It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Jefferton
Only on ATS would catching a rapist/killer be "alarming".
Oh boy.
originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: Blaine91555
Anything that law enforcement can do to protect us from evil like that is fine with me.
originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha
a reply to: Blaine91555
I used to tell people like 10 years ago that the future would replace job applications with a facebook and DNA submission.
Looks like my vindication is not too far off!
originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: theantediluvian
Some of my family members and I had a discussion a while back about taking DNA tests. We opted not to do it for 2 reasons.
1) These DNA testing companies have laughably small sample sizes of African ethnic groups, which defeated the purpose for us.
2) We were all suspicious that the DNA samples and info would be kept, sold to, and used by companies, researchers, law enforcement branches, and various other govt agencies virtually forever (not just in this country).
So I'm not surprised by this story. If anything, I'm surprised that they allowed the public to know how they got the info. It's kind of like the CIA's fake vaccine program that supposedly led them to Bin Laden in Pakistan. The method itself isn't that surprising; the surprising part is that they let the world know that's how they supposedly did it.
ETA: After reading some of the comments in this thread, I now think I understand why they released this info. I'd completely overlooked the fact that some people would willingly trade their own info and rights in exchange for a sense of security. So it makes sense that they'd use this incident to boost support for law enforcement keeping everyone's DNA on record.
Now the tinfoil-hat-wearer in me wonders if they really used DNA info to track this guy in the first place. It's something that also bothered me about my above example of the CIA's fake vaccine program being used to track Bin Laden. I wondered why they would release that info because it would let their enemies know their methods, which would theoretically make it easier for their enemies to counter those methods. But part of me wondered if that story was a lie and was just used to cover up their real methods for tracking people or to provide cover to specific informants who may have been the real reason the CIA was supposedly able to track him.
originally posted by: one4all
originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: theantediluvian
Some of my family members and I had a discussion a while back about taking DNA tests. We opted not to do it for 2 reasons.
1) These DNA testing companies have laughably small sample sizes of African ethnic groups, which defeated the purpose for us.
2) We were all suspicious that the DNA samples and info would be kept, sold to, and used by companies, researchers, law enforcement branches, and various other govt agencies virtually forever (not just in this country).
So I'm not surprised by this story. If anything, I'm surprised that they allowed the public to know how they got the info. It's kind of like the CIA's fake vaccine program that supposedly led them to Bin Laden in Pakistan. The method itself isn't that surprising; the surprising part is that they let the world know that's how they supposedly did it.
ETA: After reading some of the comments in this thread, I now think I understand why they released this info. I'd completely overlooked the fact that some people would willingly trade their own info and rights in exchange for a sense of security. So it makes sense that they'd use this incident to boost support for law enforcement keeping everyone's DNA on record.
Now the tinfoil-hat-wearer in me wonders if they really used DNA info to track this guy in the first place. It's something that also bothered me about my above example of the CIA's fake vaccine program being used to track Bin Laden. I wondered why they would release that info because it would let their enemies know their methods, which would theoretically make it easier for their enemies to counter those methods. But part of me wondered if that story was a lie and was just used to cover up their real methods for tracking people or to provide cover to specific informants who may have been the real reason the CIA was supposedly able to track him.
A guy named Adolph would have absolutely loved there to have been a DNA databank available to him....are you getting my drift here......only an idiot would surrender their DNA willingly.
originally posted by: enlightenedservant
originally posted by: one4all
originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: theantediluvian
Some of my family members and I had a discussion a while back about taking DNA tests. We opted not to do it for 2 reasons.
1) These DNA testing companies have laughably small sample sizes of African ethnic groups, which defeated the purpose for us.
2) We were all suspicious that the DNA samples and info would be kept, sold to, and used by companies, researchers, law enforcement branches, and various other govt agencies virtually forever (not just in this country).
So I'm not surprised by this story. If anything, I'm surprised that they allowed the public to know how they got the info. It's kind of like the CIA's fake vaccine program that supposedly led them to Bin Laden in Pakistan. The method itself isn't that surprising; the surprising part is that they let the world know that's how they supposedly did it.
ETA: After reading some of the comments in this thread, I now think I understand why they released this info. I'd completely overlooked the fact that some people would willingly trade their own info and rights in exchange for a sense of security. So it makes sense that they'd use this incident to boost support for law enforcement keeping everyone's DNA on record.
Now the tinfoil-hat-wearer in me wonders if they really used DNA info to track this guy in the first place. It's something that also bothered me about my above example of the CIA's fake vaccine program being used to track Bin Laden. I wondered why they would release that info because it would let their enemies know their methods, which would theoretically make it easier for their enemies to counter those methods. But part of me wondered if that story was a lie and was just used to cover up their real methods for tracking people or to provide cover to specific informants who may have been the real reason the CIA was supposedly able to track him.
A guy named Adolph would have absolutely loved there to have been a DNA databank available to him....are you getting my drift here......only an idiot would surrender their DNA willingly.
First, I think a DNA database would actually reduce a lot of ethnic-based and race-based bigotry since all of that "racial purity" crap tends to go out of the window when DNA results come back. And second, there are plenty of legit reasons for someone to willingly give up DNA samples. Have you ever given a blood donation before?
ETA: I get your point but I don't think DNA tests are bad. It's the way DNA testing companies use the data afterward that concerns me.
This is a bit alarming to me. I think it's great that they've potentially caught this bastard but the implications here are more than worrisome.
originally posted by: enlightenedservant
originally posted by: one4all
originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: theantediluvian
Some of my family members and I had a discussion a while back about taking DNA tests. We opted not to do it for 2 reasons.
1) These DNA testing companies have laughably small sample sizes of African ethnic groups, which defeated the purpose for us.
2) We were all suspicious that the DNA samples and info would be kept, sold to, and used by companies, researchers, law enforcement branches, and various other govt agencies virtually forever (not just in this country).
So I'm not surprised by this story. If anything, I'm surprised that they allowed the public to know how they got the info. It's kind of like the CIA's fake vaccine program that supposedly led them to Bin Laden in Pakistan. The method itself isn't that surprising; the surprising part is that they let the world know that's how they supposedly did it.
ETA: After reading some of the comments in this thread, I now think I understand why they released this info. I'd completely overlooked the fact that some people would willingly trade their own info and rights in exchange for a sense of security. So it makes sense that they'd use this incident to boost support for law enforcement keeping everyone's DNA on record.
Now the tinfoil-hat-wearer in me wonders if they really used DNA info to track this guy in the first place. It's something that also bothered me about my above example of the CIA's fake vaccine program being used to track Bin Laden. I wondered why they would release that info because it would let their enemies know their methods, which would theoretically make it easier for their enemies to counter those methods. But part of me wondered if that story was a lie and was just used to cover up their real methods for tracking people or to provide cover to specific informants who may have been the real reason the CIA was supposedly able to track him.
A guy named Adolph would have absolutely loved there to have been a DNA databank available to him....are you getting my drift here......only an idiot would surrender their DNA willingly.
First, I think a DNA database would actually reduce a lot of ethnic-based and race-based bigotry since all of that "racial purity" crap tends to go out of the window when DNA results come back.
But the real takeaway centers on a new, nuanced pattern within white supremacist groups to redefine and solidify their ranks through genetic ancestry testing, said Aaron Panofsky, a UCLA sociologist who co-led the study presented Monday at the American Sociological Association’s 112th annual meeting in Montreal.
“Once they start to see that a lot of members of their community are not going to fit the ‘all-white’ criteria, they start to say, “Well, do we have to think about what percentage [of white European genealogy] could define membership?” said Aaron Panofsky, a UCLA sociologist who co-led the study presented Monday at the American Sociological Association’s 112th annual meeting in Montreal.