The Implications of Fingerprinting and Government Surveillance Quiz

According to the text, which of the following is a reason why governments fingerprint and photograph convicted criminals?

According to the text, corrupt governments treat all citizens as criminals who break even the smallest law. True or False?

According to the text, what did a Federal District Court hold regarding the right to take fingerprints?

According to the text, when can an arrest be made at any time of the day?

According to the text, when is an arrest regarded as oppressive and without justification?

According to the text, who can make a legal arrest?

According to the text, what is the general rule for a legal arrest?

According to the text, what is one reason why the acts of compulsory fingerprinting, blood tests, etc., are considered unlawful?

According to the text, what is one limitation upon arrests based on common law?

According to the text, what is one argument made by the corrupt courts to limit the protection of self-incrimination?

According to the text, what is one reason why the Banlella case is significant?

Unlawful acts of fingerprinting, photographing, and other measures are often associated with convicted criminals, implying that all citizens are treated as criminals by corrupt governments. Some cases in Louisiana and New Jersey have debated the constitutionality of fingerprinting and other measures, with conflicting decisions. The decision in the Bartletta v. McFeeley case has been criticized for allowing intrusive and oppressive measures, leading to the erosion of personal liberties. A 1945 study by the Court of Chancery of New Jersey concluded that there is no justification for taking fingerprints, photographs, and other measurements before conviction. Compulsory blood tests and urine tests after arrest and before trial are also seen as an invasion of personal privacy and a violation of constitutional rights. Some courts limit the protection of self-incrimination to oral utterances and not physical evidence, but there are cases that argue that compulsory physical examinations are inadmissible as they violate the right against self-incrimination. There are at least five reasons why compulsory fingerprinting, blood tests, etc., are unlawful: evasion of the right to privacy, compelling self-incriminating evidence, assault and battery, violating due process, and infringing on liberty. The common law sets limitations on when and how arrests can be made, but there is a tendency among the ignorant and corrupt to broaden the causes and reasons for arrests. Arrests without a warrant require sufficient cause based on actual facts creating probable cause of guilt, suspicion alone is not enough. An arrest cannot be justified by one cause and then justified by another, as this would be an incentive for loose practices by police officers. Arrests made at night, on Sundays, or other holidays, except in cases of pressing necessity, are regarded as oppressive and without justification. The constitutional protection regarding arrests and searches applies to all individuals, regardless of innocence or guilt. The concept that the end justifies the means cannot be used to justify an arrest without a warrant, as the law requires a warrant to render an arrest legal.

Quiz: Understanding the Implications of Fingerprinting and Government Surveillance Explore the controversial practice of fingerprinting and its association with criminality. Discover how corrupt governments may treat citizens as criminals and violate due process of law. Test your knowledge on the importance of presumption of innocence and the potential implications of mass surveillance.