[eman]

Originally Posted by Tightline11

I know I will never move to Portland I this is allowed. I do know in Louisiana you have to present ID when ever it is asked for by LEO and when he said no then he would have been arrested for resisting and to be a ***** about it if his shirt would have fell over the handle of the pistol in Louisiana that is considered concealed carry and you have to present ID for that or go to jail. The cop let a lot of big talk get to him and all who say the guy was cool for knowing his rights that is good he should, but let him sit next to you and your family while out eating somewhere and see how you feel. To be considered open carry in Louisiana there or some strict guide lines and Im glade they or that way.


Sent from my iPhone 4 using Tapatalk

LEO Has the right in LA to demand to see ID but there is a difference in demand and required.
ariations 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
All this seems to hinge on weather you are being detained or not ???