And again, this is about stop and identify, which again covers both pedestrians and motor vehicle operators but does not preclude the requirement to identify oneself when operating a motor vehicle, which is covered by different statutes.

▲

ceejayoz 2 days ago | parent [-]

"Additional states (including Arizona, Texas, South Dakota and Oregon) have such laws just for motorists" implies that others do not, correct?

	▲	ibejoeb 2 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Correct. Some states have broad stop-and-identify laws. Some have limited stop-and-identify laws. What we're talking about is more specific than that, and other statutes are implicated. If you were operating a vehicle and cop pulls up next you and casually asks about your day, then you don't have to identify, because that's a consensual encounter. If he suggests that you rolled through the stop, even if you didn't, then you're subject to things like implied consent that are attached to vehicle operation.
	▲	lwansbrough 2 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		If a state does not have a law regarding stop and identify, that does not mean they do not have a law about identifying when operating a motor vehicle.