I've been meaning to look in to this piece of controversial legislation and Viking Spirit's call for Gov. Taft to veto it was the latest catalyst for me to dig some information up.Viking has two problems that he has highlighted. The first is that the Ohio Patriot Act would supposedly require a citizen to divulge "the name, address and birth date of anyone they suspect of committing, currently committing, or planning to commit a criminal act." Here is the relevant section of the law:
Sec. 2921.29. (A) No person who is in a public place shall refuse to disclose the person's name, address, or date of birth, when requested by a law enforcement officer who reasonably suspects either of the following:I'm not real sure what this has to do with stopping terrorism specifically, the language employed here is pretty broad, but I don't have a problem with this either. In order to take issue with this, you have to be in favor of crime. I don't think that is really Viking 's position. There is also a built in protection against "fishing expeditions":
(1) The person is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a criminal offense.
(2) The person witnessed any of the following:
(a) An offense of violence that would constitute a felony under the laws of this state;
(b) A felony offense that causes or results in, or creates a substantial risk of, serious physical harm to another person or to property;
(c) Any attempt or conspiracy to commit, or complicity in committing, any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section;
(d) Any conduct reasonably indicating that any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section or any attempt, conspiracy, or complicity described in division (A)(2)(c) of this section has been, is being, or is about to be committed.
(C) 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.The second problem that Viking has is that a citizen would be required to show ID when a law enforcement officer asks. This sounds like Sheriff Billy Bob can stop you in the mall and ask for your ID, that isn't what this legislation does. Here is the relevant section:
Sec. 2909.31. (A) No person entering an airport, train station, port, or other similar critical transportation infrastructure site shall refuse to show identification when requested by a law enforcement officer when there is a threat to security and the law enforcement officer is requiring identification of all persons entering the site.Who has a problem with this? I sure don't... Let's revisit what got all this started, shall we?
That is a critical transportation infrastructure.
Back to Sec. 2909.31...note that there has to be a threat to security and that the law enforcement officer is checking IDs of everyone entering the site. And what is the penalty for not showing your ID?
(B) A law enforcement officer may prevent any person who refuses to show identification when asked under the circumstances described in division (A) of this section from entering the critical transportation infrastructure site.I have absolutely no problem with this whatsoever...
Russian gulags and Nazi stormtroopers this is not... Please, read the legislation... Taft should NOT veto the Ohio Patriot Act.
If I'm missing something, feel free to enlighten me...
