obama supportts dna sampling upon arrest

[Gunny]

I have no problem with this...I've had to give dna samples on several occasions my last few years in...mostly for ID purposes if I was blown to smitherines...but I'm in the National Database now.

Bull. I was forced to and felt and still feel my privacy was invaded. You might be comfortable being a lag rat, but I'm not.

I don't feel that my privacy was invaded any more than when my fingerprints were taken.


BTW...we've had two horrific kidnapping/rape/murders here in the San Diego area in the last year...they FINALLY caught the guy based on DNA dead to rights on one case, and that seems to have led to FINALLY finding the body of the second poor girl. I'm not really feeling like it's a problem.

Of course you don't. I don't have a problem with it being used for good. I DO have a problem with it being misused. And our government misuses any and everything it gets its hands on.

 

[rightwinger]

On arrests?? That's a bit overboard... upon convictions, I would support that

That's pretty much where I'm at.

They take mug shots on arrest and fingerprint you. Having a DNA swab is no different. It also provides an opportunity to screen you for involvement in any other unsolved crimes.

Under the fourth amendment it is not an unreasonable search

 

[Xenophon]

The gov can't manage money properly, ran the post office into the ground, ruins everything its involed in, and some of you want us to trust they won't misuse things like DNA.

Yeah, right.

 

[DiamondDave]

On arrests?? That's a bit overboard... upon convictions, I would support that

That's pretty much where I'm at.

They take mug shots on arrest and fingerprint you. Having a DNA swab is no different. It also provides an opportunity to screen you for involvement in any other unsolved crimes.

Under the fourth amendment it is not an unreasonable search

Yes.. but neither is a piece of you, it is an image of your or part of you...

Just like someone can take a picture of you in public and that's ok, but they cannot come up and take a piece of your skin..

Once someone is convicted and a prisoner, they lose certain rights.. which is why I am fine with collection of the DNA of criminals.. because of the propensity of repeat offensers

 

[rightwinger]

The gov can't manage money properly, ran the post office into the ground, ruins everything its involed in, and some of you want us to trust they won't misuse things like DNA.

Yeah, right.

And the criminals win

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Bull. I was forced to and felt and still feel my privacy was invaded. You might be comfortable being a lag rat, but I'm not.

You privacy WAS invaded!! They can even make a clone of you if they wanted!

At the time, all that cloning crap was big in the news and that was EXACTLY what I was thinking.

Then again, an army of "Gunny's" would be cool.

Would the cloned Gunny be a good Administrator?

 

[rightwinger]

That's pretty much where I'm at.

They take mug shots on arrest and fingerprint you. Having a DNA swab is no different. It also provides an opportunity to screen you for involvement in any other unsolved crimes.

Under the fourth amendment it is not an unreasonable search

Yes.. but neither is a piece of you, it is an image of your or part of you...

Just like someone can take a picture of you in public and that's ok, but they cannot come up and take a piece of your skin..

Once someone is convicted and a prisoner, they lose certain rights.. which is why I am fine with collection of the DNA of criminals.. because of the propensity of repeat offensers

You sound like a whiny, ACLU loving Liberal

 

[Gunny]

On arrests?? That's a bit overboard... upon convictions, I would support that

That's pretty much where I'm at.

They take mug shots on arrest and fingerprint you. Having a DNA swab is no different. It also provides an opportunity to screen you for involvement in any other unsolved crimes.

Under the fourth amendment it is not an unreasonable search

It's an invasion of privacy, period.

 

[Newby]

Bull. I was forced to and felt and still feel my privacy was invaded. You might be comfortable being a lag rat, but I'm not.

You privacy WAS invaded!! They can even make a clone of you if they wanted!

At the time, all that cloning crap was big in the news and that was EXACTLY what I was thinking.

Then again, an army of "Gunny's" would be cool.

A Gunny for every girl.

 

[bodecea]

Bull. I was forced to and felt and still feel my privacy was invaded. You might be comfortable being a lag rat, but I'm not.

I don't feel that my privacy was invaded any more than when my fingerprints were taken.


BTW...we've had two horrific kidnapping/rape/murders here in the San Diego area in the last year...they FINALLY caught the guy based on DNA dead to rights on one case, and that seems to have led to FINALLY finding the body of the second poor girl. I'm not really feeling like it's a problem.

Of course you don't. I don't have a problem with it being used for good. I DO have a problem with it being misused. And our government misuses any and everything it gets its hands on.

Well, it has been known to misuse the Military, hasn't it?

 

[tigerbob]

On arrests?? That's a bit overboard... upon convictions, I would support that

That's pretty much where I'm at.

They take mug shots on arrest and fingerprint you. Having a DNA swab is no different. It also provides an opportunity to screen you for involvement in any other unsolved crimes.

Under the fourth amendment it is not an unreasonable search

I'm not saying it's not legal, I'm saying I don't entirely agree with it.

I have no problem with DNA being taken from people after conviction. I have somewhat more of an issue with it being taken from people on arrest, unless it is destroyed if that person is not convicted.

We should either be up front about this and take everyone's DNA when, for example, they get a driving license, or only take it from those convicted.

My concern about a 100% DNA database is who has access to it (and, perhaps more pertinently, who has control over it).

The police, for the purposes of comparing DNA found at a crime scene? Fine with that.

The health services, for screening to determine whether someone is at risk of developing a potentially chronic condition? Hmm, maybe, but that's getting dangerously close to.....

The health insurance industry, for screening applicants to determine whether to deny coverage or jack up premiums.

Once Pandora's box is open....

 

[Gunny]

The gov can't manage money properly, ran the post office into the ground, ruins everything its involed in, and some of you want us to trust they won't misuse things like DNA.

Yeah, right.

And the criminals win

The criminals already win because they have more rights than their victims. Get a clue, huh?

 

[Xenophon]

The gov can't manage money properly, ran the post office into the ground, ruins everything its involed in, and some of you want us to trust they won't misuse things like DNA.

Yeah, right.

And the criminals win

Lemmings are always quick to turn over their freedom to the gov in the hope of safety.

Its how everyone from Stalin, through Hitler to Mao and beyound came to and held power.

 

[Gunny]

You privacy WAS invaded!! They can even make a clone of you if they wanted!

At the time, all that cloning crap was big in the news and that was EXACTLY what I was thinking.

Then again, an army of "Gunny's" would be cool.

Would the cloned Gunny be a good Administrator?

If *I* get to train them from birth? Heh ....

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It's so anti-4th Amendment, why do we even have a Constitution?

Then again Obama is on record fundamentally disagreeing with the Constitution

 

[Gunny]

They take mug shots on arrest and fingerprint you. Having a DNA swab is no different. It also provides an opportunity to screen you for involvement in any other unsolved crimes.

Under the fourth amendment it is not an unreasonable search

Yes.. but neither is a piece of you, it is an image of your or part of you...

Just like someone can take a picture of you in public and that's ok, but they cannot come up and take a piece of your skin..

Once someone is convicted and a prisoner, they lose certain rights.. which is why I am fine with collection of the DNA of criminals.. because of the propensity of repeat offensers

You sound like a whiny, ACLU loving Liberal

Oh, because he believes in having REAL rights as opposed to concocted ones?

 

[Gunny]

I don't feel that my privacy was invaded any more than when my fingerprints were taken.


BTW...we've had two horrific kidnapping/rape/murders here in the San Diego area in the last year...they FINALLY caught the guy based on DNA dead to rights on one case, and that seems to have led to FINALLY finding the body of the second poor girl. I'm not really feeling like it's a problem.

Of course you don't. I don't have a problem with it being used for good. I DO have a problem with it being misused. And our government misuses any and everything it gets its hands on.

Well, it has been known to misuse the Military, hasn't it?

Not relevant, but what's your point?

FYI, the military is the social testing ground for every PC bullshit thing the left tries to force on society. They have an unwilling but subservient audience.

 

[rightwinger]

The gov can't manage money properly, ran the post office into the ground, ruins everything its involed in, and some of you want us to trust they won't misuse things like DNA.

Yeah, right.

And the criminals win

The criminals already win because they have more rights than their victims. Get a clue, huh?

And denying criminal investigators access to a DNA database gives a criminal more rights. DNA databases have proven to be essential in capturing criminals in long forgotten cases. They have also been used to get innocent people released.
You get arrested for drunk driving and they do a DNA swab on you as well as a mug shot and fingerprints. If it turns out that your DNA was involved in a rape four years ago...I call that good police work and am glad you are off the streets

 

[Gunny]

And the criminals win

The criminals already win because they have more rights than their victims. Get a clue, huh?

And denying criminal investigators access to a DNA database gives a criminal more rights. DNA databases have proven to be essential in capturing criminals in long forgotten cases. They have also been used to get innocent people released.
You get arrested for drunk driving and they do a DNA swab on you as well as a mug shot and fingerprints. If it turns out that your DNA was involved in a rape four years ago...I call that good police work and am glad you are off the streets

How many rights are you willing to give up in this private little world of yours where the nanny state protects you?

Your premise is fallacious. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty -- a basic Right in the US Constitution?

I wasn't convicted nor arrested for anything. I was a member of the US military.

Explain away ....

 

[blu]

why not just do it at birth?? that way the government could catch 100% of criminals!