Proposed Bill Would Force Arizonians To Pay $250 To Have Their DNA Added To a Database (gizmodo.com)

technology_dude writes: One by one, thresholds are being crossed where the collection and storage of personal data is accepted as routine. Being recorded by cameras at business locations, in public transportation, in schools, churches, and every other place imaginable. Recent headlines include "Singapore Airlines having cameras built into the seat back of personal entertainment systems," and "Arizona considering a bill to force some public workers to give up DNA samples (and even pay for it)." It seems to be a daily occurrence where we have crossed another line in how far we will go to accept massive surveillance as normal. Do we even have a line the sand that we would defend? Do we even see anything wrong with it? Absolute power corrupts absolutely and we continue to give knowledge of our personal lives (power) to others. If we continue down the same path, I suppose we deserve what we get? I want to shout "Stop the train, I want off!" but I fear my plea would be ignored. So who out there is more optimistic than I and can recommend some reading that will give me hope? Bill 1475 was introduced by Republican State Senator David Livingston and would require teachers, police officers, child day care workers, and many others to submit their DNA samples along with fingerprints to be stored in a database maintained by the Department of Public Safety. "While the database would be prohibited from storing criminal or medical records alongside the DNA samples, it would require the samples be accompanied by the person's name, Social Security number, date of birth and last known address," reports Gizmodo. "The living will be required to pay [a $250 processing fee] for this invasion of their privacy, but any dead body that comes through a county medical examiner's office would also be fair game to be entered into the database."

Comments

If they want my DNA . . .

[PolygamousRanchKid]

. . . they'll have to get it the old fashioned way.

They can kiss my hairy ass, and swab their lips afterwards.

We have a positive match of your DNA to a murder crime scene from 1910. This was before you were born, but it could have been an accident with a contraceptive in a time machine.

Re:If they want my DNA . . .

[kilfarsnar]

The requirement seems to be tied to a job, so it's your job that's on the line not your freedom.

I guess freedom really is just another word for "nothing left to lose".

Re:If they want my DNA . . .

[stealth_finger]

Let a private company maintain the database.

That seems like a brilliant plan with no obvious downsides.

David

[mentil]

Bill 1475 was introduced by Republican State Senator David Livingston

I presumed it'd be a Republican to do this.

Re:David

[Freischutz]

Bill 1475 was introduced by Republican State Senator David Livingston

I presumed it'd be a Republican to do this.

... and what are you willing to bet that he either has a stake in the company doing the sampling or received generous cash donations from them?

Re:David

[Anonymous Coward]

You are more accurate than you know. From the article, it looks like he "represents" those who pay him:

The last time Rep. Livingston made headlines was in 2017 when he sponsored legislation that would make the contents of an insurance policy’s cover sheet and synopsis unenforceable if the long-form contract is different. According to the Arizona Capitol Times, one of Livingston’s fellow lawmakers questioned him on why he was bringing that legislation forward. Livingston reportedly said at the time that “citizens of the state of Arizona” had asked for it. When he was asked if those citizens were “connected to insurance agencies, companies, groups, special interests related to insurance,” Livingstone replied with a simple “yes.”

Re: David

[Jumperalex]

You, him, and the R's don't get off that easy. The No True Scotsman argument holds no water. He calls himself a Republican, the Republican party accepts and supports him, and probability theory says at least one registered Republican voted for him; if not two.

Citation: 1856 case of "If it walks like a duck and quacks like a Duck ..."

Re:David

[h33t l4x0r]

The whole Drain The Swamp mantra did not start with Donald Trump.

No but we all know that Mexicans are rapists. From there it's no big intuitive leap to New Mexicans are rapists. Guilt by association, I'm afraid, means Arizonians must be rapists too. We need your DNA and we should probably build a wall around Arizona while we're at it.

Re:David

[rickb928]

Even better. Arizona real estate law, and I bet contract law, specifies that revisions are expected to be honored in preference to 'previous' provisions, in contracts, the principle being that a change should be considered the intention. But insurance policies are, indeed, different, as the cover sheet and synopsis are murky bits, with much dispute over whether these are the governing statements of a policy.

The bill to make that explicit was actually a good idea, if it had included the requirement of a disclaimer, required to be in the largest font used on the page other than for titling, stating that everything on the cover sheet and synopsis was nonbinding... Which of course could, for some, raise the suspicion that the insurer was not being entirely truthful in the summary...

Couldn't have THAT, could we?

Re:David

[Oswald McWeany]

Funny, I expected it'd be a Democrat. Take their guns, ridicule their religion, tax their sodas, "Think of the children" and all that.

The way I see it:
Democrats want to own all your money and make you be a hippy. Republicans want to own your body and soul. They both want to tell you how to live.

Both parties have nasty flaws, but over-zealous policing has always been the Republican side of the vice bucket.

Re:David

[rickb928]

If you attributed this to the intentions of any particular political party, you;re doing it wrong. There is only one State.

Re:David

[CaptainDork]

I agree and would add that Americans are in control.

If they choose to sleep at the wheel and let government run on autopilot, that's control by proxy.

Re:David

[CaptainDork]

Bullshit.

Trump brought the goddam swamp with him. Mueller's doing the draining.

Re:David

[Uberbah]

Democrats want to own all your money and make you be a hippy.

On what planet is that? Democrats are nothing but the other party of corrupt right wing assholes, who are frequently to the right of their GOP opponents. Just to pick one example, Kamela Harris's Republican opponent for the position of CA AG ran to her left on marijuana legalization. To pick another, Trump ran to Hillary's left on corruption, trade, and foreign wars. That he's turned out to be largely full of shit on those campaign issues doesn't change the fact that he ran to her left.

Re:David

[Uberbah]

The Democrats themselves say that they want to take your guns...

Repeating a big lie doesn't make it true, it just makes you a more pathetic liar for repeating it. And pathetic you gun nuts are, as you DGAF about police shootings that rend the 2nd Amendment moot. If bearing a firearm in an open carry state is an automatic death sentence (or even not-firearms like the toys or BB guns held by Tamir Rice or John Crawford) then obviously you don't have a right to bear them. If you weren't full of shit, your first priority would be to get those killer cops sent to prison for murder.

Re:David

[Falconnan]

Over-zealous policing of individuals has generally been a Republican Party thing during my lifetime. Policing of business has been a Democratic Party thing. And here's the thing: Businesses have never shown the ability to be responsible when not regulated. Unfortunately.

That said, both parties like to ban various things. Republicans ban drugs of any recreational use as a reflex on the (often correct) grounds they cause societal harm. Weapons also cause more harm than good, but that's somewhat intentional in their purpose, and therefore the Dems go after that.

Put another way, Dems usually want to tax your money and provide services (of variable efficiency) in return. Republicans want to take the leash off of money and put it on your neck. Both do so in the name of public safety. I'm not seeing how the potential abuse of this system as stated doesn't outweigh the theoretical benefit of having it.

Perhaps the problem is a failure of either side to see a basic truth: Freedom ain't free. It's an old trope, but history suggests it's usually true.

Re:David

[CaptainDork]

The term "Deep State" is about as meaningless as "snowflake," "libertard," and other stupid motherfucking words that you use as placeholders for knowledge.

Re:David

[Obfuscant]

If bearing a firearm in an open carry state is an automatic death sentence

Since it isn't, the rest of your rant is moot. Maybe you're just confused between the word "bearing", which means "carrying", and the words "threatening someone with", which is illegal even in open carry locations. And threatening a cop with one can get you shot (not "will"), which most people seem to understand.

Re:David

[PurplePhase]

As I remember it, Trump ran to Hillary's left, right, center, North, South, East and West during the campaign: anything and everything to get someone to vote for him.

What are they going to do if people refuse?

[Registered Coward v2]

Fire them? If entire staff at schools, police departments, etc. refuse to take the test and pay it won't turn out well if they try to fire them. Between lawsuits, union fights and politicians trying to explain why school is canceled and the police/fire are not answering calls things will get sorted out quickly. My guess the bill dies quietly in committee...

Re:What are they going to do if people refuse?

[Tomahawk]

It's well and good, but these people need jobs. They are more likely to give them what they want than be out of the street wondering where their next meal will come from.

People's security is very important to them, and companies know this.

The best way to stop this is via the law, preferably Federal law.

"Freedom"

[Tomahawk]

It seems the more and more the meaning of the word "Freedom" and "Land of the Free" is becoming more and more watered down.
And I'm not sure I'm surprised, to be honest. It seems that the USA, for everything that it does have, has forgotten about its people.

There are many countries in the world where this sort of thing just wouldn't happen. Some have laws to protect their citizens (Europe being one -- no was would the GDPR allow this to happen, for example), and some just wouldn't have it within their culture.

I do fear for the USA sometimes. Things are constantly happening there are making it one of the least free countries in the world. It's a trend that I don't see stopping. You might have missed the deadline of 1984, but I fear that's where you are all heading.

And it's a bit scary looking at it from here.

Re:"Freedom"

[e3m4n]

There is a book that’s now at a print that you should find and read called radio warfare. Before reading that book I was not aware that during World War II George Orwell worked in psychological operations or PsyOps. They quickly realized it was a lot easier to run propaganda against their own people than it was the enemy. The book 1984 was not a fictional imagination of a dark future, it was the only way to get the word out about a roadmap. Slowly, patiently, like a snowball gaining momentum, that’s how that drum beat from World War II to the year 2000. Once there was the world trade Tower attack in 2001, things picked up pace abruptly. If you were to measure the rate at which privacy was a rotated since that event, you would notice that it’s far less linear. A snowball is a really good analogy. Once they get to the point where they’ve taken enough of your liberties away they go all in and throw all the chips on the table.

  It is the single reason why the defenders of the Second Amendment here are so vehemently opposed to any sort of restriction. The day the road that liberty will be the day with in a year that you see a sweeping police state rise from the shadows.

Re:"Freedom"

[Anonymous Coward]

The (actual) Nazis were greatly helped by data collection in the time before they came to power. They had databases available to them which showed them where the Jews lived.

Re:"Freedom"

[green1]

The second amendment people are delusional. Their guns do not in any way protect them against the government. The military has weaponry, and armour, far beyond anything available to these people.

If the military is against you, your handful of small arms won't save you. If the military is with you, your handful of small arms won't be needed. In either case the person most likely to be killed by, or due to, your small arms is you.

Now if you want to talk about "a good guy with a gun" vs "a bad guy with a gun", at least you'd theoretically have a point (though all studies and statistics show otherwise). But the protection from the government angle is pure lunacy.

More big government

[The Evil Atheist]

It's always Republicans that want bigger government. It's not about taxes, Libertarians, it's about power.

Re:More big government

[Shotgun]

Really? Always? Have you not read even ONE news story covering the Green New Deal?

Reading Recommendation

[oflaherty]

I don't think most of the commenters actually read the post. Technology_dude was asking for reading recommendations to make him feel better. I can't suggest anything real. Whenever I read things that make me feel better, like new stuff the FSF is doing, it's always tinged by how frequently it's not enough or doesn't spread. For fiction, tho, I read Punch Escrow recently and found it's vision of our future to be uplifting. It's not a utopia, but it may very well be that those are off the table.

Does the list include Senators ?

[Alain Williams]

If they want this then they should lead by example and be the first to have their DNA added to this database.

A common problem it seems.

[Sqreater]

Now, and surely more certainly in the future, the information demanded in this law will allow others to become you absolutely anytime they want to. Name, address, social security number, even DNA - what else is left that defines you as you? Hackers will have a field day. We Americans have lost the belief that freedom should cost anything in our daily lives. We are willing to give up freedom, privacy and rights if we think we can attain some minor level of safety and protection by doing so. Those who strive for more power over Americans know this and use this cowardice.

Re:Knowing Arizona as much as I do

[forkfail]

It may not fly, but I rather suspect it will trudge forward through the muck and mire.

The Machine

[JBMcB]

London is also trying to roll out facial recognition, tied into a database that tracks movements. They are basically trying to build The Machine from Person Of Interest, that tracks everyone using cameras and cell phones to predict crimes. The difference being, in Person of Interest, the designer made it so you couldn't "direct" the Machine - it only spat out the ID of potential terrorists. London's technology is totally unencumbered by such fail-safes.

...and many others ....

[rickb928]

I fear this is a response to a recent incident of abuse at an extended care center here in Arizona. An incident so abhorrent I will not describe it here. So we have an ambulance chaser making such a noble proposal...

And the overreach:

In Arizona, this will include real estate salespersons and brokers, among others. The current list of those required, in Arizona, to obtain a fingerprint clearance card:

ABDE-Dental Hygienist Licensure
ABDE-Dentist Licensure
ABDE-Denturist Certification
ADFI-Appraisal Management/Controlling person
ADFI-Appraisal Management/Registration
ADFI-Appraiser-License or Certificate
ADOT Traffic School Licensure
ADOT-Driver Training School Licensure
AZ Board of Fingerprinting-Members & Staff
AZ Charter School Board-Member/Applicant
AZ Dept. of Ed-Attend Vocational Program; Age 22 or older
AZ Dept. of Ed-Child Nutrition Programs
AZ Dept. of Ed-Surrogate Parents
AZ Dept. Real Estate-Licensure
AZ Game and Fish
AZ Schools for the Deaf & Blind-Superintendent
BPT - Physical Therapist & Assistants Licensure
BTR-Alarm Agent Certification
BTR-Controlling Person Certification
DCS - Child Welfare/Adoption Agency Employee
DCS-Adoption
DCS-Employee or IT Employee or IT Employees of Contractors or Subcontractors
DCS-Field Employee
DCS-Foster Home Licensure
Department of Juvenile Corrections-Licensee or Contract Provider
DES-CCR&R Registered Home
DES-Certified Child Care Provider & Non-Certified Relative Provider
DES-DAAS-Division of Aging & Adult Svcs.
DES-DDD - Developmental Home Licensure
DES-DDD/HCBS-Home & Community Based Svcs.
DES-Domestic Violence/Homeless Shelter
DES-Employee
DES-IT Position
DES-Employee or Contractor with access to Federal Tax Information
DES-JOBS Program
DES-WIOA-Workforce Innovation & Opportunity Act
DHS-Arizona State Hospital
DHS-Child Care Employees & Volunteers
DHS-Child Care Facility Licensure
DHS-Child Care Group Home; Certification, Employees or Volunteers
DHS-Children’s Behavioral Health Programs Employees and Volunteers
DHS-Nursing Care Administrators & Assisted Living Facility Managers
DHS-Residential or Nursing Care Institutions; Home Health Agencies – Employees and Volunteers
Health Science Student & Clinical Assistant
Juvenile Probation-Supreme Court, County Attorney or other Contract Provider Employee or Volunteer
State Board of Pharmacy-3rd Party Logistic Providers Representative
State Board of Pharmacy-Licensure
State Board of Education (Teacher or Other Certification)
Tutor or Teacher Preparation Programs
Charter School Instructor
School Bus Driver
Public and/or Charter School Non-certificated personnel
Public and/or Charter School Contractor, Subcontractor or Vendor and their Employees

Of note; appraisers, IT subcontractors and their employees, alarm agents.

The bill specifies collection from (with my notes in parentheses):

1. A PERSON WHO IS REQUIRED BY LAW TO SUBMIT FINGERPRINTS FOR PURPOSES OF IDENTIFICATION AS PART OF AN APPLICATION FOR LICENSURE, CERTIFICATION OR A PERMIT OR RENEWAL OF A LICENSE, CERTIFICATE OR PERMIT IF THE PERSON HAS NOT PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED DNA ID. (see the list above)

2. A PERSON WHOSE EMPLOYMENT OR POSITION REQUIRES FINGERPRINTING FOR PURPOSES OF IDENTIFICATION. (apparently requiring collection if an employer requires fingerprinting, overreach)

3. A PERSON WHO IS EMPLOYED BY OR VOLUNTEERING WITH A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY. (redundant)

4. A PERSON WHO, FOR ANY OTHER REASON, IS REQUIRED BY LAW TO SUBMIT FINGERPRINTS FOR PURPOSES OF IDENTIFICATION. (redundant)

5. A DECEASED PERSON, WHOSE DNA ID SHALL BE COLLECTED BY THE MEDICAL EXAMINER OR THE MEDICAL EXAMINER'S DESIGNEE AND SUBMITTED PURSUANT TO PROTOCOLS DEVELOPED BY THE DEPARTMENT. A DECEASED PERSON'S DNA ID MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT WITHIN TWENTY-FOUR HOURS AFTER COLLECTION.

6. A PERSON WHO IS ORDERED BY

If you haven't done anything wrong...

[snowchicken]

If you haven't done anything wrong then you have nothing to hide. I am squeaky clean and planning on moving to Arizona to prove it. Wait, what do you mean 'databases and the people who use them aren't infallible?'. Oh well, here's my $250 anyway. Feel free to shove it up my ass while I'm bent over for the rest of your laws.

Does this really matter?

[dasunt]

We're to the point these days where we can usually use available DNA databases to narrow down suspects to a small family. If we have an unknown DNA sample, we can sequence it, match it against the genealogy DNA databases out there (usually GEDCOM). We'll find that the unknown DNA matches both the Doe family and the Roe families, leaving us to find the individuals resulting from a marriage between the two families. After that, it's just a matter of some simple deduction (e.g. Jane Doe and Richard Roe had four children, one was male while the suspect's DNA was female, another was living in Alaska at the time, but the third and fourth one was in the area at the time of the murder), some police work to retrieve a sample of DNA (e.g. tail them, wait for them to get a coffee and then fish the empty coffee cup out of the trash), and it's done.

The cat's out of the bag at this point. Assume GEDCOM and the other genealogy databases go defunct. Okay, great, you've just delayed the problem for a few years before some federal contractor builds in the ability to match DNA samples to relatives who have been incarcerated or DNA collected at a crime scene. (The US locks up a lot of people. Countless others (including murder victims) have their DNA collected by the police for the purpose of elimination.)

I think the question we should be asking is what limits should we put on this power? And how do we work on training police and prosecutors in this new era? What instructions do we give to a jury? Because when you can match anyone's DNA that you find at a crime scene, it's going to lead to more random coincidences and mistakes. (A famous one would be the "serial killer" whose DNA was found at multiple crime scenes - but it turned out the "killer" was a factory worker at the place that makes the swabs being used.)

Re:Jumperatex supports KKK?

[kilfarsnar]

Says the guy supporting a KKK member as VA gov in Northam A serial rapist as VA Lt. Gov in Fairfax In addition that same Northam told us about how he supports killing live born babies brought to full term and calling it abortion.

Sure, you support the KKK, rapists, and killing babies. Congratulations! You are literally a monster

You sure you want to stand by that last statement? I ask because David Duke and the KKK have literally announced their support for Donald Trump. I'm not saying Trump is a racist; I'm saying other racists think Donald Trump is a racist. So congratulations.

Need to pass a data privacy liability act too

[goombah99]

Before they pass this they need to pass a data privacy liability act. It should state the penalty for every occurence of a data record being lost to hackers because of inadequte security on the data base. FOr example, $1 million for loss of a DNA record, $500K for loss of a financial record, $250K for loss of a social security number. $100K for loss of a purchase history record and so on.
Additionally the penalty would apply not just to the person that collected the data in the first place but separately to any other parties it was entrusted to who lost it. So shared data would be subject to double the penalty. This would prevent avoiding responsibility by delegation.

If they did that then I'd not be quite as fearful of this. It could still be abused by the gov't itself but this would reasonably limit the scope

Re:Need to pass a data privacy liability act too

[CaptainDork]

Reverse that, OK?

My DNA, obviously, is important to these bastards. Let them pay ME .

It's my IP. Either I created it or it's an "act of God."

I declare it part of my estate, as well.

Re:Uberbah the liar

[kilfarsnar]

The KKK were the violent political extreme of the Democratic Party. They're racist because the Democratic Party is racist. Regarding rape, i only know about Billy C. There are probably others. Baby killers is obvious; you may disagree with the politics of Pro-life groups, but you can't deny that post-birth humans are persons by law, and that viable third trimester fetuses are babies in everything except their uterine status. The existing Democratic Party also supports the KKK, but not openly. They also support the AntiFa who are the new racist KKK with a different style of masks. Don't believe me? Start doing some research into how many AntiFa thugs who get arrested for assaulting bystanders shout racial slurs at the bystanders, especially Hispanic bystanders.

Hey look! It's some guy that can't tell the different between the 1950's and today! It's like you don't even know that Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon were president. And stop it with your concern trolling about racism. Like you give a fuck.