Slashdot Mirror
Police Pull Over More Drivers For DNA Tests
schwit1 sends this news from the Washington Times:
"Pennsylvania police this week were pulling people to the side of the road, quizzing them on their driving habits, and asking if they'd like to provide a cheek swap or a blood sample — the latest in a federally contracted operation that's touted as making roads safer. The same operation took place last month at a community in Texas. Then, drivers were randomly told to pull off the road into a parking lot, where white-coated researchers asked if they'd like to provide DNA samples for a project that determines what percentage of drivers are operating under the influence of drugs or alcohol at given times. With uniformed police in the background, the researchers also offered the motorists money — up to $50 or so — for the blood or saliva samples."
What?
Who'd really buy into that?
"Here, take my biological information. You want to use it to create an army of biologically superior clones? That's nice. Oh, $50? Even better!"
Am I being detained?
Am I free to go?
No, I do not consent to any search.
[
What the **** does a DNA sample have to do with the percentage of drunk drivers?!?!?!?
I don't think pulling people over for research is a reasonable use of police power. Actual enforcement, maybe, but not for research.
Why don't they just put a spit cup at toll booths?
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Come on, of course it's just for study. Why else would the National Science Academy form the Pacific Research Institute for Chemical Knowledge? What, to get DNA linked to drivers licenses? Of course not! The National Science Academy already has all of that information.
This is just a benign, voluntary research campaign. So please, listen to the Pacific Research Institute for Chemical Knowledge and just hand over your DNA. We would also appreciate a few ovums from a selection of healthy, attractive ladies aged 18-25. For research purposes of course!
Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
Reading Police Chief William Hein said ...Moreover, he claimed police only served as security and weren’t actually pulling drivers to the side or asking questions.
Then I'd drive away.
Ticket me? Arrest me?
Hein is an asshole.
is how it starts.
I can't imagine how the "official story" would yield usable statistics for very obvious reasons. The drunks/stoners who refuse aren't stupid, but then again, they don't have to be too bright to see right through this.
Hell, even Scully's looking at this thinking "they're frakin up to no good".
to make sure everyone understands that it is voluntary.
just sayin
Obama administration is getting uglier by the day.
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
If uniformed police officers are pulling you off the road in marked cars with flashing lights, your participation is hardly voluntary.
What happens if you decline to answer the questions of the men in white coats a little too firmly? Well, an officer with badge and gun is right there to show you the error of your ways!
I'm amazed the local chapter of the ACLU is merely "watching the operation closely" (per the article).
... approved this study?
Pretty much all studies involving human subjects in the U.S. have to be approved by a review board for compliance with ethical and safety standards. This study is an obvious fail in multiple respects, and I can't imagine a reputable review board approving such a thing. And if it wasn't reviewed, the study participants^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H victims of the study probably have standing to sue.
http://www.pire.org/topiclist2.asp?cms=63
They don't stop everybody, they stop, say, every third car. And they use high-pressure sales techniques to try to get "biological samples". But they actually don't arrest people they find impaired; they try to arrange transportation for them. And they don't claim to actually collect or register DNA, just the presence of drugs. I don't think that makes it right, but let's at least be accurate about what they're doing.
More information and links to past examples of these "studies":
http://www.politechbot.com/2007/09/21/colorado-sheriff-creates/
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
Next course of action after everyone has their DNA on record will be implanting chips in everyone.
Of course only the guilty need worry about this, we must of course consider the children, make them safe oh and catch terrorists.
America, land of the free....ROTFLMAO.
What is this? The endgame?
"if they'd like to provide DNA samples" You can't detect drugs in DNA, but you can detect drugs and DNA from blood and cheek swabs. Misworded. Now people are all neurotic about their DNA being obtained when it's the content of alchohol and drugs in their system they're checking.
needed police "security" presence...
perhaps the survey was overstepping legal authority just a tad, hmmmmm? why else would their presence be needed, if not to intimidate people into compliance?
knock it off, already.
Please be sure to call it National Academy of Science. Honesty and transparency are highly important. People may get confused otherwise.
I saw that article too - it was a Fark link a while back.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/11/20/texas-cops-force-drivers-off-the-road-to-give-dna-to-federal-contractors/
This is one of those things where LE thinks how easy their job would be and how much more effective they could be if they had everyone's DNA on file and people of course worry about anyone having that kind of power.
We're not Norway (unfortunately by my lights) people. If we dont' trust each other with this level of information,maybe that's because we know each other and we therefore ought to listen to ourselves.
Sure all knowledge and power and everything could *could* be used just totally for good and never for evil. And? And? And your argument is?
Pretending that a corrosive kind of corruption isn't being enabled with these kinds of god-level knowledge of what everyone does, is, thinks, where they go and who they talk to- pretending that this doesn't enable evil (as well as good) or that the evil is just SO unlikely, is just stupid and quite frankly anyone trying to pass themselves off as incensed that I should worry about this , or to paint me as WAAAAY out there, is not even naive in my view, but most likely a manipulative liar.
We know ourselves. We grew up here , went to elementary school here, got our first jobs here and we've seen what we've seen and know what we know about ourselves. Thus the popular resistance to such measures. .
They offered $50 for my DNA and arrested me when I whipped it out and started masturbating. I want my $50, dammit.
"asking if they'd like to provide a cheek swap or a blood sample "
Sometimes the difference between a B and a P are important, such as in "Pritish Betroleum"
Cops are not your friends, they are not on your side, they are not there to help you, they don't give a FUCK about you.
They are nothing but the countrys largest and best armed gang anymore.
Even if you've never done anything wrong. Ever. (impossible) They can still destroy your life and your future on a whim. And often do.
And will never face punishment for doing so.
Fear them. Be afraid of any interaction with them. It's a gamble with your life, your familys life, your future.
In this example if they are offering $50 (of your own money, TAXPAYER money) for your DNA. They are going to get alot more than $50 worth of value out of it.
Somehow.
Maybe not today, Maybe not tomorrow. But they will profit somehow. And you.. You're nothing. You're just a datapoint. A criminal datapoint.
To be used as they see fit anytime they want.
as a result the civil servants & i could spend less time trouble & money all at once. makes sharing easier?
free the innocent stem cells. they haven't harmed anyone either
Who is there ??
Your government !!
My governmenty who ??
(BAM !!) (POW !!) (SPLAT !!)
It's free money yo!
Many people are claiming they are being pulled over by the police. The article states Reading Police Chief William Hein claims police only serve as security and weren’t actually pulling drivers to the side or asking questions.
Somebody is very obviously lying here and I don't think it is the people claiming to have been pulled over.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/dec/18/penn-police-pull-people-over-random-dna-tests-feds/
What is the maximum percentage of DNA in your blood where you are still legally drive a car?
You PRICK !
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
"The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania is watching the operation closely, claiming such checkpoints are only constitutional if theyâ(TM)re aimed at protecting the safety of the public"
NO NO NO NO NO!
They are only constitutional if there is REASONABLE ARTICULABLE SUSPICION that the INDIVIDUAL being stopped WAS/IS/OR IS ABOUT TO BE involved in criminal activity.
How could the ACLU get it THIS wrong?
Maybe they're just trying to find where "stupid" is in DNA. Anyone that blindly and for no reason provides "the authorities" with their DNA are the sheep that "the authorities" are looking for. And then they spice that gene into an army of zombie-people that they're making in a lab somewhere, to replace the population that stands in their way.
Seriously though, what we need to know is: Who started this idea/concept, and how do we get them out of their position of authority? Hell India is all up in arms over the recent treatment of an Indian woman by US authorities. Why can't we do something similar here?
Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
$50 is a lot more to a lot of people than you think. If you have a secure job or a lot of money it may seem like surrendering your privacy for nothing important. But for some people that means a chance to eat more than beans and rice this month, a phone card that could land them a job, or a 5 month overdue oil change.
Perspective is important.
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
Voluntary is having a sign "$50 for a cheek swab, next right". Involuntary is police directing you to testing area. Period.
I've always said English was my second language. Had Romeo and Juliet been written in C, I might have understood it.
I refuse to be molested in such a way, thank you. Why?
Because fuck you , that's why.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
This isn't about DNA or road safety it is a test to see how much shit people will take from their government and what additional compliance can be purchased with money.
I sure don't teach Them to do that. Every defense Lawyer, Prosecutor, and police Officer I have ever spoken with has consistently told Me the same thing: if the Police say They want to talk with You, You give one answer, "Not without My Attorney's approval."
So was there a huge fuss thrown over this in 2007, when the NHTSA performed (presumably) the same tests for their National Roadside Survey?
http://www.nhtsa.gov/Driving+Safety/Research+&+Evaluation/2007+National+Roadside+Survey+of+Alcohol+and+Drug+Use+by+Drivers
That's not to say that the police should be allowed to intimidate drivers, but I think jumping to Police State They're Doing Something Bad With My DNA is a little unnecessary.
Remember: It's only being done in red states by state police.
Unfortunately your acronym joke is a little too subtle for many people around here.
In all of these cases, there is no mention of how much money the jurisdictions involved received from the feds for allowing these actions to occur.
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
This is a public service announcement
With guitars!
Know your rights all three of them
Number 1
You have the right not to be killed
Murder is a CRIME!
Unless it was done by a Policeman !
Or aristocrat...
Know your rights
And Number 2
You have the right to food money
Providing of course you don't mind a little
Investigation...
humiliation
And if you cross your fingers...
Rehabilitation!
Know your rights!
These are your rights!
Number 3
You have the right to Free Speech
As long as you're not dumb enough to actually try it...
Know your rights
These are your rights!
All three of 'em
It has been suggested in some quarters
that this is not enough!
Well!
Get off the streets
Get off the streets!
We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
In the U.S., more people have been killed in so-called "justifiable homicides" by police officers than terrorists in the last ten years according to crime statistics. So, I guess you could say, "If you let the cops do this, the more-deadly-than-terrorists win"?
Twenty or thirty years ago there used to be people called "journalists" whose job it was to (a) collect enough data so you could figure out what happened, and (b) write it up in an intelligible story.
Look at the linked story *critically*. How does the "reporter" know DNA was being taken? What is his source for this, or is he just guessing?
This story is basically rumor -- passing along what's on the grapevine. There's no actual reporting here. If there were, that would answer the questions a reasonable person might have. For example: are the researchers collecting DNA or not? And who *are* these researchers? Can we get a name please? Or an institution?
Back in the day a reporter would have identified the researchers and called them up for an interview, or at least a statement from the research institution's public affairs office. He'd look up the grant in the federal records and find out whether or not the researchers had been granted money to collect DNA and what they are being paid to do with it (yes, you can do that!). He'd may even have interviewed people on the institutional review board (required by US law) that approved the project.
But the "reporter" in this case did none of this. She appears not to have done *any* verification or independent research. A story like this would take a real reporter two or three days to nail down, not two or three phone calls.
I'm not saying some horrendous violation of civil liberties could not have taken place, I'm saying the writer of the article didn't do enough work for anyone to decide what did or did not happen. This is not reporting, it's *blogging* under a byline.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
If people were intimidated into giving their info unwillingly, yeah that's bad. But the sense I get from a lot of these comments is that people should not be free to sell it for an agreed price at all. Seller beware, for sure, but either "I'm a consenting adult; I can make my own choices!" is true or it's not. Make up your mind.
The Washington Times article credits Fox News. It quotes but does not credit the Reading Eagle, which appears to have first reported on this incident:
http://readingeagle.com/article/20131218/NEWS/312189945/1052
The Reading Eagle quotes but does not credit CNN. CNN last reported on the issue in June when this happened in Alabama.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/19/us/drug-survey-roadblocks/index.html?iref=allsearch
I do not block ads. I do block third party scripts.
They're just making sure that you're human because you can't even trust yourself...
I drove through one, and it only took about 10 minutes. I could've done it in five, but the DNA collector didn't really turn me on.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
Remember: It's only being done in red states by state police.
Since when is Pennsylvania a "red state?"
Better zip up, your confirmation bias is showing.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
And because if you set up a random roadblock type scenario, you probably need traffic control and a police presence in case of accidents. It doesn't mean that they actually cared or were part of it.
That people immediately assumed it was a Gestapo maneuver and then complied is more an indictment of the them and the degree of freedom people have already willingly given up for the veneer of security.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
...is using State police to assist in the collection of DNA samples. How long are we going to pretend we aren't seeing an alarming rise of fascism in America?
When your police forces are either ignoring or unaware of your laws, you lose.
Pulling people over for a research project with uniformed police officers who make it look like your "voluntary" compliance is anything but, you live in a fucking police state.
Why the fuck should we be providing DNA samples to you idiots? This is completely asinine.
We would also appreciate a few ovums from a selection of healthy, attractive ladies aged 18-25. For research purposes of course!
Blue-eyed blondes with no Jewish contamination, er, ancestry, please.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Can somebody point to a website with information regarding the study? If it is federally funded it must be publicly posted somewhere. Such studies typically require "informed consent" from the subjects. I would really like to see how do they obtain consent from the people being pulled over and how they justify instructing the police to pull over random drivers without probable cause. It would have been a different story if they sit in a parking lot and ask for samples drivers already stopped at the parking. The whole thing with the police pulling people over seems a bit too coercive for my taste.
In Tony Blair's Britain, this is how this form of social engineering project plays out.
1) minor, specialist controlled press and NGOs begins the process with editorials and 'specialists' laying out a societal 'need' to 'test' drivers for issues that might impact public 'safety'.
2) with the propaganda from stage 1) already in place, mainstream media propaganda campaigns begin addressing the wider population, quoting the sources from 1)
3) now the State authorities start to 'voluntarily' request the participation of drivers in towns and cities where the local population traditionally bends over to all forms of abusive governance.
4) The State creates an ever growing bureaucracy specifically crafted to gather such data from drivers, and PR the same operations in the mainstream press (and even shill in public forums like this one at Slashdot).
5) Now, at this stage, one of two things happens. EITHER here is such a public back-lash against the abuse (like the backlash that helped to thwart Tony Blair's plans to launch the greatest air attack in Human History against Syria) that the current project has to be cancelled. OR the sheeple are sufficiently cowed that the abusive can be moved to a more 'legal' footing.
Essentially, this is how it works. The mainstream media (especially sources like the BBC) start to imply that people who REFUSE to co-operate with 'voluntary' road side stops are dangerous anti-social criminal types, ABUSING their freedoms. The BBC, Daily Mail and Guardian etc. thus attempts to rally a 'people's mob' 'demanding' that the law be changed making such actions compulsory in Law. 'Victims' of drivers under the influence of drugs are rolled out on TV, giving outrageous statements against the principle of Human Rights.
Tony Blair did this with mass DNA collection from every type of British citizen. First he made EVERY 'offence' arrestable, and then Blair made EVERY arrestable offence an opportunity to forcibly collect DNA. Then Blair made EVERY person within the vicinity of a crime a legal SUSPECT, which is the same in British law as being a potential offender, which is the same as having committed an arrestable offence, which meant the police could go door-to-door DEMANDING either a DNA sample, or the arrest of the householder who refused to give said sample.
Blair lost in the European Court of Human Rights over his ability to INDEFINITELY hold the DNA of innocent people, BUT the court judgement allowed him to hold such DNA under the flimsiest of excuses IF the DNA was to any degree imaginable part of ANY potentially active police investigations. So Blair had automated computer programs created that simply generate millions of legal 'documents' that list potentially active investigations- like the machine generated 'take-down' messages that Google gets in the millions every day. As a result, Britain NEVER destroyed even one DNA sample taken from any of the mass, door-to-door police operations, even if the specific crime originally used to excuse such operations has been completely solved and resolved in court.
The old "I had to do it, so why should YOU have the right to refuse" plays well with most subservient simpleton sheeple. How many kids 'salute', Nazi style, the flag of the USA at school each day, because they dare not publicly exercise their Right to abhor such vile displays of brainless aggressive war supporting 'patriotism'? The trick of the masters that rule you is to persuade the sheeple that 'Rights' mean the right to CONFORM to the approval of your neighbours.
The roadside abuses listed in the article work on exactly this psychology. Object to the abuse, and the uniform goon will come across, and describe your attitude as "aggressive". The US Supreme Court has ruled that America's uniformed goons have the Right to murder citizens showing 'aggressive' behaviour as an act of "self-defence". In a police state, like the USA, you tend to comply because you KNOW the uniformed goons of the state can and will harm you, and when they do, no matter WH
There are only two kinds of cops: 1.) Bad cops and 2.) Accessories after the fact.
Pretense for DNA and blood data collection and storage. Are those data exempt from future criminal charges? Nope.
...federally contracted operation...
Dumb Fuck. Has someone been hitting you with an "I'm as dumb as shit" stick?
I'd readily agree if they would do full DNA sequencing and also send me the results. Come on, normally this operation should cost a few thousand bucks and here they are giving you something. It's not like NSA couldn't collect that saliva or whatever without ever telling you.
Maybe a human biology expert can tell me, but how exactly does one infer drug consumption from DNA?
John_Chalisque
"You can have my DNA when you suck it out of my dick."
Learn to spell: nickel, missile, lose, solely, amendment, speech, kernel, probably, ridiculous, deity, hierarchy, versus
I know there are a lot of social and economic problems that may come to the top of peoples' minds before privacy, but in the absence of an expectation of privacy, those other problems can never really get better.
Everybody across the political spectrum has to fight this stuff. It really bothers me when political division prevent agreement on this issue. If a liberal comes out against spying then some conservatives feel they have to support it and vice versa.
This is an easy one. Everybody needs to be outraged about government collecting all this information using invasive means like DNA tests and road blocks and wiretapping and hacking.
I think to some extent, the government (and the private corporations who are doing a great deal of the actual spying and data collection) are counting on us being too divided over other issues to put up any resistance. We absolutely must prove them wrong.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Notice how they're only doing this in a few states? I have a feeling this sample collection has nothing to do with DUI or any research..... I have a feeling they're looking for someone specific via DNA from already-collected evidence in some ongoing case.
C|N>K
Left/W PA = Red
Right/E PA = Blue
The east side has more population making it a "blue" state.
This country is going steadily becoming a Police State.
Being self sufficient and never having to leave the farm. I can order anything I dont got on line.
Sense you can stop someone without probable cause for anything at all it only a matter of time until few people drive.
As more people give it up the fewer left are stopped more often til no one will drive at all.
Remember: It's only being done in red states by state police.
Since when is Pennsylvania a "red state?"
Better zip up, your confirmation bias is showing.
Since about 1980.
Rural Pennsylvania is about as conservative as the deep south.
How exactly do they determine alcohol/drug use from DNA? This doesn't add up. Or did I miss something?
http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/13/12/18/2027239/approximate-computing-saves-energy
Since when is Pennsylvania a "red state?"
In terms of the state government? 2012.
Governor - Tom Corbett, Republican
Lieutenant Governor - Jim Cawley, Republican
Pennsylvania House of Representatives - 110 Republican, 92 Democrat, 1 Vacant
Pennsylvania State Senate - 27 Republican, 23 Democrat
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania - 4 Republican, 3 Democrat
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
He's likely referring to the presidential election. As the electoral votes are awarded on a popular vote, with gerrymandered districts NOT figured (directly..) into the outcome, he clearly forgets that the State GOP has deemed that their continued representation of a minority through use of gerrymandered districts is more important than having a representative democracy.
Happens all the time.
I think i've flown on an airliner once or twice since the TSA was invented.
& im sure i'll never do it again.
If i ever have to go overseas again... i'lll probably drive to canada or mexico & fly out from there.
What the hell will taking DNA samples provide when looking at intoxication levels?
If you think that is the goal of this dragnet I have a bridge for sale.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Who knew that Transylvania had its own NSA?
Uhh, this is a state that had elected ultra-conservative Rick Santorum 1995 to 2006 and he lost to a conservative Democrat. And of course Arlen Specter was a longtime Republican from 1981 to 2010 until he switched parties for the 2010 electio-- which he lost to a Republican. There are currently 13 Republican Representatives and 5 Democrats. Pennsylvania has historically been a "red state", so there's no confirmation bias present, just a fact.
Aliens! The government is trying to find some escaped aliens.
That's exactly what they want ... obedient sheep. Don't be the cause of the problem ... stand up for your rights.
They could set the cheek swabbing station up where the hookers are turning tricks and they'd get quite a few sets of DNA from the inside of each cheek.
How did they get this past an IRB? If you're doing human experimentation (and just sending a survey out counts, much less taking DNA samples), you have to pass a bunch of hurdles, and surely one of them is "subjects will be arrested"
An Anonymous Coward with a big fat turd of a fallacy. A police officer giving testimony of "smelling alcohol" is not evidence of anything, and is already useless in court. Any cop that gives this as the only evidence for drunk driving would be summarily dismissed, after the defendant and the attorney laughed at them.
That said, does alcohol on someone's breath does not mean that they have done or are doing anything illegal. Last I checked, selling and consuming alcohol is legal. I'm sure your straw man that follows will claim "but drunk driving", to which I'll say it takes a breathalyzer to show drunk driving and not simply an odor. A tablespoon of Robitussin contains alcohol, so should a person with a head cold be jailed for driving?
If you fail to understand or care about history and don't mind a good old fashioned fisting from the Constable, head to the local depot and ask them to search you. All of the silent and submissive Jews in Germany will tell you exactly how that worked out for them.
The rest of us should resist the tyranny that is growing in the USA.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Do you mean the NYPD? Those are all pretty apt descriptions of them.
Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
Since when is Pennsylvania a "red state?"
Better zip up, your confirmation bias is showing.
For the past couple decades, Pennsylvania's been blue as far as Presidential elections go. Historically, though, it's been mostly red. (Source)
People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
Actually, I believe traffic stops are governed by the same rules that cover pedestrian stops. Namely, police officers only need a "reasonable suspicion" based on a "totality of the circumstances" that your vehicle is involved with some type of criminal activity. In practice, this can very well go down as a hunch, as long as the cop can list specific facts that make him suspicious.
"Jesus christ you're an idiot. Yes, they use intimidation. No, it's not "terrorism". Grow the fuck up."
This is an interesting assertion. Please explain how police intimidation -- i.e., the threat of force to coerce a desired behavior out of people -- is different from "terrorism", which is the threat of force to coerce a desired behavior out of people.
By definition it's only "terrorism" if its done for political or social objectives http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Political+terrorism. Threats of force to coerce desired behavior on an individual basis or to coerce desired behavior for personal objectives are simply threats of force.
Welcome to the USSA.
Get your free Dropbox account with 2 GB Free storage!
A completely inaccurate but sensational slashdot headline. How unusual.
THERE IS ZERO INDICATION OF ANY DNA TESTING HERE.
This would happen to me. Even if there are copy there, I'd call 911 anyway. Or better yet FOX news, probably say that there is some big traffic stop with people in white coats forcing people to give body samples, and heavily insinuate it's the CDC and something horrible is going on. Especially if the police where there, make it totally sound like the start of some medical apocalypse, have everybody with me call different news shows...have someone start screaming "OH MY GOD" in the back ground, keep repeating where I'm at, say "their doing a roadblock with all these medical people, something horrible must be happening!" In the right city, maybe could even start a riot if it could get splashed on the news as people start fleeing the "pandemic"
Reading this, makes me honestly wish I was a US person living in the US.
You are allowed to say no. Many other countries, mine among them, would take the DNA, with or without consent. Some even keep a biobank of DNA taken at birth. Just in case.
Pennsylvania is one of the most gerrymandered states in the union, gerrymandered in favor of Republicans. Interesting when all the state elected officials are Republican, yet the majority vote for POTUS was on the Democratic side...
He's likely referring to the presidential election.
Yea, that's probably the map that popped up when I did an image search for 'red state blue state'
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Conspiracy theory: fed overreach aimed at collecting citizen biological data to build a database for a yet unknown purpose.
Wrong! They have been doing this in other states, like New York. New York is not a "red" state. Also, city police and county sheriffs have been involved.
Last month I went to my doctor for a checkup. He asked me to help him with a study Medicare was conducting. He wanted to swab the inside of my mouth for DNA samples. He said that this would help Medicare determine appropriate dosages of medicine I was taking. I hit the roof and told him to go to hell. And if he ever even hinted that he was in cahoots with this NAZI activity, I would smear his name all over town. Now I see that the US govt is trying other angles to build a data base of information on us citizens. PEOPLE WE BETTER WAKE UP!!!! MAYBE THOSE CONSPIRACY NUTS ARE NOT SO NUTTY!!
Since the Republicrats and Democans constantly violate the 9th and 10th amendments of the constitution they have no problem violating the rest. Being pulled over to provide DNA samples is just yet another violation of the constitution, the 4th to be exact. This will allow for racial profiling on both the left and right wings as well as denying certain people their right to drive due to certain "disabilities" that would otherwise not impair someone's ability to drive. I can just see how this will work out. Oh, "Joe Sixpack, it appears you have autism and it went unreported. Because of this your license is hereby revoked immediately. Oh, you have to get to work? Well tough shit use public transportation. Oh, you won't be able to? Oh, are you now resisting? You are now under arrest for *insert lame excuse here* you have the right to remain silent, etc" and the beatings commence. The license to drive may also be revoked for racial reasons. Plus it gives the government the ability to tag everyone due to their DNA and so long privacy and it will be endorsed by the sheep as they say "Won't somebody please think of the children!" The two major parties need to be flushed out of the American government for their fear mongering practices.
________________________________
A vote against a Libertarian candidate is
a vote to abolish the Constitution itself.
You want what? I spit on your request... nevermind that's a sample too.
The cops are all Ministerium für Staatssichereit. 6.0E6 can't be wrong.
It's almost like we shouldn't boil down politics into a 2 party, good vs. evil, sith vs. jedi, Cleveland vs. Pittsburgh, Manchester vs. Chelsea, Japan vs. China, USSR vs. NATO, Hetfields vs. McCoys decision. Almost.
But there's far too much money to be made by turning politics into entertainment.
I agree. I prefer a much more adversarial system with limitless party options - that way, no one party would be likely to ever accumulate enough power to actually do anything the others didn't want to happen.
On a related note, Manchester United FTW, bitches.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
I went through one of these check points and they said in lieu of a dna sample, they would accept linking my cell phone number to my facebook acct. I said, "no- take my dna".
Hahaha, disregard that I SUCK COCKS!!!!
just what DNA discloses about the current metabolytes in one's system?
I'm pretty sure your DNA does not change when you have a beer, and I'm pretty sure there are no DNA mutations that uniquely and reliably signal the ingestion of any psychoactive substance.
Now, maybe other tests are done as well, and the DNA is used just as a label for your file, instead of "sample subject #012345".
I hate when ignorant folk regurgitate the phrase I don't care I don't have nothing to hide so I let them do it.
First off if you aren't doing anything wrong then why are you being stopped or pulled over. Think about that for a moment. Innocent until proven guilty.
Second you have the right to be protected against illegal search and seizure don't give it up without a fight or they will keep abusing their power.
Third just because you don't have anything to hide does not mean you should allow police to violate your constitutional rights.
http://bigodfw.com/police-state/federal-contractors-set-roadblocks-force-drivers-surrender-dna/
They are able to put your DNA in any crime scene after that.
Police forces are not baskets of individuals. They are organizations, and those organizations train and direct their personnel. Humans generally adapt to the culture of the organizations where they are attached.
You let the culprit escape if you debate whether all, most, or only some cops are bad.
Fixing the missions and organizational designs of police forces is within our political power.
How the fuck - I mean HOW THE FUCK - are you expected to determine if someone is under the influence of drink or drugs by checking their DNA?
That would imply that every time you take a drink (or smoke anything, including tobacco), you induce DNA changes in your cheek cells. And therefore, get cancer. Now, I do know that both drinking and smoking are associated with increased cancer rates, but they're not 100% cancer rates.
Someone has been writing absolute shit "science journalism".
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
I know this isn't going to be answered since I waited too long to ask but I'll try anyway...
What if you just shook your head and refused to move or be pulled over if they wouldn't let you continue on your way? The study is "voluntary" and the police officers are off duty, so what authority do they really have?
I ask because obviously there would be "consequences" for saying no, but I'm wondering if the officers would have any legal standing to arrest and prosecute. Put it another way - can the issue be successfully forced into (favorable) litigation if I encounter one of these stops and (unlike the Texans) say NO I will NOT pull over?