You may have seen this story from Asheville, NC. I'd quote but it's easier to summarize:

A married couple decided to hang the US flag upside down on their front porch this summer. A local police officer sees it and asks what's going on; an upside-down flag is considered a sign of "distress" and he wants to be sure everything is fine. The couple assure him it's just political speech, and ask if they've violated some ordinance (probably meaning one about signs or displays, not one specifically about the US Flag, since the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that, as Aaron Sorkin once put it, free speech is not just the right to fly the flag, it's also the right to go as far as burning that flag in protest). The officer assures them that all is well.

To alleviate concerns, the couple pinned a note to the flag explaining that it was a protest, along with a picture of President Bush with the words "Out Now" on it. A day or two later, a "man in fatigues" driving a car with a US Federal Government license plate (according to the couple) came up to the porch. One of the two said, "He stood here telling me that I needed to take the flag down or fly it right."

That was about a week ago. Several of the couple's neighbors confirm that the "man in fatigues" drove by the house several times over the following days. One night, "several other men in fatigues" were seen taking pictures of the upside-down flag.

On Wednesday, a county sherriff's deputy came to the couple's house with a printout of an unenforceable North Carolina statute declaring it to be a misdemeanor to "desecrate" or "trample" the US or North Carolina flags. The sherriff's department says it got a complaint, and even though the house is in the jurisdiction of the city of Asheville, not in an otherwise incorporated area of Buncombe County, they say, "When we receive a complaint that a law is being broken, we have to respond."

Already at this point, you should notice a few anomalies:

• The local police, with primary jurisdiction, had already investigated and were satisfied no enforceable laws were being broken.

• An unidentified person wearing US government uniforms and driving a US government vehicle tried, without authority, to instruct them to cease their lawful protest. When they did not, he placed them under observation, and apparently brought others to look at it as well.

• The sherriff's deputy who responded had a printout of the unenforceable ordinance, indicating that he knew before he even got there how he was going to try to intimidate the couple into taking down the flag, even without authority to do so. (As the police regularly say to suspects, "Ignorance of the law is no excuse," meaning that police who attempt to enforce unconstitutional laws are themselves breaking the law.)

When the officer told the couple that they were violating a state ordinance and had to remove the flag, they weren't convinced - so he started talking about arresting them. Then took it down. This did not satisfy the officer, who, with no warrant and no emergency situation, demanded to see identification papers for these people in their own home.

Here the story starts to split.

• According to the deputy, he required their IDs to write them a citation for the misdemeanor flag "desecration." When they did not comply, he wrote in his official report, they slammed the door on his hand, breaking the pane of glass out of the door in the process. The officer then entered the house and a scuffle ensued. The wife called 911 during the scuffle. Other officers arrived and demanded that the husband get on the ground and surrender for arrest or he would be tasered. The husband complied; both he and his wife were arrested for assaulting the deputy and resisting arrest.

- or -

• The couple, as well as neighbors who witnessed it, said that after the couple took the flag down, they asked if they were under arrest. When the deputy said "no," but demanded their IDs, they asked why. He didn't have an answer for them, so they asked him to leave, went inside their house, and closed and locked the door. Then the deputy started kicking the door, "five or six good times, then he laid right into it," according to a neighbor witness. "After he got done kicking it, he broke the window out - I saw him hit the window." The deputy then entered the house, chased the husband into the kitchen, and drew his baton as a weapon. That's when the wife called 911. According to the husband, "They never, ever told us why we were being arrested until we were in jail."

Given that everything the couple says is supported by documents or eyewitness testimony, and everything the deputy says is only supported by his own statements (and he was fairly obviously prepared to intimidate these people into taking down the flag when he got there), this doesn't seem like much of a contest. However, if there weren't neighbor witnesses, this would just be "the police say this and these dirty fucking hippies say that," and there's little doubt how that would have turned out.

But what's really scary to me is the comments on this story from the Mountain Xpress newspaper. They're fairly split on the merits, and they seem to mostly be focused on the facts of the case instead of devolving into some kind of pro-war vs. anti-war diatribe, but there are a disturbing number of comments like these:

By running into the house, slamming the door on the officer’s hand they guaranteed arrest. They were arrested for resisting arrest and assaulting an officer. Those charges will stick and the ACLU won’t touch it unless they get charged with desecrating a flag - which they weren’t. When will people learn?

Police officers do not make or interpret the law, certainly not on the front porch. They merely enforce the law as written and leave it to a judge to decide the rest. If you think they were under no obligation to identify themselves to the officer, try not identifying yourself the next time a cop wants to give you a ticket. You’ll find yourself in jail pretty quick. These people will have the desecration charge dropped and be convicted of assault and resisting arrest. And they are guilty of both. They should have simply complied, taken the ticket and gone to court on the desecration charge and had it and the law itself tossed. Instead they resisted and actually did break the law.

Or this (all one comment, and one of my favorites):

The Deputy then asked for ID.

The couple DID NOT CO-OPERATE ...

THEY FLED INTO THE HOME AND LOCKED THE DOOR.

I do not care of the Deputy pulled the door off the hinges with his car.....those 2 people IGNORED the Deputy and HIS REQUEST for ID.

The ACLU WILL NOT TAKE THIS CASE .....NOTHING WAS VIOLATED.

THESE PEOPLE NEED TO MOVE TO SAN FRANCISCO IF THEY WANT TO ACT LIKE THIS....

END OF STORY…

Wow. OK. Once more, and slowly, for those among us who obviously do not grasp the distinction: Police officers are not kings. Police officers do not have the authority to make you do whatever they want you to do, nor can you be punished for refusing to obey an officer's unlawful order. The last commenter quoted is confusing a "sherrif's deputy" with an "emperor" and his divine right. That's not how it works in this country.

And speaking of the ACLU, this kind of situation is exactly why, many years ago, the organization prepared a wallet-sized bust card that you can carry with you that tells you exactly what you can, cannot, and should not do if you're detained or questioned by a police officer. It's free and everyone should have one.

What does it say about being stopped by the police in your own home?

1. If the police knock and ask to enter your home, you don't have to admit them unless they have a warrant signed by a judge.

2. However, in some emergency situations (like when a person is screaming for help inside, or when the police are chasing someone) officers are allowed to enter and search your home without a warrant.

3. If you are arrested, the police can search you and the area close by. If you are in a building, "close by" usually means just the room you are in.

We all recognize the need for effective law enforcement, but we should also understand our own rights and responsibilities—especially in our relationships with the police. Everyone, including minors, has the right to courteous and respectful police treatment. If your rights are violated, don't try to deal with the situation at the scene. You can talk to a lawyer afterwards, or file a complaint with the Internal Affairs or Civilian Complaint Board.

How about more generally?

1. What you say to the police is always important. What you say can be used against you, and it can give the police an excuse to arrest you, especially if you bad-mouth a police officer.

2. You must show your driver's license and registration when stopped in a car. Otherwise, you don't have to answer any questions if you are detained or arrested, with one important exception. The police may ask for your name if you have been properly detained, and you can be arrested in some states for refusing to give it. If you reasonably fear that your name is incriminating, you can claim the right to remain silent, which may be a defense in case you are arrested anyway.

3. You don't have to consent to any search of yourself, your car or your house. If you DO consent to a search, it can affect your rights later in court. If the police say they have a search warrant, ASK TO SEE IT.

4. Do not interfere with, or obstruct the police—you can be arrested for it.

It's no wonder people get confused, and deference to law enforcement really isn't a bad default position if law enforcement can overall be trusted. In this particular case, however, it is clear that the deputy had no search warrant, no justification for entering the house, and had not lawfully detained the couple which might allow him to require them to identify themselves in their own home. When a police officer pulls a weapon on you in your own home (and let's be clear here, if you pulled a billy club on a policeman you'd be charged with using a weapon, and that works both ways) and are not under arrest or even threatening the officer, you have every right to passively defend yourself from it. None of this can reasonably or constitutionally be called "threatening" an officer, obstructing his duty, or resisting arrest.

How do you know? If the deputy had reason to arrest the couple, he would and should have done so as soon as they stepped out of the house to talk to him. Once he started making unauthorized demands, they did not have to comply as long as they were not endangering anyone, and clearly they were not. You are within your rights not to identify yourself to an officer when you are not being detained and the officer does not have a warrant for your arrest. The exception is if you're in a car, in which case you usually have to produce ID on demand.

If you do not have the ACLU Bust Card in your wallet, download it tonight and print it. Read it if you ever need it. I've read stories about people and cops reading the thing together during a stop and reaching accommodation, and I love a win-win situation. We all want to keep and protect our rights and let legitimate law enforcement do its job effectively and professionally, and this is a really really easy way to get there.