Obama supports DNA samples upon arrest (interview, legal, accuse, ammunition)

[ergohead]

Originally Posted by Factsplease

Seriously? Are you kidding me? Why would this all of a sudden be an issue? If you're not a criminal, why would this bother you?

The definition of "crime" changes with each political breath.

[delusianne]

Originally Posted by arctichomesteader

That wouldn't stop them from planting evidence/tampering with evidence, and unless you have inside info., you'd never be able to prove it.

Some examples that have come to light, but corruption has probably covered many more I'm sure:

Crime lab botched 27 DNA results - The Boston Globe

Top lab repeatedly botched DNA tests - chicagotribune.com

I know, but then (or beforehand) you get an outside, dated, witnessed test and keep it somewhere else.

Remember how we were/are all supposed to keep a few pints of the blood of each member of our families at a blood bank (or somewhere) in case of emergencies... add DNA samples to that, I guess.

[ovcatto]

By the way, for the record, the FBI fingerprint database contains 50 million sets.

[allydriver]

Originally Posted by ovcatto

Jesus christ.

You get arrested, your finger prints go to a huge FBI data base. DNA, finger prints, what's the dif?

ON EDIT: Oh yeah, DNA is science, so we've got to be against that!?!

thats what I'm sayin
Microchip,DNA and prints.
Science has made the chips so much less intrusive, how can you argue against them?

p.s. bonus points for using "jesus christ" and "science" in the same post.
You progressives are goooood.

[rhinestone]

OMG next he'll want to take mug shots and finger prints too.

[ovcatto]

Originally Posted by ergohead

The definition of "crime" changes with each political breath.

Such as?

[delusianne]

Originally Posted by rhinestone

OMG next he'll want to take mug shots and finger prints too.

"He" meaning President Obama OMG?

[Toyman at Jewel Lake]

The Patriot Act seems to have lead everyone to accept increased government intrusion into personal privicy. I agree with some other posters, why wait till an arrest, just collect a DNA database upon everyone at birth. That whole protection against unreasonable search and seizure really doesn't mean anything anyway.

[Bagger]

Originally Posted by ovcatto

Jesus christ.

You get arrested, your finger prints go to a huge FBI data base. DNA, finger prints, what's the dif?

ON EDIT: Oh yeah, DNA is science, so we've got to be against that!?!

You have a good argument concerning finger prints.. I guess I would say what can the finger print tell you about the person besides identifying them?

Couldn't DNA be used for other purposes than identification?

[ovcatto]

Originally Posted by allydriver

thats what I'm sayin
Microchip,DNA and prints.
Science has made the chips so much less intrusive, how can you argue against them?

Sure can, but if you can't discern the 4th and 5th Amendment objections to micro chips vs DNA and finger prints I don't see what purpose it would serve.

p.s. bonus points for using "jesus christ" and "science" in the same post.
You progressives are goooood.

Please note the non-capitalization of christ, and I would think that such usage in this context would be clearly blasphemous by Biblical standards. So using jesus christ in the diminutive tense would be sufficiently in accord with my atheistically progressive sinfulness.

P.S. In the absence of a grown up policy regarding expletives on C-D I have to resort to such phrases as jesus christ instead of words with higher impact and emphasis.