Repeal the 4th Amendment

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Si modo, May 21, 2010.

  1. Si modo
    Offline

    Si modo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2009
    Messages:
    41,538
    Thanks Received:
    6,382
    Trophy Points:
    1,810
    Location:
    St. Eligius
    Ratings:
    +8,703
    Why bother even having the 4th Amendment in our Constitution any longer? It has been so eroded over the years, and now the Democratic House has this to add as another notch in the 4th: Katie Sepich Enhanced DNA Collection Act of 2010
    (passed 357 to 32)

    Damn, if someone fingers you for something you never did, the state gets to take your DNA and keep it on record. And, if the individual states are uneasy with this, well, they don't get the $75,000,000 from the feds each year and even their current funds will be cut.
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2010
  2. Dr Gregg
    Offline

    Dr Gregg BANNED

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2010
    Messages:
    2,901
    Thanks Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +200
    HOw does taking a DNA fingerprint, which gives no information about the person's genome, a violation of the 4th amendment? It's the same as a fingerprint, but for the DNA. It gives no information regarding what genes the person possesses, just a fingerprint of digested DNA bands run on a gel for identification purposes only.
     
  3. JW Frogen
    Offline

    JW Frogen Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2009
    Messages:
    6,165
    Thanks Received:
    1,167
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Ratings:
    +1,206
    Don't tread on my DNA!
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. Si modo
    Offline

    Si modo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2009
    Messages:
    41,538
    Thanks Received:
    6,382
    Trophy Points:
    1,810
    Location:
    St. Eligius
    Ratings:
    +8,703
    Unreasonable search, that's how.

    I have no issues with DNA fingerprints in CODIS for convictions. None at all. This is expanded for simple arrests. For that, I have a problem.

    And, I have no assurances that the government will properly dispose of the samples once a gel is completed. The Privacy Act of 1974 does not cover this situation, for obvious reasons.

    Get a warrant. It's the proper check and it actually works most of the time. Better a slimeball go free from time to time, than more innocents being in the system forever.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
    Last edited: May 21, 2010
  5. Dr Gregg
    Offline

    Dr Gregg BANNED

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2010
    Messages:
    2,901
    Thanks Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +200
    What are they searching? that's quite a stretch

    YOu don't have a clue what you are talking about. The gel provides no information at all, and the DNA is so sparse nothing can be done with it. It's science fiction that anything can be done with that DNA. It's like a fingerprint, nothing else. And its wacky conspiracy theory nonsense is all you ever hear from people against such thing.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. boedicca
    Offline

    boedicca Uppity Water Nymph Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Messages:
    41,808
    Thanks Received:
    12,777
    Trophy Points:
    2,250
    Location:
    The Land of Funk
    Ratings:
    +22,811
    Yet another example of how Big Government uses the tax money taken from the states to then manipulate states via the doling it out process.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: May 21, 2010
  7. Si modo
    Offline

    Si modo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2009
    Messages:
    41,538
    Thanks Received:
    6,382
    Trophy Points:
    1,810
    Location:
    St. Eligius
    Ratings:
    +8,703
    LOL. Search and seizure law would disagree with you. That's the exact reason warrants are needed for blood and/or DNA samples. This bill does away with the need for most of those warrants.

    Au contraire, mon ami. LMAO! I would venture to say that I not only have a clue but am pretty well versed in this area. I guess my several hundred syntheses of nucleic acids and nucleotides and nucleosides, and several hundred annoying fucking gels would give me a wee bit of knowledge about them.
    Actually, it provides a DNA fingerprint, as I said.
    What part of my previous post has you so confused? Read it again. You're just repeating yourself, now.
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2010
  8. Dr Gregg
    Offline

    Dr Gregg BANNED

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2010
    Messages:
    2,901
    Thanks Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +200
    Whether or not the law agrees with you remains to be seen, as the final court decisions on the matter have yet to be made. Guess we will see.


    but its science fiction/conspiracy theory that any information other than a fingerprint occurs by taking a DNA sample for fingerprinting
     
  9. Si modo
    Offline

    Si modo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2009
    Messages:
    41,538
    Thanks Received:
    6,382
    Trophy Points:
    1,810
    Location:
    St. Eligius
    Ratings:
    +8,703
    The current law is already established and has been for years. A warrant is needed for DNA.

    The second line of your post is your strawman.

    The Privacy Act of 1974 is inadequate in dealing with how the government will handle the reamining sample taken from citizens. That is a problem. Only a very small a protion of a swab is needed for a gel leaving the gross majority of the swab in the hands of the state. This is a big problem for any citizen who has a reasonable expectation of privacy concerning their own physical person.

    And, frankly, DNA fingerprints provide much more information than simple fingerprint scans. For example, familial relationships cannot be gleaned from one's fingerprints. That is intimate information that the government will possess, just for example, about non-convicted innocents.
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2010
  10. rightwinger
    Offline

    rightwinger Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    120,372
    Thanks Received:
    19,845
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    NJ & MD
    Ratings:
    +45,405
    Works for me....we want these creeps off the street. If they are wanted on other charges DNA will identify them

    The Fourth Amendment requires "Probable Cause"...the fact that they are already arrested satisfies probable cause
     

Share This Page