Supreme Court Upholds the collection of DNA from everyone that is arrested

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of it, therefore it must be constitutional and no one should complain.

And people say you can't learn anything in vs.
 
misleading title is misleading.

Nowhere does it state that everyone who is arrested will be swabbed for DNA.

They already, almost always, fingerprint upon arrest prior to being convicted. Not sure how much more intrusive a cheek swab is.

Surely this may help solve crimes. Besides being an "invasion of privacy" can someone explain to me how this could hurt a law abiding citizen who was wrongly arrested?
 
[quote name='GBAstar']misleading title is misleading.

Nowhere does it state that everyone who is arrested will be swabbed for DNA.

They already, almost always, fingerprint upon arrest prior to being convicted. Not sure how much more intrusive a cheek swab is.

Surely this may help solve crimes. Besides being an "invasion of privacy" can someone explain to me how this could hurt a law abiding citizen who was wrongly arrested?[/QUOTE]

This is a prime example of thinking as to why we are headed toward the shitter.....

If DNA was so postive in solving crime... it seems DNA is also very slow to possibly non-existent in freeing the innocent, heck sometimes DNA is UNrealiable according to the following
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/16/u...-by-some-prosecutors.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Who needs to build a family tree when the gov't can do it for you now...
 
Seems I've read quite a few stories of long held prisoners being freed because of new DNA evidence that proves they're innocent.
 
[quote name='cancerman1120']Don't get arrested?[/QUOTE]

You do know J-walking can also subject a person to arrest and so does littering...

You can basically be ARRESTED for almost anything in the United States, its just that some laws are currently ignored due to low offense.
If the police want to arrest you they will find a way.
 
[quote name='Finger_Shocker']You do know J-walking can also subject a person to arrest and so does littering...

You can basically be ARRESTED for almost anything in the United States, its just that some laws are currently ignored due to low offense.
If the police want to arrest you they will find a way.[/QUOTE]

J-walking and littering arent things people should be doing anyways, and I think it's pretty common knowledge that they can get arrested for it. If a person doesn't want to do anything that might get them arrested they should learn their rights.
 
Well in theory I wouldn't have an issue with this if they were only using it for identification purposes, a la STR analysis.

The problem in practice is I could see states using someone's DNA to sell to a company, saying you don't have the right to your DNA, to it not being used for medical purposes anymore.  They ban felons from voting, what we consider a fundamental right so tell me that for some this would be a big stretch.

This is my main worry for the cheek swab, that and they now know your medical history so if you're an issue they can even more make something look like an accident if you're a political dissident.

 
Sarang01 said:
Well in theory I wouldn't have an issue with this if they were only using it for identification purposes, a la STR analysis.

The problem in practice is I could see states using someone's DNA to sell to a company, saying you don't have the right to your DNA, to it not being used for medical purposes anymore. They ban felons from voting, what we consider a fundamental right so tell me that for some this would be a big stretch.

This is my main worry for the cheek swab, that and they now know your medical history so if you're an issue they can even more make something look like an accident if you're a political dissident.
Click to expand...
I think you've lost the plot there bud.

Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill. Once you're arrested, not detained, police follow a processing protocol which includes fingerprinting the arrastee. At this junction doing a DNA swab is not intrusive nor does it violate your rights, cops are allowed to search your persons for contraband, weapons or anything else.

The government will use this data the same way they use fingerprints. Merely as an identification marker. If you don't want the government to get your DNA then don't break the law or better yet don't commit any crimes which might get you into trouble. There is always a fine line between protecting individual rights and protecting society as a whole.

 
You are missing the point kill3r7.  I said if it was used exclusively for STR analysis, which is similar to fingerprint analysis, I wouldn't have a problem with this.  However, I don't believe they are likely doing just that or if they are right now.  If they are, I still think they likely have enough DNA material to compose a genetic profile in the future.

Although I think one's DNA is sacred in the sense it should only be used for medical purposes without one's consent I wouldn't put it past the government and the prison system to behave otherwise.  Let me paint this scenario for you:  I run a for profit prison and some drug provider or other entity approaches me with a wad of money to either retrieve new DNA from the prisoners or existing DNA for them in storage.

There's also the idea that politicians will pass a law saying when you get thrown into prison you give up your rights for DNA, in terms of them being used for that purpose.

Seriously, you say I'm making a mountain out of a molehill and I'm saying you need to not be so narrow-minded and look at the bigger pictures and the possibilities that might ensue, even if they're illegal.

 
Sarang01 said:
You are missing the point kill3r7. I said if it was used exclusively for STR analysis, which is similar to fingerprint analysis, I wouldn't have a problem with this. However, I don't believe they are likely doing just that or if they are right now. If they are, I still think they likely have enough DNA material to compose a genetic profile in the future.

Although I think one's DNA is sacred in the sense it should only be used for medical purposes without one's consent I wouldn't put it past the government and the prison system to behave otherwise. Let me paint this scenario for you: I run a for profit prison and some drug provider or other entity approaches me with a wad of money to either retrieve new DNA from the prisoners or existing DNA for them in storage.

There's also the idea that politicians will pass a law saying when you get thrown into prison you give up your rights for DNA, in terms of them being used for that purpose.

Seriously, you say I'm making a mountain out of a molehill and I'm saying you need to not be so narrow-minded and look at the bigger pictures and the possibilities that might ensue, even if they're illegal.
Click to expand...
I'll try to tackle your hypothetical point by point.

1) If we are talking about illegal behavior then the courts ruling has no bearing on it. Right now in certain states prisoners are tested for STDs upon entry and release. STD testing usually consists of drawing blood for testing purposes. So if the intent of a for profit prison is to illegally steal your DNA they do not need the governments permission to do so since they get access to it via your blood.

2) If congress wants to pass a law they certainly can do so but it must fit within the metes and bounds of our Constitution. In other words any such legislature cannot violate prisoner rights.

3) I agree with you that the government fully intends to build a DNA database of all "criminals" ie individuals who have entered the judicial system. It's easy and convenient for them to use DNA as a screening method. It's probably true that they'll also start to develop genetic profiles for such individuals but that's only speculation on all our parts.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top