Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 10/11/2007 1:07:58 PM EST
Not everyone HAS fingerprints. Granted, it's only a very small portion of the population.

But some people (for whatever reason, lost hands in an accident, etc.) simply do not have fingerprints.

What recourse does such a person have if they want to buy NFA items or get a CCW permit? Since fingerprints are required for these things, and some people don't have fingerprints, how can the laws be constitutional?

I imagine there is some kind of process in place already for this, but if there isn't, could such laws be overturned on the grounds that not everyone is capable of complying with them?
Link Posted: 10/11/2007 1:09:51 PM EST
This doesn't apply to CCW necessarily, but fingerprints aren't required on NFA purchases made by a corporation, trust, etc.
Link Posted: 10/11/2007 1:10:08 PM EST
I believe NFA guidelines say if the LE agency is unable to obtain identifiable prints they must send a letter on dept. letterhead stating why they were unable to obtain readable prints.\

I don't have any NFA stuff yet, so I don't really recall.

Although, I do have fingerprints so not a problem for me.
Link Posted: 10/11/2007 1:10:25 PM EST

Originally Posted By Subnet:
This doesn't apply to CCW necessarily, but fingerprints aren't required on NFA purchases made by a corporation, trust, etc.


+1 go the trust route
Link Posted: 10/11/2007 1:12:46 PM EST
Wait till a DNA sample is required of everyone. Perhaps a simple oral swabbing while renewing your driver's license. Think it won't happen? You're kidding yourself.
Link Posted: 10/11/2007 1:15:27 PM EST
Too much time on your hands again, eh?
Link Posted: 10/11/2007 1:15:59 PM EST
oh just give them your damn prints!
Link Posted: 10/11/2007 1:17:11 PM EST
Everything that the government wants to do is unconstitutional.
Link Posted: 10/11/2007 1:19:37 PM EST

Originally Posted By ABNAK:
Wait till a DNA sample is required of everyone. Perhaps a simple oral swabbing while renewing your driver's license. Think it won't happen? You're kidding yourself.


I'd believe it. It would be used in conjunction with fingerprints, though.
Link Posted: 10/11/2007 1:20:20 PM EST

Originally Posted By Bloencustoms:
Not everyone HAS fingerprints. Granted, it's only a very small portion of the population.

But some people (for whatever reason, lost hands in an accident, etc.) simply do not have fingerprints.

What recourse does such a person have if they want to buy NFA items or get a CCW permit? Since fingerprints are required for these things, and some people don't have fingerprints, how can the laws be constitutional?

I imagine there is some kind of process in place already for this, but if there isn't, could such laws be overturned on the grounds that not everyone is capable of complying with them?


That's an absurd premise...

If you have NO fingers, how do you carry/fire a gun?

No, fingerprint laws are not unconstitutional.... There is no Constitutional right to be un-identifyable....

And in almost any case where FP laws exist, you are tyring to do something that requires you have hands....
Link Posted: 10/11/2007 1:24:15 PM EST

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
That's an absurd premise...

If you have NO fingers, how do you carry/fire a gun?


Catsclaw will be along shortly to explain it to you, with pictures.
Link Posted: 10/11/2007 1:29:10 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/11/2007 1:30:00 PM EST by david_g17]

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

No, fingerprint laws are not unconstitutional.... There is no Constitutional right to be un-identifyable....


"The right of the people to be secure in their persons..against unreasonable searches and seizures."

what does that part of amendment IV mean?

seizing information, correct?
Link Posted: 10/11/2007 1:29:29 PM EST

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By Bloencustoms:
Not everyone HAS fingerprints. Granted, it's only a very small portion of the population.

But some people (for whatever reason, lost hands in an accident, etc.) simply do not have fingerprints.

What recourse does such a person have if they want to buy NFA items or get a CCW permit? Since fingerprints are required for these things, and some people don't have fingerprints, how can the laws be constitutional?

I imagine there is some kind of process in place already for this, but if there isn't, could such laws be overturned on the grounds that not everyone is capable of complying with them?


That's an absurd premise...

If you have NO fingers, how do you carry/fire a gun?

No, fingerprint laws are not unconstitutional.... There is no Constitutional right to be un-identifyable....

And in almost any case where FP laws exist, you are tyring to do something that requires you have hands....


So an amputee can't have a prosthetic MG? I guess that Laser Beam Eyes thing is out the window too...
Link Posted: 10/11/2007 1:31:06 PM EST
Of course it is unconstitutional.

The only exception I can see is foreigners/aliens.

Link Posted: 10/11/2007 1:37:46 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/11/2007 1:38:33 PM EST by Admiral_Crunch]

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
That's an absurd premise...

If you have NO fingers, how do you carry/fire a gun?

No, fingerprint laws are not unconstitutional.... There is no Constitutional right to be un-identifyable....

And in almost any case where FP laws exist, you are tyring to do something that requires you have hands....


IBCKYA.

In Before Catsclaw Kicks Your Ass.
Link Posted: 10/11/2007 1:52:31 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/11/2007 1:53:46 PM EST by ArimoDave]

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By Bloencustoms:
Not everyone HAS fingerprints. Granted, it's only a very small portion of the population.

But some people (for whatever reason, lost hands in an accident, etc.) simply do not have fingerprints.

What recourse does such a person have if they want to buy NFA items or get a CCW permit? Since fingerprints are required for these things, and some people don't have fingerprints, how can the laws be constitutional?

I imagine there is some kind of process in place already for this, but if there isn't, could such laws be overturned on the grounds that not everyone is capable of complying with them?


That's an absurd premise...

If you have NO fingers, how do you carry/fire a gun?

No, fingerprint laws are not unconstitutional.... There is no Constitutional right to be un-identifyable....

And in almost any case where FP laws exist, you are tyring to do something that requires you have hands....


Catclaw does not seem to have to much problem with shooting.

ETA: Damn. Beaten by every one above me. But it still worth repeating.
Top Top