Article

2005-10-02 Home Front: Tech

Police To Collect Citizen DNA Under Any Pretense

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-10-02 13:09|| || Front Page|| [11136 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 And the downside to better identification of criminals AND vindication of innocents is...?

Posted by Neutron Tom 2005-10-02 13:33|| 2005-10-02 13:33|| Front Page Top

#2 Oh, boy. All we need is to spread the word among the moonbats that Bush-chainey-haliburton-etc. is behind all this as part of the PNAC / Patriot Act. Panic then ensues from the tinfoil hat moonbat crowd in 5, 4, 3...

Posted by N guard 2005-10-02 13:41|| 2005-10-02 13:41|| Front Page Top

#3 Okay, here's one downside.

Suppose Hillary and her bunch are in power. Now your DNA is on file and can be scanned for, say, susceptibility to cancer. Add in her nanny-state health care approach and you may find you go to jail if you smoke or do other 'bad' things for your health.

Yeah it's a stretch ... but not as big a one as I'd like.

Posted by Omerens Omaigum2983 2005-10-02 13:56|| 2005-10-02 13:56|| Front Page Top

#4 Not good - not good at all.

Posted by Tony (UK) 2005-10-02 14:26|| 2005-10-02 14:26|| Front Page Top

#5 My concern about DNA-as-evidence is the danger of corrupt cops or private enemies to manufacure evidence that will be accepted as infallible. Just get a little hair/saliva/trousersnake venom to where it will be collected by forensics and someone is in a world of trouble.

Posted by Grunter 2005-10-02 16:36|| 2005-10-02 16:36|| Front Page Top

#6 Or the opposite - disproving guilt.

Sigh. It's so much easier to postulate dangerous and sinister scenarios in the foggy future than it is to disprove or moderate them. It's also a magnet for some people, who automatically assume the worst... with very very very very very little in US history to substantiate that view.

Hollyweird, et al, have succeeded in spreading conspiracist paranoia crap. Take the Patriot Act for example. Despite all the brouhaha and bullshit, there is ZIP, ZERO, ZILCH, NADA, real-world evidence to support the fear-mongering.

Sad. It takes reality to disprove this knee-jerk reaction - and that's just too skeery for many.

Posted by .com 2005-10-02 16:51|| 2005-10-02 16:51|| Front Page Top

#7 Totally agree Grunter - it's the belief in the infallibility of the evidence that worries me most though.

Posted by Tony (UK) 2005-10-02 16:52|| 2005-10-02 16:52|| Front Page Top

#8 ...and I was more worried about its use over here than the US (plod is very keen on keeping a database 'just in case').

Posted by Tony (UK) 2005-10-02 16:54|| 2005-10-02 16:54|| Front Page Top

#9 I know the Law Enforcement and Justice system. If you think this will just be used to go after criminals your living in a dream world.

DNA evidence is regulary mishandled and contaminated. People have been put in jail due to that mishandeling and contamination. If you think DNA is going to protect those that are not guilty please look at how hard it is to get DNA evidence processed to disprove guilt. It's like pulling wisdom teeth. DA's and Prosecuters fight it tooth and nail. Courts regularly turn down applications to process DNA to prove inocence. The only thing the Courts and Law Enforcemnet is interested in is locking people up. It's a numbers game. Finally DNA is not the magic bullet we are led to believe it is. Their are DNA experts that will say so I am sure.

Here PD, you can use my screwdriver on me. I disagree with your assesment but entirely without malice.

Posted by Sock Puppet OÂ´ Doom 2005-10-02 17:11|| 2005-10-02 17:11|| Front Page Top

#10 It would certainly put an end to dangerous predators and serial killers ability to blend in among us, but it could easily be used in the future to identify "undesirables". Jews, Christians, Arabs, the ill, leaders, followers, etc., etc. It was less than 100 years ago that Hitler could have put this to good use.

Don't know what the answers are, just hope we come up with a good balance to use it for good and prevent it from being used for bad.

Posted by 2b 2005-10-02 17:30|| 2005-10-02 17:30|| Front Page Top

#11 I didnt address the flipside of the DNA-as-evidence question- that of proving innocence, but for the record, it has freed a lot of innocent people.

Posted by Grunter 2005-10-02 17:35|| 2005-10-02 17:35|| Front Page Top

#12 Lo, SPo'D - no, thanks, lol.

I know several people in LE, from street cops to sheriff deputies to Fibbies. None of them will knowingly pursue someone they know to be innocent - and that's specifically mentioned because bad prosecutions, normally a DA / Judge thingy since they're the sole politicians (non-professionals) in the LE system, are usually pretty clear to the investigators. Corruption in the system is not common. I know these folks. Played softball with 'em, drank beer with 'em staged BBQ's with 'em, watched videos and played cards with 'em. And I don't believe I happened to know just good guys - they're the rule, not the exception.

When the system is bagged, i.e. corrupt, then they will get your ass, DNA or no. What DNA does do, however, is as Tony pointed out - it's considered nearly infallible. Since the defense is free to perform its own tests, thus validating the lab isn't corrupt or inept, the remaining area that presents opportunity for bad actors is planted evidence. There's damned little anyone can do about this where there are corrupt people out to get someone. DNA just makes it more of a slam dunk when it's used by corrupt LE, not more of a possibility that the LE is corrupt.

I'm clean. I'm no scofflaw. I know the people who do this, have done it for decades. They're not gunning for anyone but bad guys. This is much like the myths of hacking secured systems. The only good thefts occur when the either the system is managed by an idiot or it's an inside job. Good people don't do this shit. City govts pretty much set the stage for how a cop shop will be run. New Orleans is a classic example. Bad Actors at the top means bad actors throughout the system.

And that's all I have to say about that. :)

Posted by .com 2005-10-02 17:39|| 2005-10-02 17:39|| Front Page Top

#13 Well I have to agree 99.9% of LE are good folks. Some are even my relations. I have hundreds of hours classroom time with them and many many hours of work time with them. I know these people and the system. That 1% however screw over a lot of people in a year. Good people can be inept and make mistakes as well.

There is a local LE person (a back shooter no less.) That has been unremovable for years. He is as crooked as the day is long. He regulary "frames" folks. It's common knoweledge. Other LE agencies will not work with him if it can be avoided. He is the kind of people I fear. He is not an isolated case. It's one of the reasons I got out of private security here. The 99.9% can't seem to do anything about guy's like that. I don't want to give them that kind of power. I don't want it used against me or my kin.

Posted by Sock Puppet OÂ´ Doom 2005-10-02 18:04|| 2005-10-02 18:04|| Front Page Top

#14 I find it hard to believe that this data will be solely kept by LE. Imagine how it would be used by insurance companies, the same ones who are now denying hurricane damage policies because of the subsequent flooding. "You could have had your roof torn off in the flood! Prove otherwise!"

Medical insurance will, of course, be the worst. Even those of you who think they are genetically fine might get proven otherwise in a year or two. Ever been tested for "Fragile X syndrome"? Newly discovered genetic fault responsible for a lot of retardation in the US. Very common.

You might be fine, but your *kids* might be turned down for insurance. Remember that if they find out your DNA, they pretty much know your parents' and your kids.

Can o' worms.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-10-02 18:16|| 2005-10-02 18:16|| Front Page Top

#15 They fingerprint you when you get booked, whether you're guilty or not.

Federal paramilitary forces like the ones that the FBI, BATF, DoE, ad infinitum, have worry me. Weakening Posse Comitatus worries me. Taking DNA samples just doesn't bother me.

Posted by 11A5S 2005-10-02 18:36|| 2005-10-02 18:36|| Front Page Top

#16 For goodness sakes, we're not talking about mapping each person's whole genome here. It's not like we're going to take a saliva swab and then spend millions of dollars mapping all of your children's DNA. You don't need the entire map of Wahington, DC to determine that you're in Washington, DC -- the piece that shows the White House on Pennsylvania avenue is more than enough.

Posted by Darrell 2005-10-02 18:45|| 2005-10-02 18:45|| Front Page Top

#17 They have no right to "invade" my person without a warrant as far as I am concerned. Show my DNA is a threat to LE if they want a sample. Otherwise no way. Some people are willing to give away to many rights because "they aren't guilty." Of course you are not guilty, so, I am not eitehr, but I don't feel like giving up my rights to make it easy on LE of the government. It's as simple as that. Want DNA? Arrest me and get a court order for it. Just taking me into custody is not good enough reason, it isn't the way we do things here. We are not talking about finger prints here.

Posted by Sock Puppet OÂ´ Doom 2005-10-02 19:02|| 2005-10-02 19:02|| Front Page Top

#18 Now you're cookin', SPo'D. That's exactly what Moosey was looking for with the post.

Can o' Fear.

Posted by .com 2005-10-02 19:06|| 2005-10-02 19:06|| Front Page Top

#19 intersting thoughts. It's true that if the govn't is corrupt, they don't need your permission in the first place, there is plenty of ways to get samples without you even knowing. And a bad cop out to get you doesn't need your DNA.

It would be best if the requests were voluntary, because when someone refuses that puts them immediately higher up on the suspect list. However, many people would refuse for reasons SPOD noted, so it's not as good as getting the sample.

I'm not sure how I feel about this. I don't believe that once Pandora is out a box, she can be put back. So you might as well use the good ...since you are going to get the bad whether you want it or not.

Posted by 2b 2005-10-02 20:44|| 2005-10-02 20:44|| Front Page Top

#20 .com: why not look at how DNA tests are already in use in Britain? Entire areas are cordoned off, even if virtually, and all individuals who fit the profile of a particular criminal at large are asked to submit a DNA sample. Since all DNA samples are kept permanently, refuseniks gravitate to the top of the suspects' lists for any DNA evidence crime in the area.

If you happen to have left your DNA, quite innocently, near any crime scene (remember this is a small area, maybe just a few blocks, so this is not as unlikely as it sounds), then you become a PRIME SUSPECT.

This means that you can be pestered. It means that there is already "probable cause" against you as far as warrants to pry into your personal life, your finances, your relationships, your garbage. When the police look for evidence somewhere, expecting to find evidence, they find evidence. That's not twine in your cabinet, that is suspected strangling cord. And dirty pictures on your computer are evidence of everything.

Police already have a gazillion tools at their command. Most crimes are not rocket science to solve. Lawyers and judges create effective counters to most everything they come up with. So the bottom line to a DNA database of innocent people, looking for a guilty one in the bunch is that it is a major, expensive hassle, one likely to solve some crimes, but also likely to drag people into court who shouldn't be there.

Is it worth it to drag innocent people into court just to nab a few guilty ones? Many people would say yes, but many would say no. I say if the police are relying on DNA evidence to get a conviction, they don't have enough proof, unless it is "sperm in the vagina" conclusive.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-10-02 21:11|| 2005-10-02 21:11|| Front Page Top

#21 It's hard to convince me that the government needs more leeway in tracking citizens---especially those without records.
My local LE took it upon themselves to flag every person involved in a domestic violence incident. Even those that called it in.

Now, if some University frosh is drunk and beating her head against a lamp post and I call it in---dispatch calls me, asks me to step out on my deck and wait for the officer. Every time, without recourse. Remember, we have to obey every "reasonable" request of a LEO immediately and without question. It's during your day in court after they take down your door and drag you away that "reasonable" is actually defined.

Posted by asedwich">asedwich 2005-10-02 21:30|| 2005-10-02 21:30|| Front Page Top

#22 I'm clean. I'm no scofflaw.

They fingerprint you when you get booked, whether you're guilty or not.

Of course you are not guilty, so, I am not eitehr..

Ima ~~gulity~~ never broken the law..never! In fact I'll givr my DNA to any female cop who wants it.

/yeeaarright. 'ception for that strech *ahem* 71-7.....

Posted by Red Dog 2005-10-02 21:37|| 2005-10-02 21:37|| Front Page Top

#23 Imagine MY surprise - rather than a Penthouse and Nivea, they want a cheek swab! The nurse looked like Nancy Pelosi too! uuggghhh

and all for those contributions to the RNC and Tom Delay....damn

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-10-02 21:50|| 2005-10-02 21:50|| Front Page Top

#24 As a former civilian with a big city PD in Kyl's home state (yup, PHX), no way in hell would I voluntarily give up my DNA. I'm with SPo'D on this one. Get a court order first. And then get a backup lab to double check the results.

All it takes is one totally incompetent and/or corrupt yahoo in the lab to really make your life pure hell.

Phoenix fired some lab tech who routinely ignored lab procedures for years....messing up hundreds of cases by taking things home, not doing tests, etc. The department had to admit that people were sent to jail who shouldn't have been, due to this jackoff's "lab work". An entire squad of detectives was reassigned to straighten this mess out. One of the reasons he got away with this crap was his mama ran the lab.

Really sounds like a professional, big city PD there, doesn't it? Just imagine what goes on in some podunk towns.

Before you give up the DNA, keep in mind....cops in trouble with the law ALWAYS get a lawyer to talk to their "brothers and sisters in blue". They know better than anyone how the game is played....and you better believe, it's a game. Justice, sadly, has little to do with it.

Posted by Desert Blondie 2005-10-02 22:10|| http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com]">[http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com] 2005-10-02 22:10|| Front Page Top

#25 In response to all of those who have the fears, I'll reiterate this:

City govts pretty much set the stage for how a cop shop will be run. New Orleans is a classic example. Bad Actors at the top means bad actors throughout the system.

And my faith in the system came the hard way - I used to be, um, well extremely unsavory. The statute of limitations has run out, lol, but I'll pass on enumerating my youthful crimes.

Quick note on investigators / detectives... If they found my DNA in a location, but I was not on the traditional short-list of suspects that, indeed, turns out to contain the perp 80+% of the time, then I might have an unpleasant interview - maybe two. But the focus will be where it belongs - on the husband, wife, whomever is logically appropriate as proven by experience. Detectives are not idiots. SPo'D can verify the exams are not trivial. Again, I reiterate those sentences above.

BTW. I find it interesting that many who are vocal in opposition to many of the LE initiatives are also among the most vocal regards illegal immigration. Chew on that, folks. Truth is, you can NOT have it both ways. Either you have rock-hard standards and positive ID methodology, or LE can't do even a fraction of what you demand of them. It would take an real iron curtain, North and South, 100 ft high and sunk 40 into the ground, to stop most of the unobserved movement. Then, for those passing through the gates - you'd still need positive and reliable ID means. We don't have that now. Period. I can easily buy a DL in most states, probably any state, and that's the most universal ID we have.

Some serious issues lying at the base of this entire discussion. In my opinion, most of it has to do with corruption and incompetence, not the nature of the evidence.

Posted by .com 2005-10-02 22:52|| 2005-10-02 22:52|| Front Page Top

#26 Frankly, I have NO problems with getting printed or DNA'd, especially if it's in compliance with citizenship checks...k, PD?

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-10-02 23:02|| 2005-10-02 23:02|| Front Page Top

#27 Heh, my prints have been on file since I was 13. :)

Posted by .com 2005-10-02 23:04|| 2005-10-02 23:04|| Front Page Top

#28 Exactly, Neutron Tom. And as far as using DNA to wrongfully convinct someone. DNA can be used, and IMO will be used far more frequently, to prove innocence, e.g. in the case where no one can verify an alibi but DNA can.

Posted by phil_b 2005-10-02 23:09|| 2005-10-02 23:09|| Front Page Top

#29 But you see, I CAN have it both ways, and I'll eat one of them too! :)
My fingerprints have been on file with the feds for years too. My fingerprints aren't proof of ID, they aren't proof of innocence. Fingerprints have been around as a legal argument long enough that they aren't used as the be all and end all of guilt or innocence.
DNA, on the other hand, DOES put you into a pool of presumably guilty persons, DOES have enough wiggle room for questionable ethics, lousy techs, and it's expensive as all fuck. Once you're in jail you can't just take the results to an independent analysis.

BTW. I find it interesting that many who are vocal in opposition to many of the LE initiatives are also among the most vocal regards illegal immigration. Chew on that, folks. Truth is, you can NOT have it both ways. Either you have rock-hard standards and positive ID methodology, or LE can't do even a fraction of what you demand of them.

PD, you're not just reaching, your FLAILING! :) What, either we give LE free reign to devise their own methodology, without oversight, or we're easy on immigration?
Or are you saying that we can't be hard on immigration if we don't submit to DNA mapping to determine citizenship? Because I'll take a barcode to my forehead to determine citizenship before I submit to a technology that currently doesn't have the discrimination to differentiate me from even 25% of the American population in several days.

But from the LE perspective, that's 25% guaranteed guilt, dude.

Posted by Omolusing Glurong4284 2005-10-02 23:30|| 2005-10-02 23:30|| Front Page Top

#30 echo dittos here.. that's a go on collecting of DNA, the plussesus outweigh the minussesus big time.

lets catch the rapist, terrorists, and the illegal aliens etc. Today, that would be an enhancement of our citizen status.

Posted by Red Dog 2005-10-02 23:51|| 2005-10-02 23:51|| Front Page Top

#31 OG - That's a steaming pile of shit, son.

"My fingerprints aren't proof of ID..."

"Fingerprints have been around as a legal argument long enough that they aren't used as the be all and end all of guilt or innocence."

WTF? That's some of the stupidest shit I've ever read. The first brain fart is lead pipe territory. Total bullshit. If they have your prints and you, then it IS proof, one way or the other. Sheesh. The second one just makes no sense. You either is or you isn't if there's enough to work with. If there's less that the accepted minimum data points available, then it will put you into or take you out of a pool of suspects. Duh, son. Your take makes no fucking sense.

"DNA, on the other hand, DOES put you into a pool of presumably guilty persons"

Again, you miss the point - it is NO different from fingerprints. With N matching alleles you can be either ruled in or ruled out. It's actually a slam dunk in the rule you out direction - any marker mismatches rule you out, yet it takes several exact matches (not all markers always show - depends upon the quality of the DNA they had to work with - so the marker is sometimes null, and thus ignored if no better DNA sample is available) to rule you in.

The forensic difference between a perfect fingerprint match and an all alleles match is ZERO. Lacking those perfect cases, then the percentage confidence of what is available rules you into or out of the suspect list, with DNA ruling you out on any mismatches.

Flailing?

Gee, fuck you.

I did not say:
"What, either we give LE free reign to devise their own methodology, without oversight, or we're easy on immigration?"

Nor did I say:
"Or are you saying that we can't be hard on immigration if we don't submit to DNA mapping to determine citizenship?"

Exaggeration is fine for fun, but not for argumentation. You think you made some sort of case? Bullshit. You've merely proved you can't read and comprehend. Re-read. Think. Then say something intelligent.

Posted by .com 2005-10-02 23:57|| 2005-10-02 23:57|| Front Page Top

23:57 .com
23:51 Red Dog
23:50 DMFD
23:47 Bomb-a-rama
23:38 Bomb-a-rama
23:33 DMFD
23:30 Omolusing Glurong4284
23:25 Fun Dung Poo
23:25 imoyaro
23:24 Red Dog
23:23 r
23:18 Fun Dung Poo
23:10 DMFD
23:09 phil_b
23:08 Comic-book Guy
23:05 trailing wife
23:04 .com
23:02 .com
23:02 Frank G
22:59 phil_b
22:52 .com
22:46 Fun Dung Poo
22:40 True German Ally
22:40 Sock Puppet OÂ´ Doom