I would argue the other way. Since that is their claim then I would go to the 5th Amendment because the fingerprints are a forced testimony against one's self.However, they also noted that fingerprinting at the scene of a Terry Stop is not necessarily violative of the 4th Amendment.
Now if you were to borrow a friend's car, gun, boat, computer, etc, and it gets stolen shortly after you return it. Then the property is found in a dumpster, pond, garage, etc it gets dusted for prints your prints are found on it and now you will be a suspect and could be charged based on the prints alone. While awaiting a hearing you could be locked up and deprived of life, liberty, property (cops are the biggest bunch of thieves IMHO), etc. Then while waiting for the prosecutor and/or judge to get their thumbs out of their hind ends, you could lose your job, marriage, reputation, life, and more. Even if your friend comes down and tells them that they have the wrong person, you might be be let loose even then. Once tried if you are found not guilty you don't get that time you lost back, you don't get compensated, you don't get to sue you boss for the lost job etc. The government agents just say, "Well I, think you're guilty/ am just doing what I am told/ insert BS line here." Then after that, "Sorry/I'll get you next time/well you won/insert follow up BS here."
This is a slippery slimy slope. I think that the Terry cause should have been over turned and that if the cops don't see anything/don't have a warrant that they need to F off and leave us freedom loving citizens alone.