Slashdot Mirror
Californians To Vote On Largest DNA Database
mpthompson writes "California law enforcement officials are backing a proposed ballot measure that would give them authority to operate the largest DNA database in the world and collect DNA samples from everyone arrested or convicted on felony charges."
It's already done with fingerprints... I don't see how this is much different.
Now, if California wanted to make the database for every single citizen, I would object. If it was for anyone convicted of anything (parking tickets included), I would object. But it's not...
It's FELLONS. These are not jaywalkers, they are murderers, rapists, duggies (dealers, trafficers, etc), and more. I don't mind this segment of the population losing a little bit of their rights, because they chose to give them up when they decided to commit a crime. I don't mind this just like I don't think felons should be allowed to have guns (I am otherwise very supportive of right to bear arms). They are FELLONS, we shouldn't be crying for them.
Now that said, there are bound to be false convictions, and this is the one caviat that I have. When a false conviction is found, that person's DNA needs to be removed from the database IMMEDIATLY and any convictions/etc based on the DNA that was collected because they were a fellon (fruit of the poisonous tree). But ONLY THAT DNA. If the person submitted their DNA during the investigation, that obviously gets to stay in the database, it's only DNA collected after they were convicted that should be "tossed" in such a case. If this part is held, I have no qualms what so ever.
Bring on the database.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
We've been taking fingerprints of criminals - and suspected criminals - for decades, and it hasn't extended to include anything unreasonable. So given that we have a history of doing exactly the same thing, and doing it generally responsible, the burden of proof is pretty clearly on you to demonstrate why this is really a slippery slope.
The answer is easy to understand, but so much easier to overlook. If your DNA is in the database, then anyone who wants to commit a crime against any of your acquaintances, or frame you for whatever reason, has only to obtain the smallest sample of your DNA (e.g. from a kleenex or napkin in your trash), use an easily available PCR kit to amplify it, add the DNA to some of your type of whole blood with leukocytes removed, sprinkle a few drops at the crime scene, and presto! you're in jail on incontrovertable evidence.
But it's not incontrovertable if the process of faking your blood with PCRed DNA is so easy, is it? Well, that's missing the point. The likelyhood that anyone would actually do this sort of thing (if they haven't already) is strongly correlated with the proportion of the population cataloged in a database. If everyone is cataloged, then everyone's friend is cataloged, and everyone's enemy is cataloged. So no criminal is then precluded from establishing this nearly perfect diversion.
In short, the larger proportion of people in the cops database, the more useless the database becomes. As soon as one DNA forgery is discovered, there goes the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard in every subsequent case.
Can we say "Unreasonable search and seizure". IANAL, but as I understand it the government needs to have a basis to investigate a person for a crime. Using this kind of database match is, in essance, like allowing the government to investigate people without having any basis to do so. If we allow this to be passed, where does this slope end? RFID tags implanted into every person so that the police can see who was in the area when the crime was commited?