Slashdot Mirror


Vast DNA Bank Pits Policing Vs. Privacy

schwit1 writes "Today a Washington Post story discusses the vast U.S. bank of genetic material it has gathered over the last few years. Already home to the genetic information of almost 3 Million Americans, the database grows by 80,000 citizens a month." From the article: "'This is the single best way to catch bad guys and keep them off the street,' said Chris Asplen, a lawyer with the Washington firm Smith Alling Lane and former executive director of the National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence. 'When it's applied to everybody, it is fair, and frankly you wouldn't even know it was going on.'"

17 of 275 comments (clear)

  1. Bad guys by liangzai · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But which people are the bad guys is subject to continuous change. Yesterday it was the rapists and murderers. Today it is the filesharers. Tomorrow it is the occasional book reader.

    1. Re:Bad guys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Please, save us your radical hysteria.

      Oh shut up.

      If you think its just "radical hysteria" please explain the library records seizure rules introduced in the usa patriot act. Apparently it's "neocon hysteria" too.

    2. Re:Bad guys by vertinox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Come back when there is a consistent practice of knocking down people's doors just for buying The Anarchist Cookbook.

      By then it will be too late to do anything about it.

      Much less be able to talk about it on a public forum.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    3. Re:Bad guys by PatrickThomson · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Spending money on a good lawyer should not be a prequisite of being innocent.

      --
      I am one of many. My idea is not unique, nor do I expect my voice alone to sway you. I speak in a chorus of opinion.
    4. Re:Bad guys by chriso11 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You know, I saw this written somewhere, and it struck me as appropriate:
      Facism is when the efficiency of the government is more imporant than the rights of citizens.

      --
      No, I don't trust in god. He'll have to pay up front, like everybody else.
  2. Bad guys? by Oldsmobile · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What I find interesting is the term "bad guy". It seems I've been hearing this alot lately. It is like some strange code word, and when that label is applied to someone, they instantly become a target that can be killed, arrested, abused, even tortured without a guilty consciense.

    For instance, in numerous television interviews, troops in Iraq talk about bad guys, cops on the street talk about them, inteligence agency agents talk about them etc.

    I'm kind of worried, is this the new code word for sub human? For unexplaned threat?

    --
    Some say he is made with ascii, others that he is eyeballed daily by millions. All we know is, he is known as the Sig
    1. Re:Bad guys? by Arker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's just todays politically correct way of saying untermensch.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
  3. Frightening by l5rfanboy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    'When it's applied to everybody, it is fair, and frankly you wouldn't even know it was going on.'

    I would be greatly interested in a link to just who has had their data collected, and their collection methods. I do not want (and I am far from alone in this) the government keeping tabs on me or archiving my personal habits into some large database that will be used against me in the future. I have never been indicted nor found guilty of any crime and as such there is no reason for the government to retain such information.

  4. Well... by LockeOnLogic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Frankly this: "you wouldn't even know it was going on." scares me the most of all.

  5. 52 digit number by dpreformer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not commenting on whether I think the database is a good or bad idea beyond stating I think it is bad...

    I do think that once a profile is done and a unique ID (The 52 digit number mentioned in the article and thread title) is developed that the sample can be destroyed. Concerns about new techniques etc are red herrings - if there is a need to do more with a given individuals DNA in a criminal investigation then the authorities should be able to show probable cause to get a new sample and do the analysis. Keeping a sample in storage is an invitation to abuse of the data.

  6. Tomorrow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No, tomorrow it will be any individual who isn't a member of the government or a government-approved corporation.

  7. Re:What a dolt. by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Insightful
    If you made it to the end of TFA, there's another disturbing quote from that same guy:
    But Asplen of Smith Alling Lane said Congress has been helping states streamline and improve their DNA processing. And he does not think a national database would violate the Constitution.

    "We already take blood from every newborn to perform government-mandated tests . . . so the right to take a sample has already been decided," Asplen said. "And we have a precedent for the government to maintain an identifying number of a person."
    Translation: If I had my way, we would be doing this now, without any debate, because I think it is justified under existing laws and precedents. And we'd do it from birth.

    That really puts his "When it's applied to everybody, it is fair, and frankly you wouldn't even know it was going on" statement into another light.

    /Insert Gattaca comment here

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  8. It is fair? by Burning1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "When it's applied to everybody, it is fair, and frankly you wouldn't even know it was going on."

    If full scale thermo nuclear war killed everyone in the world, it would be "fair." That doesn't make it reasonable or right.

  9. Land of the free! by suv4x4 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Requirements for being "land of the free":

    * Take thumbprints, photo and install RFID chip on immigrants (check)
    * Take DNA and thumbs of every citizen (check)
    * Monitor phone calls nation-wide and data transferred over the network (check)
    * Big corporation control the government, government controls the people, people control nothing (check) ... ... ...

    That's some land of the free you got there, guys.

  10. Data collection versus data usage by c0d3h4x0r · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know all the Slashdot fanboys are violently against anyone collecting personal information about them without their permission. I can't say I disagree (at a gut-feel level). But set your emotional disgust and fear aside and think about it.

    Information collection isn't the problem. Information misuse is the problem.

    The problem with the data brokerage industry isn't that they collect data about me (and sometimes get it wrong). The problem is that there's no transparency for consumers into the data kept about them, and no efficient process for them to get inaccuracies corrected. The problem is that companies and the government are often using data (sometimes incorrect) in ways they shouldn't be allowed to.

    You just can't stop data collection. It's going to happen, it's already happening, it's been happening. Organizations and people need to collect and exchange information in order for the economy and society to function efficiently and smoothly. Law enforcement needs information to investigate and prosecute wrongdoers. These kinds of informational needs aren't going to magically disappear.

    What needs to be stopped it the misuse of data. I should be guaranteed by law the right to completely and freely see, without being charged, at any time, any and all information that any organization, business, or the government has on me, and I should be able to challenge the accuracy of the data and get corrections made in a timely manner. It should be illegal for law enforcement or the government to use data about my legal actions or protected opinions as justification for arresting me, harassing me, publicly smearing me, getting a search warrant against me, or suspecting me of criminal activity. It should be illegal for a lender to deny me a loan based on inaccurate information in my credit report; I should be guaranteed by law an opportunity to prove that the information is wrong and the lender should then be forced to reevaluate using the corrected data. It should be illegal for an employer to not hire me based on information in my credit report or medical records. Etc.

    What we need are more accurate and good laws to protect people against the misuse of information. Then the mere collection of data becomes a moot point.

    --
    Moderator hint: a comment is neither "Flamebait" nor "Troll" if it is true.
  11. RIP - US Consitution by bpd1069 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What makes me laugh when I see posts SUPPORTING an all out assault on our freedoms, is that they don't realize that by defending the assualt, they are supporting forfeiture of their own rights.

    But then I realize I shouldn't get all worked up over the US Government doing this, I need to get worked up over my fellow Citizens who are letting this happen by not voicing Outrage.

    Our current Laws, and Judical system (Thanks to the last couple SCOTUS appointments) give the executive branch so much power that they can dismantle our sacred rights.

    This isn't a hypothetical, its happening now.

    Wake up people.

    --
    --
  12. Death by a 1000 Laws by redneckHippe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Last week I went to buy a pack of smokes and the cashier said there was a new law that requires you to show some I.D. when purchasing cigarettes. I'm 55 w/ grey hair. It's obvious I'm old engough (and dumb enough)to smoke. But she was insistent that I show my I.D. After a couple of days of this, I asked her if there was a camera watching her and she said yes, thats why she has to check.
    Seems pretty minor (not to mention creepy) but I beleive it's this constant onslought of new laws that is the most dangerous threat to our freedoms and way of life.
    The congress (both federal and state) seem to think you can solve any problem just by passing a bill. And with the current culture of lobbyism/activism not unresaonable to think that eventually everybody will be guilty of something.
    Right now we have a wannabe facist administration. What do you think will happen if we get a real one? Should someone dare speak out there would certainly be something they could be arrested on.
    It's not even really about the impact new laws have on us today, but how they might be used in the future. Isn't kind of odd that people cussing someone out are now charged w/ making a 'Terrorist Threat'? Or have the baby seat pointing in the wrong direction is 'Child Endangerment' (a felony unless you're Britney Sprears). And of course remember Al Capone was eventually brought down with 'Tax Evasion' charges. You might think he might of deserved it but remember you could someday be on their rader.
    Not to mention they're taking all our freedoms by protecting everybodys rights.
    R.H.

    --
    It'll quit hurtin' once the pain stops.