Posted on 05/27/2008 9:12:13 PM PDT by Raineygoodyear
WASHINGTON - May 23, 2008 - Fingerprints are considered to be among the most personal of information, and fingerprint databases created and proposed in the name of national security have generated much debate. Recently, “Server in the Sky” - a proposed international database of the fingerprints of suspected criminals and terrorists to be shared among the U.S., UK and Canada - has ignited a firestorm of controversy, as have cavalier comments made by Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff that fingerprints aren’t “personal data.”
Yet earlier this week, a measure creating a federal fingerprint registry totally unrelated to national security passed a U.S. Senate committee almost without notice. The legislation would require thousands of individuals working even tangentially in the mortgage and real estate industries - and not suspected of anything - to send their prints to the feds. The database and fingerprint mandates were tucked into housing and foreclosure assistance bills that on Tuesday passed the Senate Banking Committee by a vote of 19-2.
The measure the committee passed states that “an individual may not engage in the business of a loan originator without first … obtaining a unique identifier.” To obtain this “identifier,” an individual is required to “furnish” to the newly created Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry “information concerning the applicant’s identity, including fingerprints for submission” to the FBI and other government agencies
Other than your knee jerk reaction, specifically which part of the constitution is violated by a finger print data base?
Why would being arrested for a crime then make that right no longer applicable? Remember you get finger printed when you get arrested, not convicted of a crime.
All men and women in the armed services have their finger prints, dental records, and DNA on file with the feds. Is that also unconstitutional in your book? Every naturalized citizen also has their fingerprints on file with multiple agencies. Is that unconstitutional? Or did all persons who service in the military, simply get arrested, or immigrated here LEGALY, waive their constitutional rights. Or, is it possible, that having fingerprints on file is not a violation of your "civil rights".
As far as I am concerned the answer to all of your questions is YES, it is both unconstitutional and unnecessary to maintain such databases. And it does not have to violate a specific section to make it so... the fact that such authority is not specifically granted is enough. See the Tenth amendment. If you want to do that, get a specific amendment passed by 3/4 of congress and 2/3 of the Several States, dealing with the issue and explaining exactly WHY this would be a good thing.
As far as criminals go, I would mandate that their fingerprint records be destroyed the day they finish their sentences and are released from prison. One not charged or one found not guilty should IMMEDIATELY have their fingerprint records expunged.
Same with the military. ALL such “personal identifiers” should be eliminated on separation from service. While IN service it’s needful in order to ID the body or body parts of casualties. That’s all.
When someone takes the oath of citizenship, any and all fingerprint records should be destroyed at that time, as well.
The answer to your last question is an unqualified NO.
I'd like to know just who authors these little gems, and then slips them into legislative bills. Just some faceless staff member working for a Congressman or Senator - or is it more devious than that?
I appreciate consistency. It relieves me of the necessity of trying to remember each different story to each different person.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.