Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

Powergamz1 -> Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 10:09:49 AM)

http://news.yahoo.com/court-police-dna-swabs-arrestees-141629414.html

quote:

A sharply divided Supreme Court on Monday said police can routinely take DNA from people they arrest, equating a DNA cheek swab to other common jailhouse procedures like fingerprinting.


I expect a few games to be played with the implementation of this.



JeffBC -> RE: Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 10:18:38 AM)

OK, now who is surprised that the supreme court of our surveillance state thinks DNA tagging everyone is hunky dory? I'd have been stunned if this didn't get approved. This sort of thing is not optional. The police-state NEEDS it.



tj444 -> RE: Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 10:23:32 AM)

yeah, I pointed that out with a similar article on another thread.. you can change your face with cosmetic surgery, you can alter/remove your fingerprints (chemically, etc repeating when they come back).. but your dna you can not modify.. and imo, the US govt's goal is to have all this info on every person living or visiting the US in its database..



LRF69 -> RE: Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 10:27:54 AM)

The other side to this is...it could help free the innocent. How many people have been released thanks to DNA testing, which hadn't been available at the time they were on trial? How many from death row have been freed, cleared due to DNA testing. My concern, reading the title, was that they had ok'd random DNA sample collection from the general population....but collecting it from those arrested sounds better.



JeffBC -> RE: Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 10:30:34 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444
yeah, I pointed that out with a similar article on another thread.. you can change your face with cosmetic surgery, you can alter/remove your fingerprints (chemically, etc repeating when they come back).. but your dna you can not modify.. and imo, the US govt's goal is to have all this info on every person living or visiting the US in its database..

The real truth though is that it's a dead letter worry. While we all worry about them building a massive DNA database "to keep us safe" they are in fact already building massive facial recognition databases to keep us all safe. Unlike a DNA database, a facial recognition system does not need any sort of sample to work from other than a random video image. In other words, long before I worried about them nabbing me and taking a blood sample for a DNA test I'd be worried about just showing up on some random camera somewhere and being flagged for whatever reason.

Still though, the police state will want/need to double down on it's control measures. So I expect it to push aggressively for any and all surveillance measures even as it asserts more and more secrecy on the part of "the state". Watching what's happening in the US regarding videotaping cops on public duty in public settings is a real eye opener.



vincentML -> RE: Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 10:31:33 AM)

The array of justices on either side is really interesting.

Breyer in line with Roberts, Kennedy, Alito and Thomas in favor of warrantless DNA sampling at arrests. Against: Scalia, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan. Strange bedfellows indeed.



Powergamz1 -> RE: Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 10:32:04 AM)

Unless 'everyone' is arrested and booked, that isn't what this ruling authorizes.


The question is going to come when cops in the field try to play games with the point at which someone is 'booked'... I suspect this one will be revisited.



freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 10:33:59 AM)

I would actually welcome that sort of thing here.
It wouldn't take more than a few seconds to take a mouth swab and file the results just like they do with fingerprints.

How many times have we heard crooks escape through the net because there was no way to correlate the info properly when they were interviewing suspects?
How many crooks have escaped close scrutiny because there was no record of previous crimes properly recorded?
How many crooks have been released because they can't correlate the required info within the time required by law?

I would love the authorities to have this sort of info to hand in one place so they can bring up all the previous misdemeanours in one hit.

Police state?? Maybe.
But the only ones needing to fear anything of the sort are criminals and those with something to hide.




kdsub -> RE: Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 10:35:58 AM)

I wonder if they are not charged...or if they are found not guilty in a court of law...is the DNA sample destroyed? I'd be interested to know the particulars.

Butch



tj444 -> RE: Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 10:38:03 AM)

it is a slippery slope.. they will expand it over time to include more and more of the populace and not just those arrested.. why not do a cheek swab if you are caught speeding? or jaywalking? etc.. dont they already collect dna from anyone in the military too? why not for any govt job? etc.. etc..

and sure it can sometimes allow an innocent person to be freed from jail but not always, sometimes that still isnt enough to prove innocence.. I have read of such cases..



Aswad -> RE: Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 10:39:00 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

OK, now who is surprised that the supreme court of our surveillance state thinks DNA tagging everyone is hunky dory? I'd have been stunned if this didn't get approved. This sort of thing is not optional. The police-state NEEDS it.


Your Google fingerprint is a lot more reliable than your DNA fingerprint, yanno.

Bioprinting is nothing new, and CA voters overwhelmingly supported it in proposition 69, if memory serves.

This is one of those areas I'm not happy about Norway, where we store the actual DNA sample itself indefinitely for anyone that's ever been interviewed by the police, as well as pretty much anyone that's ever been within a mile or so of any unsolved crime, interviewed or not. There's no way to be deleted from that record again, and no regulations as to what they may do with the sample. Parties on the right want to add every immigrant to the database, while parties on the left want to add every male citizen to the database (with the side effect that rape victims now find themselves washed internally with peroxide or bleach after being raped, since the database is common knowledge), and some parties- like the one attacked in 2011- want to simply add the entire population to it.

"If you want to know the future of humanity, imagine a face with a boot coming down on it. Forever." - Orwell

Guess it's time to get used to the idea that we're all owned by everyone but ourselves.

And that the top percent owns a larger share of anything owned, of course.

IWYW,
— Aswad.



mnottertail -> RE: Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 10:39:07 AM)

They are making a national database to take our guns away.  All republican.



TricklessMagic -> RE: Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 10:43:28 AM)

Hey, hey, invoking the spirit of the left, the government would never have any impure motives or desires to abuse a database full of everyone's DNA. That's just paranoid.



kdsub -> RE: Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 10:44:34 AM)

This will not be popular I know...I believe every child born in the us or anyone entering this country for any reason should have a DNA sample taken. This data base should be open to all law enforcement agencies and medical research facilities.

I trust my elected officials to legislate laws governing the use of this information. lol laugh if you want I do.

This would protect the innocent and help prosecute the guilty.

As medical discoveries are made that relate to our DNA it would be nice to receive a letter in the mail warning me of potential problems.

Butch



katts3 -> RE: Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 10:47:44 AM)

Guns what good are guns if big brother is buying up all the ammo,I have spoken on here many times in the past just how important it was to stock your ammo and learn to reload...Have you seen the lines around the block when most major sporting goods stores get their ammo shipment..Well my friends lets hope that it isn't to late for most of you...Bounty



Aswad -> RE: Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 10:49:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

But the only ones needing to fear anything of the sort are criminals and those with something to hide.


<sarcasm>

Yes, criminals like Dr. Martin L. King, Jr., M. Ghandi, etc...

We all know the world would be better off without criminals, right?

Like those crazy fuckers that own too many sex toys, engage in sodomy, whip each other, and so forth. And the gays. Let's not forget the gays. Once proper morals have been returned to lawmaking and the gay agenda has been banned, police will be able to enforce decent standards. And women that bathed during their period as teenagers, and thereby increased their risk of an unlawful miscarriage. We can even export our technology and help the Arab world keep its women in line.

</sarcasm>

That's what your line of reasoning justifies, in the long run.

ETA: And let's not forget the chilling effects.

IWYW,
— Aswad.



thompsonx -> RE: Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 10:53:57 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

yeah, I pointed that out with a similar article on another thread.. you can change your face with cosmetic surgery, you can alter/remove your fingerprints (chemically, etc repeating when they come back).. but your dna you can not modify.. and imo, the US govt's goal is to have all this info on every person living or visiting the US in its database..


Kerry mullis says that dna can not tell us who you are, dna can only tell us who you are not.
What kerry mullis says is that if your dna matches the dna at the crime sceene it does not mean shit.
What kerry mullis says is that if your dna does not match the dna of the crime sceene it means you were not the donor.



tj444 -> RE: Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 10:56:04 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

As medical discoveries are made that relate to our DNA it would be nice to receive a letter in the mail warning me of potential problems.


yes and the 1%/Big Pharma will send you an order form for the massively expensive new meds they "discover" from using your dna (which you wont get a dime from).. this has already happened elsewhere & I dont agree with it.. and what happens if they discover some aspect of your dna makes you more likely to be violent or some other criminal activity?



thompsonx -> RE: Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 11:01:04 AM)

quote:

Police state?? Maybe.
But the only ones needing to fear anything of the sort are criminals and those with something to hide.


Isn't that the same argument that the cops use to to "justify" a warrantless search?
Is it possible that there might be a reason that the founders thought it necessary to require a warrant to search a persons home?"
If an insurance co. had access to that data base might they be able to "screen" potential liabilities out?



DaddySatyr -> RE: Supreme Court OKs DNA collection (6/3/2013 11:02:11 AM)

Another revolting example of SCOTUS going against the very ideals of liberty in what is supposed to be a free country.



Peace and comfort,



Michael



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875