[lwansbrough]

That case is about Terry stops, not about failure to identify when operating a motor vehicle.

A Terry stop includes detainments of pedestrians, who do not have an obligation to identify in most states.

[ceejayoz]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop

> When police stop an automobile, this is known as a traffic stop.

They can't pull you over without reason in the first place.

[lwansbrough]

Yeah you’re doing the thing I suggested people don’t do.

It doesn’t matter if they have RS for the detainment (a reason for the stop), once the traffic stop is underway you must identify.

If you feel as though the detainment was illegal, you can sue after the fact. There’s no point in trying to litigate the situation with the officer.

[ceejayoz]

> It doesn’t matter if they have RS for the detainment (a reason for the stop), once the traffic stop is underway you must identify.

Again:

> Consequently, individuals in states without such statutes cannot be lawfully arrested solely for refusing to identify themselves during a Terry stop.

It is legal for a state to require you to do so, but some have not done so.

[lwansbrough]

Again, this case is about Terry stops. Not traffic stops.

If you have been detained in a motor vehicle you are in control of, you must identify.

[ceejayoz]

> Again, this case is about Terry stops. Not traffic stops.

A traffic stop is a Terry stop. It's within the circle on the Venn diagram.

Stop-and-frisk of a pedestrian is also a Terry stop.

[lwansbrough]

That’s not the point. The point is that a traffic stop is a traffic stop. Traffic stops, while they are Terry stops, also have separate governing rules, such as the fact that there is a failure to identify while operating a motor vehicle statute in every state.

[ibejoeb]

But not all Terry stops are traffic stops. The case you're citing wasn't a traffic stop.