High court authorizes routine DNA collection

[g5000]

To make matters even worse for you, Spoonman, Obama's two appointees to the court voted against the majority, they are against the routine taking of DNA samples of arrestees.

 

[Synthaholic]

Law enforcement is broadening DNA while corporate America is broadening fingerprinting: Universal Studios Orlando, and the Disney properties now fingerprint everyone entering their park. They claim that it's to guard against, say, a known pedophile roaming their parks, but that's bullshit.

I refuse to go to any event or attraction that insists on fingerprinting me.

 

[OKTexas]

The Government has the sample itself, not just the markers that are derived from it.

The ability to multiply genetic material from the sample to allow further testing by other agencies is there.

With the Government now intimately in control of your health care, what is to say that HHS won't ask for genetic samples, already under Government control, to use in "studies"?

Fingerprints are currently used for training all the time. Once the Government owns your fingerprints or DNA now, there is nothing to limit what they can use it for.

And don't suggest that we can "trust" the Government. Not when we already have proof that those in the Government will use whatever is at their disposal to further their own agendas. The current IRS mess is evidence of that.

if the government really wanted your DNA they could get it from your garbage. This is also not just random DNA taking, but for arrest for serious felonies.

Maybe they should move the point where the sample is taken from arrest to arraignment (so a person has been in front of a judge, i.e. due process) but a DNA profile test is no different than a photograph or a fingerprint, and those are allowed upon arrest.

They are only allowed to do this with serious felonies?

You might want to read the story again. They said it can be done subsequent to any arrest. That is just Maryland's policy.

 

[g5000]

if the government really wanted your DNA they could get it from your garbage. This is also not just random DNA taking, but for arrest for serious felonies.

Maybe they should move the point where the sample is taken from arrest to arraignment (so a person has been in front of a judge, i.e. due process) but a DNA profile test is no different than a photograph or a fingerprint, and those are allowed upon arrest.

They are only allowed to do this with serious felonies?

You might want to read the story again. They said it can be done subsequent to any arrest.

States vary. Maryland, the state at issue in this case, only does it for serious crimes.

The Patriot Act requires federal authorities to take DNA for any violent crimes, and not just for terroristic crimes.

 

[Spoonman]

To make matters even worse for you, Spoonman, Obama's two appointees to the court voted against the majority, they are against the routine taking of DNA samples of arrestees.

you missed this little fact did you?

Mon, 03 Jun 2013 1359 -0400
WASHINGTON (AP) — 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 mean it was only the opening line in the article

 

[Spoonman]

if the government really wanted your DNA they could get it from your garbage. This is also not just random DNA taking, but for arrest for serious felonies.

Maybe they should move the point where the sample is taken from arrest to arraignment (so a person has been in front of a judge, i.e. due process) but a DNA profile test is no different than a photograph or a fingerprint, and those are allowed upon arrest.

They are only allowed to do this with serious felonies?

You might want to read the story again. They said it can be done subsequent to any arrest. That is just Maryland's policy.

he seems to have missed pretty much eveything in this article and has now sunk to the liberal tactic of I know you are but what am i

 

[g5000]

The five judges who were in the majority:

Chief Justice Roberts - Dubya appointee
Justice Alito - Dubya apppointee
Justice Thomas - Bush, Sr. appointee
Justice Breyer - Clinton appointee
Justice Kennedy - Reagan appointee

In the minority:

Justice Sotomayor - Bammie appointee
Justice Kagan - Bammie appointee
Justice Ginsburg - Clinton appointee
Justice Scalia - Reagan appointee

 

[rightwinger]

They are only allowed to do this with serious felonies?

You might want to read the story again. They said it can be done subsequent to any arrest. That is just Maryland's policy.

he seems to have missed pretty much eveything in this article and has now sunk to the liberal tactic of I know you are but what am i

Liberals voted against the practice

Get your story straight

 

[g5000]

You might want to read the story again. They said it can be done subsequent to any arrest. That is just Maryland's policy.

he seems to have missed pretty much eveything in this article and has now sunk to the liberal tactic of I know you are but what am i

Liberals voted against the practice

Get your story straight

Clearly any Supreme Court decision which comes out while Obama happens to be in the White House must be wrong. Reflexive response. Somehow...Obama is responsible, and therefore it must be wrong. And none of this shit was going on before he was President. That DNA sample musta been taken while he was President, and Obama ruled it constitutional. Impeach him!

Check the White House logs to see how often the clerk of the Chief Justice visited!

 

[OKTexas]

They are only allowed to do this with serious felonies?

You might want to read the story again. They said it can be done subsequent to any arrest.

States vary. Maryland, the state at issue in this case, only does it for serious crimes.

The Patriot Act requires federal authorities to take DNA for any violent crimes, and not just for terroristic crimes.

You were too quick, I added that was Maryland's policy to my post. But the point is the SCOTUS ruling allows it for any arrest. I guarantee state will align their policies with this ruling. Have you ever know a police power bureaucrats didn't like?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Well, I guess as long as Bush & Cheney aren't involved it's perfectly ok.

 

[Sallow]

Isn't this just another form of fingerprinting?

This is something that protects the public in 2 ways.

One from false arrest.

Two from dangerous people.

It's a win win.

 

[g5000]

You might want to read the story again. They said it can be done subsequent to any arrest.

States vary. Maryland, the state at issue in this case, only does it for serious crimes.

The Patriot Act requires federal authorities to take DNA for any violent crimes, and not just for terroristic crimes.

You were too quick, I added that was Maryland's policy to my post. But the point is the SCOTUS ruling allows it for any arrest. I guarantee state will align their policies with this ruling. Have you ever know a police power bureaucrats didn't like?

Of course the police would like more power, and the more power they are given, the more likely they are to abuse it.

However, I do not see any substantive difference between taking a DNA swab and fingerprinting and taking a mug shot. In fact, DNA just provides a helluva lot more accuracy, which is a GOOD thing. It has freed many men from death row.

 

[Katzndogz]

If the state wants universal DNA collection, they better be having a lot more arrests.

 

[Sallow]

yea, they are. you can be arrested for failing to pay your taxes. for non violent crimes. why do they need a fingerprint for those? why do they need DNA? you can be arrested for a peaceful protest. for excercising your first amendment right. but you get finger printed and a mugshot. now they will take your dna too? more government over reach

When arrested you need to be identified. These thing identify you.

We are also forgetting that DNA can HELP someone accused of a crime. if you have a rape victim and the perp left DNA evidence behind, if you are somehow arrested and didnt do it, the DNA evidence could show it and eliminate you as a suspect, thus saving your ass from jail/trial and possible false conviction.

All the DNA shows is if you were there or not.

so if i am arrested for a peacful protest and I have no prior finger prints on record, how does taking my fingerprints help identify me? it doesn't.

and if i am convicted of a crime I did not commit and want to submit my dna as evidence, that should be my call

Seriously?

Are you really NYPD?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Isn't this just another form of fingerprinting?

Yes, because they can use fingerprints to figure out who all your relatives are.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I think it is a reasonable search similar in magnitute to a fingerprint or mug shot

Is that because you actually thought about it, or is it because you are completely ignorant about what DNA actually is?

 

[g5000]

For the record, and for the sake of accuracy, I have read the Supreme Court ruling, and Maryland did not start taking DNA samples of violent crime arrestees until 2009. The criminal in question was arrested in 2009, and his DNA was taken, and a red flag popped up for a rape that was committed in 2003.

The arrestee, Alonzo King, had been menacing a crowd of people with a shotgun when he was arrested in April 2009, three months after Obama took office.

The new Maryland law was passed in 2008.

Maryland has maintained a DNA database since 1994 when the Maryland General Assembly enacted legislation that required all convicted sex offenders to submit DNA samples. As DNA collection and analysis proved to be an exceptional crime-fighting tool, the Maryland legislature expanded the boundaries for collection of DNA from convicted criminals.

Starting in January, 2009, individuals arrested and charged with crimes of violence, 1st, 2ndor 3rd degree burglary or attempting these crimes are now required to provide a DNA sample.

DNA Investigations in Maryland

 

[martybegan]

yea, they are. you can be arrested for failing to pay your taxes. for non violent crimes. why do they need a fingerprint for those? why do they need DNA? you can be arrested for a peaceful protest. for excercising your first amendment right. but you get finger printed and a mugshot. now they will take your dna too? more government over reach

When arrested you need to be identified. These thing identify you.

We are also forgetting that DNA can HELP someone accused of a crime. if you have a rape victim and the perp left DNA evidence behind, if you are somehow arrested and didnt do it, the DNA evidence could show it and eliminate you as a suspect, thus saving your ass from jail/trial and possible false conviction.

All the DNA shows is if you were there or not.

so if i am arrested for a peacful protest and I have no prior finger prints on record, how does taking my fingerprints help identify me? it doesn't.

and if i am convicted of a crime I did not commit and want to submit my dna as evidence, that should be my call

If you are arrested at a peaceful protest, your fingerprints are taken, and they can be compared to the database. IF you had left a set behind at the scene of a previous crime, they would pop up, even if you never had fingerprints taken by the police before.

Here they are doing the same thing, comparing your newly taken DNA profile to those found at the scene of open cases and looking for a match. If they can do it with fingerprints on arrest, there is no real reason DNA profiling is not covered under the same concept.

Also submitting your DNA profile AFTER you are convicted for something you didnt do implies you need a better lawyer.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Isn't this just another form of fingerprinting?

Pretty much. When people hear that they are taking your "DNA" some think that the state now has your entire genome for it to scrutinize and analyse.

What they actually have is a much more limited pattern of "markers" that are close to unique (from 1 in 5 million in earlier versions to 1 in 100 billion in current versions).

The DNA test says nothing about your genetic makeup, it just gives a pattern that you alone have in a given test.

No, what they actually have is your DNA. The fact that they currently do not do a complete analysis does not change the fact that they actually have it. It takes a pretty stupid person to argue that this is all they have.