Minneapolis considers IDs for door-to-door solicitors

  • Article by: ERIC ROPER , Star Tribune
  • Updated: July 11, 2012 - 7:29 AM

To protect against door-to-door swindlers, the Minneapolis City Council is expected to approve rules requiring commercial solicitors to register or display photo identification.

  • 33
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
mongohugoJul. 10, 1210:24 PM

So now you will need an ID to solicit but not to vote?

karloff1Jul. 10, 1210:28 PM

But not to vote???!!!

DLBabatzJul. 10, 1210:49 PM

Interesting comment from the MPIRG representative. SLP already has a solicitor licensing requirement. This past spring, an MPIRG advocate stopped at my door. She became indignant when I reminded her that SLP requires solicitors to display their city issued ID prior to beginning their pitch. Initially, she tried to evade by asserting she wasn't soliciting. Then dug in her bag to find her city issued ID. After she produced her ID, I then shared that I do not support the cause she was advocating that night. She left saying some unkind words. I now keep a copy of the SLP ordinance near my door too give to solicitors who knock.

jessy03Jul. 10, 1211:48 PM

I.D. or not, I very rarely answer the door for any of them after a handful of bad experiences.

wildbill987Jul. 10, 1211:51 PM

Well lets see now. If the kids selling M&M's need a photo ID, but you don't need one to vote, hmmmm.

mark79Jul. 11, 1212:14 AM

On the news last night it was suggested that even boy and girl scouts will be issued these IDs, but they would be given to troop leaders in bulk. If that's the case, what is the point? And yes, it's funny that you need an ID to hock magazine subscriptions but not to vote on the future of our country.

mchristiJul. 11, 12 3:44 AM

These IDs are about regulating commercial activity to prevent swindle and fraud. Voting is the most basic constitutional right in a democracy. They are two very different things. Comparing this to voter ID is yet another silly analogy in which the voter ID proponents make out that two very different things are really just alike, and that both are just so normal. They are not.

ezekial39Jul. 11, 12 5:52 AM

I like this idea, just like the idea of voter ID

minneg56Jul. 11, 12 6:23 AM

DLBabatz- Totally agree on the MPIRG experience. A few years back one of their minions dropped by my door to solicit me. When I wouldn't sign up or open my wallet to their cause they let off a series of f-bombs which would have made a US MARINE blush! Hey, I'm all for stricter ID in Minneapolis! There's already ordinances for producing soliciting paperwork to solicit ... which nobody follows - I feel this is the next natural step. I don't want people on my property uninvited. It seems like I pay property taxes only to provide a Minneapolis residence for potential hawkers to come solicit! BTW- No Soliciting signs simply don't work ...

samiamJul. 11, 12 6:29 AM

This wont stop the scam artists from operating. Here in st Paul where there supposedly is an I'd requirement, I have seen several groups selling bogus alarm systems or falsely claiming hey represent a vague charity selling $5 candy bars. It will only hurt legitimate solicitors that honor my no soliciting sign now.


Comment on this story   |  


Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters