Certainly true!"I could post dozens of examples where the first words out of the cops moth is "do you have ID?"" m #20
It's not illegal for a policeman pursuant to probable cause to stop and question, including to inquire about identity. In fact, for decades NYC applied a policy known as "stop and frisk". I'm not sure, but I think that may have relatively recently been discontinued, not just for obvious Constitutional reasons. Stats indicated those stopped / frisked were disproportionately minority young men. I gather such NYPD practice usually turned up no evidence of criminal misconduct.
It would have to be an extremely unusual circumstance for a policeman in the U.S. to have a legitimate business related need to know a subject / suspect's Social Security number. And citizens have a legitimate reason to restrict access to that information. Why? It's the linchpin of "identity theft", a crime that can wipe out a citizen's savings, or worse.
I wouldn't disagree with the handcuff risk. That's not an endorsement, merely an acknowledgement.
Technology has done an end-run around all this, as now high resolution cameras in coordination with facial recognition can accomplish what a half century ago individual policemen pounding a beat could only dream of. Of course facial recognition technology is currently deficient, perhaps only 80% reliable. BUT !! The police would then at least have a mug-shot to work with.
I realize it's thin gruel, but citizens do have limited recourse against police excesses. I don't know whether statute or precedent has yet established whether citizens have a right to activate their cellphone or similar video-cam at the beginning of such police encounters. If there is now such a legal standard, and that established standard is that U.S. citizens do not have this legal right, then our republic is lost.