15413

来自「神经网络昆斯林的新闻组分类2006」· 代码 · 共 31 行

Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!magnesium.club.cc.cmu.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mstar!n8emr!colnet!res
From: [e-mail] (Rob Stampfli)
Subject: Re: Fifth Amendment and Passwords
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Little to None
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1993 23:31:12 GMT
Lines: 20

>>I am postive someone will correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the Fifth
>>also cover not being forced to do actions that are self-incriminating?
>
>[From Mike Godwin <[e-mail]>, posted with permission - Carl]
>
>Sadly, it does not. Suspects can be compelled to give handwriting and
>voice exemplars, and to take blood and DNA tests.

I am sure that Mike is correct on this point.  I am also pretty sure that
administering "truth serum" would be ruled a violation of your right
not to incriminate yourself.  But, what is the salient difference?
Both drawing blood and injecting "truth serum" incapacitate you for
a while, but do no permanent damage.  Is it simply that we have come to
view one as acceptable, while the other is viewed as a fundamental
violation of one's rights?  If this is the case, how do we expand the
protections of the 5th amendment to incorporate new technologies without
the results being a hodgepodge of different judges personal opinions?
-- 
Rob Stampfli  [e-mail]      The neat thing about standards:
614-864-9377  HAM RADIO: [e-mail]  There are so many to choose from.