It seems that he's mad because he was actually asked for those things and that he wasn't able to get away with not having them. I guess he thought since he was not drunk, they should have let him go without asking to see his license and registration for some reason. Even though they ask everyone for those things.

this is not the law in the US. Pedestrians arent required to carry ID. So long as they know who they are and can cooperate with an officer. An actual document is not legally required.

thats odd, because EVERYTIME im stopped for anything, they check my license and registration and it takes maybe five minutes

but thats IF papers are in order or IF the driver has papers at all, I Guess,

I think she is right...here to in Canada Pedestrians are not required to carry ID

(at least in Texas) you don't have to carry ID to walk, etc. But if you get pulled over (suspected in a crime or something) then you do have to prove who you are. Cops can search you by the name you give but it's quicker to show an ID or DL

Variations in “stop and identify” laws

Four states’ laws (Arizona, Indiana, Nevada, and Ohio) explicitly impose an obligation to provide identifying information.
Fifteen states grant police authority to ask questions, with varying wording, but do not explicitly impose an obligation to respond:
In Montana, police “may request” identifying information;
In 13 states (Alabama, Delaware, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Utah, Wisconsin), police “may demand” identifying information;
In Colorado, police “may require” identifying information of a person.
Identifying information varies, but typically includes
Name, address, and an explanation of the person’s actions;
In some cases it also includes the person’s intended destination, the person’s date of birth (Indiana and Ohio), or written identification if available (Colorado).
Arizona’s law, apparently written specifically to codify the holding in Hiibel, requires a person’s “true full name”.
Nevada’s law, which requires a person to “identify himself or herself”, apparently requires only that the person state his or her name.
In five states (Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island), failure to identify oneself is one factor to be considered in a decision to arrest. In all but Rhode Island, the consideration arises in the context of loitering or prowling.
Six states (Arizona, Florida, Indiana, New Mexico, Ohio, and Vermont) explicitly impose a criminal penalty for noncompliance with the obligation to identify oneself.
As of February 2011, the validity of a law requiring that a person detained provide anything more than stating his or her name has not come before the U.S. Supreme Court.

the reason being we have no offical national id card. We have cards which show id, but their purpose is not for that.

Drivers license are to prove we are valid to drive a vehicle.
passport proves you are a citizen
social security card proves you are legal to work(or be claimed on taxes)


if citizens choose not to drive or dont travel internationally or have a need to work ,,,there is no legal way to require them to purchase such documents,,,

What we have learned here tonight:

The cops in Arkansas are MUCH slower than the cops in Nevada.

Good night, Mingle Peeps!

yup...and that I think what really happened to him...but what got us all was him bringing in Hitler...which has been dead for decades and then talking about Jews....what do they have to do with him having a problem because he had no papers...why I asked a few times why did he have no papers is because many are driving without their papers for many reasons