In Cook County, Illinois, a new law starts on June 1.  After that date, not only will you be required to provide your fingerprints when you check into the county jail, but you will be required to provide your fingerprints to sell a home as well:  [Thanks L!]

CHICAGO (CBS) ― Real estate certainly has its risks and fraud is a growing problem, but now there’s a new law that’s supposed to protect buyers. As CBS 2’s Mike Puccinelli reports the new law will also place an unusual burden on the seller.

Fingerprinting is something we often associate with crime. So the fact that Cook County home sellers–and homeowners across the state–will soon have to provide a thumb print left some people shocked.

"I wouldn’t like that at all. I don’t think that’s necessary," said Chicagoan Donald Hayes.

"I don’t know what I think about that. Not very good, I think, said Jenny Armstrong of Lake Villa.

The new law, which is set to go into effect June 1, 2009, will force anyone selling property in Cook County to provide a thumbprint from their right hand.

"No more so than any law abiding citizen walking down the sidewalk should be fingerprinted; just for selling my house, that’s ridiculous," said Gerald Cain of Land Acquisitions, Inc.

Cain has been in the real estate consulting business for decades. He says the law is intrusive and threatens to create fraud when it’s designed to prevent it.

Cain has been notarizing documents for more than a quarter century, but he says unless the fingerprint rule is revoked, he plans to get out of the business.

"I would probably just quit; liability for me is too much," Cain said.

You have to wonder if Cook County has really had problems with people with fake ID selling properties that are not theirs.

Clearly, mortgage fraud has been a big problem, but the fraud I have seen would not have been prevented by providing a fingerprint.  Rather, the fraud has involved misstating the value of the property, or misstating the assets and income of the buyer.

Why invade the privacy of home sellers with a law that is unlikely to reduce fraud?