Nevada Revised Code 171.123(3), the statute in question, reads thus: "The officer may detain the person pursuant to this section only to ascertain his identity and the suspicious circumstances surrounding his presence abroad. Any person so detained shall identify himself, but may not be compelled to answer any other inquiry of any peace officer." Section 123 of Chapter 171 of the NRC is titled "Temporary detention by peace officer of person suspected of criminal behavior or of violating conditions of parole or probation: Limitations." This means that a peace officer may detain a person suspected of of criminal behavior only to ascertain his identity and also to find out what he's doing there. Mr. Hiibel was suspected of criminal behavior and refused to identify himself. Case closed. And this statute certainly doesn't violate the Fourth Amendment. The police in this case have the probable cause necessary to begin an investigation (someone called the police, the position of the truck, possible alchohol), the first step of which is to find out who this guy is.

The main page of Hiibel's website claims, "One balmy May evening back in 2000, Dudley was standing around minding his own business when all of a sudden, a policeman pulled-up and demanded that Dudley produce his ID. Dudley, having done nothing wrong, declined. He was arrested and charged with 'failure to cooperate' for refusing to show ID on demand." This is most definitely not the case and makes it sounds like we are living in a police state where people are required to produce their "papers" on demand for no reason at all. In fact, there was a reason, and a very good reason, at that. I recently watched the video, and Hiibel definitely seemed intoxicated; moreover, the officer was very polite and Hiibel was very resistant. Watch the video and judge for yourself.