Convicted Hacker Adrian Lamo Refuses to Give Blood

CaliforniaCCW writes "Hopefully everyone here remembers the case of Adrian Lamo, a so-called 'gray hat' hacker who plead guilty to one count of computer crimes against Microsoft, Nexis-Lexis and the New York Times in 2004. He got a felony conviction, six months detention in his parents' home, and two years of probation. Today, as a condition of his probation, he must provide a sample of his DNA in the form of a blood sample, something which he has refused to do. Should convicted felons on probation have privacy rights over their DNA? Or is a blood sample like a fingerprint, something that everyone should provide to their government?"

Comments

if the gov wants his/or any slash DNA

[way2trivial]

all they have to do is supply the blonde!

Re:if the gov wants his/or any slash DNA

[Paladine97]

You have a fatal error. You are assuming the Slash crowd would know what to do with the blonde! I mean, it's hard to get DNA when you ask her to play WoW with you.

Patented?

[Ohreally_factor]

Quite possibly his DNA has been patented by one of the big bio tech firms, and he is just trying to avoid costly litigation.

Other means of DNA

[Rainbird98]

If the NSA can tap your phone. Surely the cops can tap his toilet. Instant DNA.

Re:The logic escapes me

[zakezuke]

I wonder what his religion has to say about breaking the law.

If we are talking God's law in conflict with man's law... you might become a martyr, get a spiffy statue. The Christian bible is mighty clear on the no killig bit, it's rather vague about thy neighbors server.