMV photo was taken, then there's a huge problem and it has nothing to do with the private citizen and everything to do with the government. Found one criminal case, State v. Agnew, where a man was arrested for obstruction because he refused to provide his SSN to an officer in Ohio and the court held that disclosure was voluntary, is always voluntary, and summarily disposed of the obstruction charge in a few paragraphs citing the Privacy Act of 1974.
It's worth noting that the Real ID Act of 2005 (with which Ohio is in full compliance...Illinois is not and had to get another waiver but that's another story) requires proof of an SSN before a DL is issued or verification that the DL applicant is ineligible for an SSN. Since the SSN is required to obtain the DL, requiring both when contact with law enforcement occurs is duplicitous and nonsensical. Also, under the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 states are barred from placing SSNs on DL, state ID, or vehicle registration. Having an SSN on any one of those forms of ID makes it a breeze to steal an identity if one discovers a lost DL/ID/registration or steals one (or more). Seems like Ohio is one of the few states with zero legal protections for SSNs other than a federal lawsuit (which would likely be unsuccessful as the Sixth Circuit has held there's no privacy interest in a social security number, but there is a thing called "unreasonable search and seizure" and "deprivation of due process" and both are frowned upon by judges) but who wants to go there if it isn't necessary.
Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk
Under ORC Section 2921.29, only info required to disclose under your stop and identify statute is name, address, DOB. I see nothing about SSN and they cannot arrest for refusing to disclose SSN (unless the law existed before 1975 or...a bunch of exceptions but none qualify here for purposes of traffic stops, contact, or calls for service). It's also unlawful for the State of Ohio to mandate disclosure (unless they've been mandating disclosure since 1975, which I sincerely doubt) according to Section 7(a)(1) of the Privacy Act of 1974:
"It shall be unlawful for any Federal, State or local government agency to deny to any individual any right, benefit, or privilege provided by law because of such individual’s refusal to disclose his social security account number."
The Privacy Act goes on to state that disclosure is voluntary. They cannot deny you your civil liberties (such as placing you under de facto arrest) simply for not providing an SSN when asked. Further, Ohio Statute, specifically ORC § 2921.29(C), expressly states:
"Nothing in this section requires a person to answer any questions beyond that person's name, address, or date of birth. Nothing in this section authorizes a law enforcement officer to arrest a person for not providing any information beyond that person's name, address, or date of birth or for refusing to describe the offense observed."
Also, the section states it's only a crime if you refuse to provide the above information to a law enforcement officer if you are in the commission of, have committed, or are intending to commit a criminal offense, are complicit in the criminal act, are conspiring to commit a crime, or are a witness to a felony (verbiage is a little bit more thorough). It's a personal choice whether you want to disclose your SSN. May make your life easier, but at what price. Not worth it to me, go ahead and take me into custody for that and then we can hash it out later. If law enforcement truly cannot identify someone without their SSN (which isn't even photo ID) and that person has not gained 100 lbs and dyed their hair blue since the DMV photo was taken, then there's a huge problem and it has nothing to do with the private citizen and everything to do with the government. Found one criminal case, State v. Agnew, where a man was arrested for obstruction because he refused to provide his SSN to an officer in Ohio and the court held that disclosure was voluntary, is always voluntary, and summarily disposed of the obstruction charge in a few paragraphs citing the Privacy Act of 1974.
It's worth noting that the Real ID Act of 2005 (with which Ohio is in full compliance...Illinois is not and had to get another waiver but that's another story) requires proof of an SSN before a DL is issued or verification that the DL applicant is ineligible for an SSN. Since the SSN is required to obtain the DL, requiring both when contact with law enforcement occurs is duplicitous and nonsensical. Also, under the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 states are barred from placing SSNs on DL, state ID, or vehicle registration. Having an SSN on any one of those forms of ID makes it a breeze to steal an identity if one discovers a lost DL/ID/registration or steals one (or more). Seems like Ohio is one of the few states with zero legal protections for SSNs other than a federal lawsuit (which would likely be unsuccessful as the Sixth Circuit has held there's no privacy interest in a social security number, but there is a thing called "unreasonable search and seizure" and "deprivation of due process" and both are frowned upon by judges) but who wants to go there if it isn't necessary.
Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk
lucky43113
Member
no the 8hrs was for paper work after i posted bail it was an actual arrest here we have to give SSN to buy a hunting or fishing license too this started a few years ago
RFI-EMI-GUY
Member
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2013
- Messages
- 6,868
Legally you are not required to furnish your SSN as an ID. Unfortunately, circumstances have degraded to the point where folks having volunteered it for such things as telephone service, it is now defacto ID.
Over 15 years ago, I called the phone company about some long distance service and they requested my SSN for ID. I said, I don't think I have ever given my SSN to your company before so we will have to use some other form of ID. They backed off.
lucky43113
Member
no choice here no SSN no fishing/hunting license
ecps92
Member
Generally that is used, for the Credit Check to ensure you will pay your bills.
skinnyb82
Member
I have no problem giving my tax info to taxing authorities. Well, I do, but what am I gonna do about it? Nothing, so I acquiesce. Hunting and fishing licenses here require SSN but when you go to buy one, they allow you to plug it in at the terminal so the employee doesn't see it. I've had Walmart employees ask me for my SSN when buying a fishing license, I refused and suggested he allow me to key it in myself. He obliged. I don't believe I had to provide it when applying for my Firearm Owner's Identification nor my CCL, as the latter is tied to the former, and the former is tied to DL and vehicle registration.
Insofar as Ohio cops not having access to LEADS on their MVCs...they do. It must be policy that dictates everything goes through dispatch. Still problematic as it adds unnecessary radio traffic.
I do know Ohio has some really messed up laws concerning consumer debt and I have heard lots of accounts of people stopped for something like speeding, ending up being arrested for some unpaid medical debt for which a default judgment was obtained (without proper service of process to the defendant, so-called "sewer service" where the process server drops the summons in the front yard, street, otherwise improperly serves defendant).
The reason why I have such a problem with giving out my SSN to any government agent requesting it is that I have dealt with some unsavory law enforcement officers in the past. Had an illegal search conducted on my car back when I was in school, ironically on my way to contract law class when I was stopped and he decided to fabricate a pot smell in my car. Mind you, my dad had died four days prior and I had six sutures in my right arm from surgery one week prior. Fast forward 45 minutes and they're holding tablets of Motrin, screaming at me "What the...is this you little....?"
Me: "Uh, ibuprofen, didn't you see the bottle?"
Trooper (name redacted): "Shut up. Why does anyone need this much ibuprofen?"
Me: "Is ibuprofen a Schedule I narcotic? No. Is it Schedule II, III, nope. It's over the counter, and take a look at my arm. I'm in pain, you're causing more pain by forcing me to press my palms into the hood of my car and every time I lift one up, your cover fondles the grip of his pistol"
Trooper: "Pfft, no he's not (dash cam begs to differ) and you did that yourself" (Yes, a man with no medical training whatsoever managed to close 6" incision on his dominant arm using surgical grade sutures...and while we're at it, I'm concealing a unicorn in my trunk). He couldn't find anything and it angered him so he kept asking me questions, including asking for my SSN, my doctor's phone number, my surgeon's number (he actually called my doc and surgeon, they were both stunned). Told him to pound sand when he asked for my SSN and to either arrest me for nothing at all or let me go. Ended up walking an hour later with a warning for improper lane usage because one tire touched the line but didn't cross it so it isn't even considered improper lane usage. I lectured him on search and seizure in his own squad car as he was writing me up. Kept telling me to shut up because he has an MS in criminal justice so he knows the law. So I threatened to sue both of them, he said he'd destroy the dash cam and audio of the stop. This is why I do not submit to police automatically and do not give out more info than is required. Bottom line, treat me with respect and you will be treated with respect. Fail to treat me with respect and I will play along, voice any objections so that they're caught on audio at every step of the way, give you enough rope to hang yourself then pull the lever when I have em dead to rights. But this is not a discussion about bully cops so I digress.
Drawing the distinction between what is legal and what is practical is an excellent point. We'll get to the point where one needs to provide SSN to use the bathroom. The only private entities that should be legally permitted to require SSN are banks (for Bank Security Act and Anti-Money Laundering). Besides that, if it isn't required by law, then it shouldn't be required at all. I've had my SSN used to open up eight (yes, 8) bank accounts with SunTrust last year. About...5 years before that, someone had used it to open an eTrade account as well as Bank of America savings and checking accounts. Then I had someone skim my debit card, use it to buy $500 in crap at a Walmart in Florida. These are all recorded, filed police report for every incident. That is why I oppose having to hand out my SSN to everyone with a pulse. File your taxes as early as possible so someone doesn't end up claiming your refund. These scum will thieve SSNs, sell them to "undocumented immigrants" aka "illegal aliens," who then use them to file 1040s and claim the person's refund. Second filer using same SSN will set off bells at the Treasury Department and the second filer to claim the refund will be subject to investigation by IRS CID. Why open yourself to ID theft when it's completely unnecessary?
Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk
Insofar as Ohio cops not having access to LEADS on their MVCs...they do. It must be policy that dictates everything goes through dispatch. Still problematic as it adds unnecessary radio traffic.
I do know Ohio has some really messed up laws concerning consumer debt and I have heard lots of accounts of people stopped for something like speeding, ending up being arrested for some unpaid medical debt for which a default judgment was obtained (without proper service of process to the defendant, so-called "sewer service" where the process server drops the summons in the front yard, street, otherwise improperly serves defendant).
The reason why I have such a problem with giving out my SSN to any government agent requesting it is that I have dealt with some unsavory law enforcement officers in the past. Had an illegal search conducted on my car back when I was in school, ironically on my way to contract law class when I was stopped and he decided to fabricate a pot smell in my car. Mind you, my dad had died four days prior and I had six sutures in my right arm from surgery one week prior. Fast forward 45 minutes and they're holding tablets of Motrin, screaming at me "What the...is this you little....?"
Me: "Uh, ibuprofen, didn't you see the bottle?"
Trooper (name redacted): "Shut up. Why does anyone need this much ibuprofen?"
Me: "Is ibuprofen a Schedule I narcotic? No. Is it Schedule II, III, nope. It's over the counter, and take a look at my arm. I'm in pain, you're causing more pain by forcing me to press my palms into the hood of my car and every time I lift one up, your cover fondles the grip of his pistol"
Trooper: "Pfft, no he's not (dash cam begs to differ) and you did that yourself" (Yes, a man with no medical training whatsoever managed to close 6" incision on his dominant arm using surgical grade sutures...and while we're at it, I'm concealing a unicorn in my trunk). He couldn't find anything and it angered him so he kept asking me questions, including asking for my SSN, my doctor's phone number, my surgeon's number (he actually called my doc and surgeon, they were both stunned). Told him to pound sand when he asked for my SSN and to either arrest me for nothing at all or let me go. Ended up walking an hour later with a warning for improper lane usage because one tire touched the line but didn't cross it so it isn't even considered improper lane usage. I lectured him on search and seizure in his own squad car as he was writing me up. Kept telling me to shut up because he has an MS in criminal justice so he knows the law. So I threatened to sue both of them, he said he'd destroy the dash cam and audio of the stop. This is why I do not submit to police automatically and do not give out more info than is required. Bottom line, treat me with respect and you will be treated with respect. Fail to treat me with respect and I will play along, voice any objections so that they're caught on audio at every step of the way, give you enough rope to hang yourself then pull the lever when I have em dead to rights. But this is not a discussion about bully cops so I digress.
Drawing the distinction between what is legal and what is practical is an excellent point. We'll get to the point where one needs to provide SSN to use the bathroom. The only private entities that should be legally permitted to require SSN are banks (for Bank Security Act and Anti-Money Laundering). Besides that, if it isn't required by law, then it shouldn't be required at all. I've had my SSN used to open up eight (yes, 8) bank accounts with SunTrust last year. About...5 years before that, someone had used it to open an eTrade account as well as Bank of America savings and checking accounts. Then I had someone skim my debit card, use it to buy $500 in crap at a Walmart in Florida. These are all recorded, filed police report for every incident. That is why I oppose having to hand out my SSN to everyone with a pulse. File your taxes as early as possible so someone doesn't end up claiming your refund. These scum will thieve SSNs, sell them to "undocumented immigrants" aka "illegal aliens," who then use them to file 1040s and claim the person's refund. Second filer using same SSN will set off bells at the Treasury Department and the second filer to claim the refund will be subject to investigation by IRS CID. Why open yourself to ID theft when it's completely unnecessary?
Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk
lucky43113
Member
Here we have no firearems card (very progun state) but i did have to show my SS card to get my CCL which they are trying to do away with and make us constitutional carry , and now they want to get rid of the duty to inform where you have to tell a cop you are carrying
You do NOT have to show your SSN to get your Ohio CCL. I have had 2, my wife once and several friends as well. No state requirement at all. There is an OPTION to enter it on the paperwork. If your Sheriff asked to see your SSN card - he was out of order.
It may help with NICS check (or not). Same when completing a 4473 for firearm purchase - optional.
lucky43113
Member
I know it's optional on the 4473 but as far as the CCL I didn't question it as I wasn't worried about it
Hooligan
Member
No idea if it's still the case or not, but back in the 1990s if Ohio Highway Patrol ran a check on someone, they'd give the full name, DOB & SSN out over the air to the dispatcher. Better yet, if the person was stopped for some civil infraction or I suppose misdemeanor & was being cited for it, at least if you weren't a resident of Ohio, you'd basically have to pay a bond, promising to appear in court or plead-guilty via mail, so complete credit card info was also given out via non-secure voice radio back in that era too.
lucky43113
Member
I have never heard cc info but I have heard Checking account numbers a few times when someone reports identity theft and the dispatcher wants the number for the report
Want a Job? SSN.
Want an ID? SSN.
Want an gun? SSN.
You a Vet, and need treatment at an VA ER? SSN.
Want to go to School, whether its K-12, or higher edumacation? SSN.
Want Insurance? SSN.
Want an apartment, or house to rent? SSN.
Want to vote? SSN.
Want to obey the law as is stated on your SSC? NO SSN!
The ONE thing that is NEVER to be used as your ID, is the ONE thing that IS the ONLY real way you get IDed! Unless you get convicted of an felony and serve time... Then you have an even better way for LEA to know ya.. Its called your DOC Gallery Number LOL!
Welcome to the way it is. Move along, nothing to see here!
Want an ID? SSN.
Want an gun? SSN.
You a Vet, and need treatment at an VA ER? SSN.
Want to go to School, whether its K-12, or higher edumacation? SSN.
Want Insurance? SSN.
Want an apartment, or house to rent? SSN.
Want to vote? SSN.
Want to obey the law as is stated on your SSC? NO SSN!
The ONE thing that is NEVER to be used as your ID, is the ONE thing that IS the ONLY real way you get IDed! Unless you get convicted of an felony and serve time... Then you have an even better way for LEA to know ya.. Its called your DOC Gallery Number LOL!
Welcome to the way it is. Move along, nothing to see here!
Last edited by a moderator:
skinnyb82
Member
Don't need to give the BATFE your SSN on Form 4473 unless you want to. And those forms only go to BATFE when the FFL surrenders his or her license, although I've heard of ATF agents copying 4473s en masse, which is a violation of federal law. I've been told it helps, others have said it makes no difference. I had to provide my SSN to BATFE on Form 7CR when I applied for my 03 FFL (curio and relics license). Honestly, I'm not very concerned about BATFE. They're usually straight shooters (no pun intended) and don't like to make trouble for anyone. In fact, they admit firearms are over-regulated.
Either way, I'm always delayed by the Illinois FTIP system due to several unsavory characters with identical names (right down to first name, middle initial, last name), plus FTIP is always screwed up. IL uses point of contact with NICS, queries every state database for admissions to mental health facilities, arrests, issuance of OPs, etc. Then checks federal. I didn't have to give my SSN for either FOID or CCL, as they are both tied to the DL and proof of an SSN or proof that one is ineligible for an SSN is required to obtain a DL. Illinois CCLs are tied to vehicle registrations, so every time I'm stopped, my active CCL pops up in LEADS when the LEO runs a 28 on my tags at the inception of the stop. Since we have modified duty to inform, we only have to disclose a firearm being carried in accordance with the law if directly asked but it's a very touchy issue as it was "brand new" (idiot bureaucrats tried to reinvent the wheel, like we're the first shall issue state when actually the last). Anecdote, I was stopped by a probationary Trooper out of D14 (the higher-ups are not on my list of favorite people) a couple of years ago, he point blank asked me if I was carrying (I wasn't, so I answered honestly "no"), but offered up my CCL card just for informative purposes. He initially declined, handed me my stuff and told me I was free to leave, changed his mind because he'd never seen a "real one" before. Standing there on the side of US 67, gawking at it and chit chatting about it. Illinois residents only gained "right to carry" after a federal lawsuit that went to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit and invalidated our ban on carry outside the home.
I guess the bottom line is that a number that is NOT identification will be eventually be used for identification purposes if you wish to use the restroom. We'll reach the point where TSA-like agents will be crawling everywhere, requiring permission and ID to pee.
Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk
Either way, I'm always delayed by the Illinois FTIP system due to several unsavory characters with identical names (right down to first name, middle initial, last name), plus FTIP is always screwed up. IL uses point of contact with NICS, queries every state database for admissions to mental health facilities, arrests, issuance of OPs, etc. Then checks federal. I didn't have to give my SSN for either FOID or CCL, as they are both tied to the DL and proof of an SSN or proof that one is ineligible for an SSN is required to obtain a DL. Illinois CCLs are tied to vehicle registrations, so every time I'm stopped, my active CCL pops up in LEADS when the LEO runs a 28 on my tags at the inception of the stop. Since we have modified duty to inform, we only have to disclose a firearm being carried in accordance with the law if directly asked but it's a very touchy issue as it was "brand new" (idiot bureaucrats tried to reinvent the wheel, like we're the first shall issue state when actually the last). Anecdote, I was stopped by a probationary Trooper out of D14 (the higher-ups are not on my list of favorite people) a couple of years ago, he point blank asked me if I was carrying (I wasn't, so I answered honestly "no"), but offered up my CCL card just for informative purposes. He initially declined, handed me my stuff and told me I was free to leave, changed his mind because he'd never seen a "real one" before. Standing there on the side of US 67, gawking at it and chit chatting about it. Illinois residents only gained "right to carry" after a federal lawsuit that went to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit and invalidated our ban on carry outside the home.
I guess the bottom line is that a number that is NOT identification will be eventually be used for identification purposes if you wish to use the restroom. We'll reach the point where TSA-like agents will be crawling everywhere, requiring permission and ID to pee.
Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk
- Status
Similar threads
