"So what ever happened to the 5th amendment and the right to be silent."
(D) It is not a violation of this section to refuse to answer a question that would reveal a person's age or date of birth if age is an element of the crime that the person is suspected of committing.
There ya go!
And, for the record, I did a knee jerk reaction as well to this bill. However, in seeing the actual language that the ACLU is "protesting", it just gives police officers the right to arrest anyone who won't identify who they are - but only if the officer stops an individual on a "suspicion". They already have that power, somewhat. The officer must have an "articulable suspicion" of a crime as a reason he stopped an individual. This bill doesn't change that - it now gives them the authority to arrest anyone who is uncooperative.
Yes, of course, I see the power for abuse. It really doesn't sit well with me.
Case in point - I once ran into a rookie officer (that was trying to make a name for himself in the dept) that stopped me on a resonable suspicion. I cooperated fully and proved to him that his suspicions were false - while providing all necessary information. However, he demanded to see my social security number. I told him he wasn't entitled to that information and he threatened to arrest me then. I told him "go ahead - what law did I break?" None. Needless to say, I won that match. But the power for abuse is definitely out there.
I think there needs to be a legal standard that defines what "probable cause" is for requesting ID, where willful refusal to comply would be a crime. The standard should involve a reasonable basis for suspicion that obtaining the ID might solve or prevent a crime. Not having any ID (for whatever reason) should be an unchallengeable defense.