Summary

Portrait of William O. Douglas William O. Douglas United States v. Freed — Opinion of the Court

The transferor-not the transferee-makes any incriminating statements. True, the transferee, if he wants the firearm, must cooperate to the extent of supplying fingerprints and photograph. But the information he supplies makes him the lawful, not the unlawful possessor of the firearm. Indeed, the only transferees who may lawfully receive a firearm are those who have not committed crimes in the past. The argument, however, is that furnishing the photograph and fingerprints will incriminate the transferee in the future.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of William O. Douglas William O. Douglas United States v. Freed — Opinion of the Court

This, combined with the protection against use to prove prior or concurrent offenses, satisfies the Fifth Amendment requirements respecting self-incrimination. [11]
Appellees' argument assumes the existence of a periphery of the Self-Incrimination Clause which protects a person against incrimination not only against past or present transgressions but which supplies insulation for a career of crime about to be launched. We cannot give the Self-Incrimination Clause such an expansive interpretation.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature