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."
Word is that they are bleeding O.J. dry to make sure that the database is very very large.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
It's already done with fingerprints... I don't see how this is much different.
Hey Clinton, better call that chick in Santa Barbara and make sure she washes her dress, and the sheets. Might as well start making calls all up and down the West Coast. It is going to be a long night: you can be sure that Ken Starr read Slashdot too, and he's going to be on this real quick.
2006 - Every baby born(for thier own saftey)
2008 - Every Person who commits a Crime (We HAVE to track them!)
2012 - Every Citizen (you have nothing to hide do you Comrade?)
Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
Oh, it'll only be used for felonies.
Two years pass
Felonies, and extreme, non felonious cases.
Two years pass
Felonies, extreme non felonious cases, and lookin funny.
What's that? Why, of course, we'd never use your toll bridge fast-pass to log your comings and goings!
"Inattention makes clowns of us all" -Bean
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.
I just wonder how long before states, start selling the databases to insurance companies to help with the expenses. States already sell personal information, what could be more personal, than your DNA.
So when all white or black or hispanic males, ages 25-32, in the City of Los Angeles fit the description of a suspect then anyone of them can be forced to be DNA fingerprinted?
He dismissed the ACLU's concerns about invasion of privacy as "a straw man argument," pointing out that the measure has extensive protections that purge DNA information when a suspect or convict is exonerated.
I hope someone will look very closely at these "extensive protections". There have already been many cases where police have demanded DNA samples from innocent people. The DNA test exonerated them but the police refused to then destroy the DNA fingerprint. Also I have no doubts that the police would run blanket checks against other cases in which the innocent donors are not suspects. When a match comes up positive they will claim that it was done "accidentally". I bet that DNA fingerprints would never actually get purged either due to "computer errors".
Me thinks it is pretty fair. After the decision to fingerprint almost "everyone" visiting the US, it is just fair, and actually just a matter of time before the Beast Turns Inward. "I think people have come to understand that an increase to security is necessary," said U.S. Homeland Security spokesman Bill Strassberger.
The Govt can keep the DNA of felons in a Central Database, but the rest of the citizens should be motivated to carry their DNA/Fingerprint ID card just in case they have to prove their identity when there is a security situation. The threat level is already at ORANGE and who knows what will happen when it turns RED !! People WAKE UP ! In fact, for your own protection you can already buy ID cards for the family that will store you DNA and fingerprints. These fingerprint and DNA identification cards are great for all families. Be prepared and have that vital identification information that may be needed in an emergency situation. Like when the threat level goes to RED !
Also NCSE provides DNA and Fingerprint Kits either for bulk sales or for use with our e-learning software or Child ID Kits.
FOR YOUR SAFETY Please Order one TODAY ! With your order please give my referrer code ref??###R@D@=sarcastic.
AGAIN, EVERYONE ! PLEASE ORDER YOUR DNA/FINGERPRINT ID CARDS TODAY !!! Don't Wait!!!!!! Make that life changing phone call today !!!!!!!!!
To see a world in a grain of sand, and then to step back and see the beach where the sand lies
On the other hand is a huge privacy issue. While it is true that the innocent SHOULD have nothing to fear the sad fact is that this is not true. Nor can we assume that even if it is true now that it will remain true in the future. The germans had a registration of who had what religion in the 1930's. We all know how that ended. Can you be sure who is in charge of the US or any country proposing a similar scheme in 10 years? That is now 3 elections away.
I have little patience with people just concerned with their privacy. Most of them are just people who don't want to be caught should they ever decide to commit a crime. Guess what sherlock that is part of the reason for introducing such a thing. "Commmit a crime and we will find you" as opposed to now, "Commit a crime and maybe we will find you". The higher the chance of getting caught the more people will be deterred.
On the other hand I do have my doubts if such a system in future might not be abused. So on the one hand yes everyones dna logged will make life a lot harder for criminals. It will also make life a lot easier for anyone seeking to oppress non-criminals in the future. Or people we consider now to be innocent but who might be made to be guilty in the future.
The answer? I don't have one. Anyone who claims they have one are lying. Don't believe those who guarantee the safe use cause they can't. Don't believe the privacy people cause they are not now the victims of crime. The moment their child is murdered they will change their tune faster then a prisoner on his way to the chair.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Lots of states sell personal data (driver's license info, etc.) to private parties. There's certainly no federal genetic privacy law, and I don't know if California has a state law limiting disclosure of genetic information. In the absence of such a law, what's to stop a state from selling potentially lucrative genetic information to well-heeled insurers and credit reporting agencies?
-Isaac
I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. For Entertainment Purposes Only.
I would think it a good thing if it were for all
US citizens and legal aliens. If such a database
were implemented the Feds could require, e.g. all
supermarkets and food vendors in general to
collect DNA and on the spot verify immigration
status. This would make it nearly impossible for
illegal immigrants to buy food, clothes, medicine,
etc. You could also then investigate anyone
buying food in bulk and see if they sell it on
black market which would be sure to form. You
could then really open a hunt for illegal
immigrants and clean up US.
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.
Now we have a use for all the Oracle licenses we bought last year.
The fewer people who are in the database, the fewer choices are available to a forger. When everyone is in the database, nobody is off limits.
And in doing so, either (A) draw attention to yourself as a witness, or (B) raise the suspicions of a frame-up with a needlessly anonymous tip.
Saying it doesn't make it so. When everyone is in the database, forging anyone's blood is possible without any further involvement or the stigma of an anonymous tip.
It isn't that politians are evil. At least not most of them anyway, chuckle. Most of them try to do the right thing. What you are missing is that there are competing interests and motivations, all valid.
In a genuine slippery slope situation there is a constant pull in one direction not for evil reasons, but from well intentioned people striving for "noble purposes". Everyone has their pet project and sees a way that one small step down the hill is a step towards a "noble goal". A way to help police catch criminals. A way to prevent crime from happening. A way to catch dead beat-dads. A way to protect the children. A way to fight terrorism. A way to raise money. A way to fight discrimination. A way to protect the enviornment. A way to stimulate the economy. A way to fight piracy. A way to stop hackers. A way to stop the spread of disease. A way to simply make their job easier. And on and on and on and on.
And that's without even considering less-than-noble motivations, special interest lobbying, and political football games.
There are many different sorts of slppery slopes. Sometimes you are better of never setting foot on that slope. Sometimes you drive a stake into the ground and refuse to step past it no matter how noble the motivation - a hard solution to enforce for an arbitrary law the legislature can rewrite at will. Many times you get stuck with an eternal war fought between opposing noble intentions shoving the line back and forth. And sometimes you just have to give up and let it fall to the bottom taking the bad with the good.
Slippery slope is a real problem. This sort of DNA database sure looks like a valid slippery-slope situation to me. There are a million ways to use it and add to it for "good purposes". Every year the legislature will repeatedly face this issue, people coming to them with a problem in one hand and a solution in the other hand. Solutions that all involve expanding the database and its uses.
Is there any inviolatable line we can drawn? Do we want to give up and simply have public database of everyone revealing every single gene? Do we want to fight an eternal legal war between increasing usages shoving the limits one way and privacy advocates shoving the other way? It is very hard to "undo" any expansion of a database or an expansion of its use. Do we even want to step on that slope at all?
The fact that legisators want to do the "right thing" is part of the problem itself.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
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?