Obama Supports DNA Sampling Upon Arrest

When you are arrested, you are photographed, numbered, fingerprinted, and get a profile. To me, DNA testing is just one more tool. When you are already having all this other stuff done, what difference will the dna tests make?

reply to post by sos37


Constitutional protections are not meant to be tactical. The very nature of our freedoms is to protect us against the potential of a non-benign government. You can not consider the ramifications of this testing in the context of today but rather assume, yes assume that it will be misused.

The first thing Hitler did was issue a national ID card. Folks did not think much about it at the time. It sure made it easier for the SS to find folks with the last name of 'berg, 'stein and 'feld.

Is that kind of thing going to happen here? No, its not. Will there be government entities who will look to leverage information about your lifestyle to engage in social engineering? Yes, its happening now. Will there be government entities who will look to impost coersive measures to gain traction in social engineering policy? Yes, its happening now.

Anytime someone wants to constrain your behaivor, take a dollar out of your pocket or learn something about you for which there is no obvious reason for them to know, be wary.

DNA is fantastic from a forensic perspective. Person A's DNA matches the DNA left at a crime scene, hence person A is guilty. How do you know that the DNA that is being stated as being found at the crime scene is actually the DNA found at the crime scene? I have no faith in the chain/custody of evidence. None. How can you prove that it is the person's DNA? In order to believe that 100% you have to believe the crime scene was properly handled, the tests on the samples run perfectly, the data entered correctly, any and all changes to the information systems which catelog and store those systems has been done with an appropriate methodology with the proper testing and validation. Think about what it really means for the government to state that the DNA is the actual DNA. It takes a lot and the longer the time between the crime and the charge being brought further compounds this, IMO.

As it pertains to the use of DNA evidence to convict someone of a crime, in many cases I am highly suspect.

Bunch of folks have been liberated from prison because DNA evidence has cleared them and thats a good thing. How many folks are wrongly in prison due to the poor handling of DNA evidence, botched tests, incompetent chain of custody, abuse by police, etc? I don't know what the number is, but there is a number. This blind faith in DNA makes too many assumptions regarding its integrity and the integrity of the process for me.

[edit on 15-3-2010 by dolphinfan]

reply to post by nixie_nox


If there is no difference, then why is it necessary? If it's the same as fingerprinting, then fingerprinting should do the job.

Fact is, it IS different than fingerprinting. DNA evidence contains much more than identification of a person. It contains genetic information and disease (medical) information.

There's also the question of putting this DNA information into the same database as the DNA of convicted criminals. How many "mistakes" are going to be made there? How many innocent people are going to prison because someone paid the clerk to do a switcheroo on the info so they can get a conviction? There's a LOT of room for mistakes and abuse of this system.

Source

The provision, co-sponsored by Kyl and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), does not require the government to automatically remove the DNA data of people who are never convicted. Instead, those arrested or detained would have to petition to have their information removed from the database after their cases were resolved.
...
"This clearly opens the door to all kinds of race- or ethnic-based stops" by police, said Jim Dempsey, executive director of the Center for Democracy and Technology, a digital policy think tank.

Originally, the federal DNA database was limited to convicted sex offenders, who often repeat their crimes. Then it was expanded to include violent felons. Several states, including Virginia, also collect DNA from those arrested for violent crimes.

"It's a classic mission-creep situation," said Jim Harper, a privacy specialist with the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank. "These guys are playing a great law and order game . . . and in the process creating a database that could be converted into something quite dangerous."

thanks for the story and btw his name is barry