ACLU Questioning Arizona's Driver-Fingerprinting Program

Officer.COM ^ | Nov. 16, 2005 | NewsEdge Corporation

[radar101]

The American Civil Liberties Union in Arizona says it is concerned about Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's new driver-fingerprinting program.

Arpaio announced Oct. 19 that drivers pulled over for criminal violations would be fingerprinted or face jail. The prints are entered into the Automated Fingerprint Identification System to see if drivers are using fake identification, a move designed to combat identity theft.

Dawn Wyland, interim director of the Arizona ACLU, said the group is researching the program's constitutionality. It would need a plaintiff to file suit. "My gut tells me this is just a horrible violation of privacy," she said. "It is compelling someone to give evidence against themselves for an unrelated crime."

Arpaio said the ACLU has a vendetta against him and that the program is legal and important

[taxed2death]

I love that guy. The pink prison suit and moldy baloney sandwhich guy, right?

Too kewl.

[American Quilter]

Dawn Wyland, interim director of the Arizona ACLU, said the group is researching the program's constitutionality. It would need a plaintiff to file suit. "My gut tells me this is just a horrible violation of privacy,"

Try using your brain instead of your intestines to evaluate the merits of an issue, madam. You'd come to a rational conclusion for a change.

[fisherman90814]

Need about 10,000 more just like him. ACLU.........another constitutional law undermined.........

[mysterio]

That guy is a menace. What's next? A DNA database of people he pulls over?

[HOTTIEBOY]

It catches criminals. Why is that not a good thing? If the ACLU would look ahead it would see that all the potential criminals that this program would catch, would result in more clients for them to set free.

[samtheman]

It should be renamed to the AACLU.

The Anti American Communist Lawyers Union

[HOTTIEBOY]

It actually started out that way but they figured having communist and lawyers in the same phrase gave communists a bad name.

[Still Thinking]

This is only for criminal traffic stops, in other words, people the officer already has the discretion to haul off to jail, which would include fingerprinting anyway. The Sherriff is just making it policy to do part of what he already has legal authority to do.

If he tried to do this for civil traffic stops (speeding, rolling a stop, etc.,) I'd be yelling louder than anyone on here.

[mysterio]

It's more "papers please" nonsense from a well documented authoritarian psycho. If he wants someone's fingerprints, then I guess he had better arrest them. Otherwise, he has no business doing this. The ACLU is dead on with this guy. I hope they take him down.

[radar101]

You have never been sent a notice that your license is now suspended because you received a citation for (Fill in the Blank). Try wearing the other shoe.

Common dodge: Man with NO I D gets stopped, says he is ( Fill in name) and gives Birthdate. Police/Sheriif run the info, find there is a person with that name. Ciatation is issued to violator in that name.

[mysterio]

Sorry. I'm not willing to give authoritarian police state tactics a pass just to save someone a mistaken identity license suspension. Mistaken identity can be cleared up. But this guy is a menace who looks at all citizens as potential criminals. He and all others like him need to be stopped.

[mugs99]

Man with NO I D gets stopped

Baloney!
If you have no ID they take you to jail. It's been that way for decades.
.

[usurper]

If he tried to do this for civil traffic stops (speeding, rolling a stop, etc.,) I'd be yelling louder than anyone on here.

A traffic stop is a traffic stop. This does not make any sense. As you say if it is a criminal traffic stop then the guy is already going to jail so who cares. But me thinks that they are actually talking about civil stops.

I tend to side with law enforcement on these vehicle issues as roads are public property and the ability to operate a motor vehicle is regulated.

If the initial traffic stop was legal then verifying the identity of the driver before issuing a ticket is a legitimate law enforcement practice. Pulling people over just to check their prints on the other hand would be clearly unconstitutional.

[radar101]

AGREED!

[nuconvert]

Is this a law passed by the voters? Or just something the sheriff is doing cuz he feels like it?

[been_lurking]

He is an elected county sheriff, one that has actually been reelected by the voters in his county.

What right do you have to judge those citizen's decision?

[Jane Austen]

ACLU is working really, really hard to make this country safe for terrorists, pedophiles and other criminals.

[t2buckeye]

"My gut tells me this is just a horrible violation of privacy"

No..what IS an invasion of privacy is the stealing of identities by criminals and illegals. When a person's social security number or other info has been stolen, that person's life becomes a MESS of trying to get back their own identity...and it can take months and years!

[mysterio]

Because as a citizen of this country, it is my right (and duty) to speak my opinion about ANY politician or authority figure; to criticize or praise them as I see fit. The First Amendment gives me that right. And when I see someone in a position of authority with an obvious contempt for limits on government police power, it is within my rights to point that out.

You might enjoy finding out more about the First Amendment. It's in the Bill of Rights, a part of the US Constitution. Perhaps you could pay Joe a visit and show him some of those Amendments as well.