colorado wants to collect DNA from anyone arrested

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: crystal

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: v1001

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: moshquerade
don't do the crime

Ha, you don't have to "do the crime." You can be arrested at any time for anything.

No. You cannot be arrested "at any time for "anything". There has to be reasonable suspicion/evidence against you.

Yeah no one has every been falsely accused. Or picked up because they looked like the criminal they were looking for. The point was someone didn't have to have done an actual crime.

Or had a prosecutor conceal exculpatory evidence in order to obtain convictions....

Let's just pick that needle out of a haystack.

Do you know of anyone that has happened to? Like it's a common occurrence? Sure, once is too much, but to say that you can be arrested anytime for anything is false. I have never been arrested, falsely or otherwise, have you?

One recent high profile example: Text

It happens a lot more than most people think. Prosecutors (being elected) are interested in convictions not justice. Most people don't understand that distinction.

Yeh, I could probably find someone in the news that it's happened to, because the media reports this stuff. It's their job.
I am saying I don't know of anyone personally, and neither do you.

That is like saying you don't care about the issue or it is a non issue until it affects you personally...

No. it's not. i was stating a fact, and trying to convey that it's a rare occasion. please read my other responses before you shoot from the hip.

 

[frostedflakes]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: Darwin333
I am opposed to it because the government ALWAYS asks for an inch and takes a mile. Right now they just want to file the DNA of people arrested (READ: Not convicted). Next they will want a big ass database of EVERYONE. Doesn't sound like a big deal right? I mean, DNA is really just like a fingerprint right?

What about in 20 years when its much easier to determine "traits" from DNA. What if we locate a gene that puts people at greater risk of mental disease. Of course, the government should be proactive in protecting society from these people that have a higher risk of mental disease right? At the very least they should put them on some list somewhere so they can keep an eye on you right?

Of course none of that is going to happen. I mean, the government has never abused databases like that to profile people before right? Bullshit, the government recently used peoples CREDIT SCORES in their risk calculations for people to be added to the "no fly" or "watch list". Wanna take a wild guess at how many people have been unjustly added to that list, denied travel within the country, denied entry into the country or had to endure a ton of extra crap at the airport? Congressmen and Senators have been hassled because of that list. If THEY are bitching about how hard it is to get removed from the list then how well do you think you or I will fare?

Of course, only terrorists need to worry about the no fly list right? If the government is willing to use your credit score to determine if you are a risk to national security do you really think they won't use your DNA in other ways when the technology matures?

I'm not 100% on this, but from what I understand of DNA forensics (at least using STR, I know there are various methods, but STR is what's used in most/all US labs), all they are interested in is 13 specific points on a certain area of the DNA. I'd assume what they are talking about is having people's STR profile on database, which is completely different than having a chunk of your DNA on ice or something like that (which, if you're into all the conspiracy theories, could lead to cloning, profiling, etc. in the future). I don't think the 13 markers used for STR comparison really contains any information pertaining to genetic traits, it's just useful for comparison purposes.

thats now. what about in 10-20 years? they are improving DNA research all the time.

it just starts something i think nobody is going to want in 10-20 years (well except for those in power).

Well I'm pretty most geneticists agree that the DNA used for STR comparison is "junk" DNA, i.e. it has no biological purpose, but I guess it's *possible* it holds information we simply don't understand yet.

Was looking around on Google and found something interesting, though, apparently many states aren't required to destroy DNA evidence after extracting a profile from it, so I guess it is possible that such laws could lead to your entire genome being stored away. Kind of freaky. :Q

BTW people, stop nesting so many damn quotes.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: moshquerade
don't do the crime

Ha, you don't have to "do the crime." You can be arrested at any time for anything.

No. You cannot be arrested "at any time for "anything". There has to be reasonable suspicion/evidence against you.

How naive. That's cute. Now get back in the kitchen.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Let's just pick that needle out of a haystack.

Do you know of anyone that has happened to? Like it's a common occurrence? Sure, once is too much, but to say that you can be arrested anytime for anything is false. I have never been arrested, falsely or otherwise, have you?

Something like this will encourage baseless arrests.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: moshquerade
don't do the crime

Ha, you don't have to "do the crime." You can be arrested at any time for anything.

No. You cannot be arrested "at any time for "anything". There has to be reasonable suspicion/evidence against you.

How naive. That's cute. Now get back in the kitchen.

Then what? DNA evidence that doesn't exist proves you did it? What are they gonna do, plant an SD card with your genome on it on the crime scene?

 

[lokiju]

Originally posted by: shinerburke
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help." - Ronald Reagan

QFT!

 

[Darwin333]

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: Darwin333
I am opposed to it because the government ALWAYS asks for an inch and takes a mile. Right now they just want to file the DNA of people arrested (READ: Not convicted). Next they will want a big ass database of EVERYONE. Doesn't sound like a big deal right? I mean, DNA is really just like a fingerprint right?

What about in 20 years when its much easier to determine "traits" from DNA. What if we locate a gene that puts people at greater risk of mental disease. Of course, the government should be proactive in protecting society from these people that have a higher risk of mental disease right? At the very least they should put them on some list somewhere so they can keep an eye on you right?

Of course none of that is going to happen. I mean, the government has never abused databases like that to profile people before right? Bullshit, the government recently used peoples CREDIT SCORES in their risk calculations for people to be added to the "no fly" or "watch list". Wanna take a wild guess at how many people have been unjustly added to that list, denied travel within the country, denied entry into the country or had to endure a ton of extra crap at the airport? Congressmen and Senators have been hassled because of that list. If THEY are bitching about how hard it is to get removed from the list then how well do you think you or I will fare?

Of course, only terrorists need to worry about the no fly list right? If the government is willing to use your credit score to determine if you are a risk to national security do you really think they won't use your DNA in other ways when the technology matures?

I'm not 100% on this, but from what I understand of DNA forensics (at least using STR, I know there are various methods, but STR is what's used in most/all US labs), all they are interested in is 13 specific points on a certain area of the DNA. I'd assume what they are talking about is having people's STR profile on database, which is completely different than having a chunk of your DNA on ice or something like that (which, if you're into all the conspiracy theories, could lead to cloning, profiling, etc. in the future). I don't think the 13 markers used for STR comparison really contains any information pertaining to genetic traits, it's just useful for comparison purposes.

That is my point. Give them an inch and they take a mile. When credit ratings were created do you think anyone thought they would use them to determine the "risk factor" of a US citizen being a terrorist?

Its not about what they want to do with it now. Its about what they can potentially do with it later. I can think of a dozen different things the government can potentially do with our DNA that is WAY over the line.

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: lokiju

Originally posted by: shinerburke
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help." - Ronald Reagan

QFT!

Yeah and after Reagan cut funding to the FDA, we complain about them letting drugs that cause serious health problems, blindness, etc, onto the market. The anti-government rhetoric is just that.. rhetoric.

Who do you think is going to save you from a corrupt DA in cahoots with a corrupt sherriff and a corrupt public defender, the people you are afraid of somehow misusing DNA profiles? Either no one or the feds.

 

[AnthroAndStargate]

Originally posted by: shinerburke
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help." - Ronald Reagan

Said the man who saw us through the Iran-Contra scandal, was responsible for the rise and genocide carried out by Pinochet, started the Army School of the Americas, carried through the failed Star Wars initiative (started against the warning of most scientists except for Edward Teller) and which almost ruined the MAD policy between the US and Russia.

He did a few things right but don't quote him like hes some small government god. He just shrunk the government in relation to poor and middle class people and grew the military budget to ridiculous levels.

As for the DNA thing that is a little scary. For those of you who say your cool with it - sure you don't commit crimes now but what happens if the winds change and some legal thing you do is now outlawed? Whoops.

It's like being a Muslim in America today. Or hell even being a Sikh. You can be innocent and still get detained and searched and/or arrested at the whim of the government. Don't go so blindly into schemes like this.

 

[lokiju]

Originally posted by: thomsbrain
definitely an invasion of privacy. people who are arrested have yet to be tried or convicted of any crimes. they could be any law-abiding person like you or me. a fingerprint is adequate to positively identify you for the purposes of keeping track of people in jail.

there is no reason to trust the people who work for the government to do the right thing with power and never make any mistakes, and plenty of examples of why we should NOT trust them. this constitutes a tremendous level of power over law-abiding citizens.

in the tired old phrase, "this isn't a problem if you are not a criminal," just replace "criminal" with "jew." The government's idea about what constitutes crime can change at any time. There are plenty of people from the middle east who have committed no crimes yet are being held without trial. it's a crapshoot about who they'll want to profile next. and life itself is a crapshoot. maybe the next person to be murdered will be that girl who gave you a sip of her drink at the bar, then later got killed by by someone else in the alley. do you really want a rookie cop sending you to jail based on DNA evidence that you were the last known person to associate with her? especially when people consider DNA evidence to automatically equal guilt?

So close to being able to call you out on Godwin's Law with that.

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: Darwin333

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: Darwin333
I am opposed to it because the government ALWAYS asks for an inch and takes a mile. Right now they just want to file the DNA of people arrested (READ: Not convicted). Next they will want a big ass database of EVERYONE. Doesn't sound like a big deal right? I mean, DNA is really just like a fingerprint right?

What about in 20 years when its much easier to determine "traits" from DNA. What if we locate a gene that puts people at greater risk of mental disease. Of course, the government should be proactive in protecting society from these people that have a higher risk of mental disease right? At the very least they should put them on some list somewhere so they can keep an eye on you right?

Of course none of that is going to happen. I mean, the government has never abused databases like that to profile people before right? Bullshit, the government recently used peoples CREDIT SCORES in their risk calculations for people to be added to the "no fly" or "watch list". Wanna take a wild guess at how many people have been unjustly added to that list, denied travel within the country, denied entry into the country or had to endure a ton of extra crap at the airport? Congressmen and Senators have been hassled because of that list. If THEY are bitching about how hard it is to get removed from the list then how well do you think you or I will fare?

Of course, only terrorists need to worry about the no fly list right? If the government is willing to use your credit score to determine if you are a risk to national security do you really think they won't use your DNA in other ways when the technology matures?

I'm not 100% on this, but from what I understand of DNA forensics (at least using STR, I know there are various methods, but STR is what's used in most/all US labs), all they are interested in is 13 specific points on a certain area of the DNA. I'd assume what they are talking about is having people's STR profile on database, which is completely different than having a chunk of your DNA on ice or something like that (which, if you're into all the conspiracy theories, could lead to cloning, profiling, etc. in the future). I don't think the 13 markers used for STR comparison really contains any information pertaining to genetic traits, it's just useful for comparison purposes.

That is my point. Give them an inch and they take a mile. When credit ratings were created do you think anyone thought they would use them to determine the "risk factor" of a US citizen being a terrorist?

Its not about what they want to do with it now. Its about what they can potentially do with it later. I can think of a dozen different things the government can potentially do with our DNA that is WAY over the line.

Bingo! It's the future expansion of uses they will cleverly come up with for information they collect like this that makes me not want them to have that ability in the first place.

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: Darwin333

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: Darwin333
I am opposed to it because the government ALWAYS asks for an inch and takes a mile. Right now they just want to file the DNA of people arrested (READ: Not convicted). Next they will want a big ass database of EVERYONE. Doesn't sound like a big deal right? I mean, DNA is really just like a fingerprint right?

What about in 20 years when its much easier to determine "traits" from DNA. What if we locate a gene that puts people at greater risk of mental disease. Of course, the government should be proactive in protecting society from these people that have a higher risk of mental disease right? At the very least they should put them on some list somewhere so they can keep an eye on you right?

Of course none of that is going to happen. I mean, the government has never abused databases like that to profile people before right? Bullshit, the government recently used peoples CREDIT SCORES in their risk calculations for people to be added to the "no fly" or "watch list". Wanna take a wild guess at how many people have been unjustly added to that list, denied travel within the country, denied entry into the country or had to endure a ton of extra crap at the airport? Congressmen and Senators have been hassled because of that list. If THEY are bitching about how hard it is to get removed from the list then how well do you think you or I will fare?

Of course, only terrorists need to worry about the no fly list right? If the government is willing to use your credit score to determine if you are a risk to national security do you really think they won't use your DNA in other ways when the technology matures?

I'm not 100% on this, but from what I understand of DNA forensics (at least using STR, I know there are various methods, but STR is what's used in most/all US labs), all they are interested in is 13 specific points on a certain area of the DNA. I'd assume what they are talking about is having people's STR profile on database, which is completely different than having a chunk of your DNA on ice or something like that (which, if you're into all the conspiracy theories, could lead to cloning, profiling, etc. in the future). I don't think the 13 markers used for STR comparison really contains any information pertaining to genetic traits, it's just useful for comparison purposes.

That is my point. Give them an inch and they take a mile. When credit ratings were created do you think anyone thought they would use them to determine the "risk factor" of a US citizen being a terrorist?

Its not about what they want to do with it now. Its about what they can potentially do with it later. I can think of a dozen different things the government can potentially do with our DNA that is WAY over the line.

so if i have a bad credit score im a terrorist?

 

[D1gger]

I don't have a problem with collecting DNA samples and keeping them on file for all convicted criminals, but to take the samples for anyone arrested takes it a step too far in my mind.

Imagine a scenario where the cops believe suspect "A" committed a serious crime. They have DNA evidence, but no reference sample from "A", so they come up with some trumped up charge such as catch him speeding and charge him with a possible DUI, just so they can arrest him and collect a sample. That sounds very much like an illegal search and seizure, but try to prove that.

 

[zoiks]

I don't care either. If it helps then great.

 

[Jugernot]

Hell yah! I've never been arrested and don't plan too, so I don't have to worry. If I did get arrested and they took my DNA, I don't break the law, again I have nothing to worry about.

If they used my DNA for the wrong reason, at least I could say hello to my clone.

 

[jjones]

I can see it for convicted felons, they have to give up certain rights already and I don't see any reason not to pile this one on, but anything less than a convicted felon? No way.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: D1gger
I don't have a problem with collecting DNA samples and keeping them on file for all convicted criminals, but to take the samples for anyone arrested takes it a step too far in my mind.

Imagine a scenario where the cops believe suspect "A" committed a serious crime. They have DNA evidence, but no reference sample from "A", so they come up with some trumped up charge such as catch him speeding and charge him with a possible DUI, just so they can arrest him and collect a sample. That sounds very much like an illegal search and seizure, but try to prove that.

thats just one of the possible issues.

im more worried about this being used for other reasons. Now to get a job you need a DNA test to make sure you are not a felon,terriost etc. and them not hireing you because you have a possiblity of cancer or such.

sure its against the law (and not 100% possible now) but who is to say what will happen in 10 years?

give them a inch and they will take what they can. the current adminstration should be proof of that.

 

[Kelemvor]

Most people get finger printed as a kid. Why not have DNA as well? I wouldn't mind.

 

[frostedflakes]

Originally posted by: Kelemvor
Most people get finger printed as a kid. Why not have DNA as well? I wouldn't mind.

Because it's a slippery slope, a slippery slope I tell you! :roll:

 

[Darwin333]

Originally posted by: Kelemvor
Most people get finger printed as a kid. Why not have DNA as well? I wouldn't mind.

Why not let them tap everyones phones without warrants? If you have nothing to hide you shouldn't have anything to worry about.

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: Darwin333

Originally posted by: Kelemvor
Most people get finger printed as a kid. Why not have DNA as well? I wouldn't mind.

Why not let them tap everyones phones without warrants? If you have nothing to hide you shouldn't have anything to worry about.

It's not that they want to invade your privacy and you have nothing to worry about if you're innocent. It's that they are sampling your DNA, which isn't an invasion of privacy.

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: AnthroAndStargate

Originally posted by: shinerburke
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help." - Ronald Reagan

Said the man who saw us through the Iran-Contra scandal, was responsible for the rise and genocide carried out by Pinochet, started the Army School of the Americas, carried through the failed Star Wars initiative (started against the warning of most scientists except for Edward Teller) and which almost ruined the MAD policy between the US and Russia.

He did a few things right but don't quote him like hes some small government god. He just shrunk the government in relation to poor and middle class people and grew the military budget to ridiculous levels.

As for the DNA thing that is a little scary. For those of you who say your cool with it - sure you don't commit crimes now but what happens if the winds change and some legal thing you do is now outlawed? Whoops.

It's like being a Muslim in America today. Or hell even being a Sikh. You can be innocent and still get detained and searched and/or arrested at the whim of the government. Don't go so blindly into schemes like this.

QFT (about Reagan)

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: Kelemvor
Most people get finger printed as a kid. Why not have DNA as well? I wouldn't mind.

Because it's a slippery slope, a slippery slope I tell you! :roll:

It's not a slippery slope, it's the bottom of the slope. It is the deepest possible invasion of your privacy.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Woo. They have my DNA. Now they can figure out my Gender, physical characteristics, and the chances that I may get some diseases. Theres a WHOLE lot that the government can do with it.

Face it, DNA basically tells the government most what they already know. Hair, eye, skin color. All they use it for is to identify people. There is NOTHING personal on DNA that could be embarrassing. Unless you're a transvestite or something. DNA will not tell the government your favorite foods, or your secret love. As long as it involves aquick and easy methods, like a finger prick, cheek scrape etc, so that it is minimally invasive. Those finger pricks can somethings hurt alot...

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: v1001

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: moshquerade
don't do the crime

Ha, you don't have to "do the crime." You can be arrested at any time for anything.

No. You cannot be arrested "at any time for "anything". There has to be reasonable suspicion/evidence against you.

Yeah no one has every been falsely accused. Or picked up because they looked like the criminal they were looking for. The point was someone didn't have to have done an actual crime.

Or had a prosecutor conceal exculpatory evidence in order to obtain convictions....

Let's just pick that needle out of a haystack.

Do you know of anyone that has happened to? Like it's a common occurrence? Sure, once is too much, but to say that you can be arrested anytime for anything is false. I have never been arrested, falsely or otherwise, have you?

One recent high profile example: Text

It happens a lot more than most people think. Prosecutors (being elected) are interested in convictions not justice. Most people don't understand that distinction.

Yeh, I could probably find someone in the news that it's happened to, because the media reports this stuff. It's their job.
I am saying I don't know of anyone personally, and neither do you.

I and most of my friends are reasonably well educated, white, and decently well off (able to provide a good defense). We're not attractive targets.

Exactly. I live in a wealthy suburb of Dallas, and I'm a reserve officer for the PD here. I only work parades and festivals and such, but if the FT officers see an undesirable hanging around town (looks poor, out of place,) they're going to make them leave. Most people just leave when threatened with jail, but some people have to be hauled in. There is ALWAYS a reason to be found for taking someone to jail. This is SOP in every nice suburb in America. You've gotta keep the riff raff out.

Big government always oppresses the poor huddled masses while the upper classes skate free.