I'm sick of seeing all these crazies crimes that go unsolved even though police have DNA samples and fingerprints, etc. just because they do not have these samples in any database. I feel that the general public would be alright with the government taking a DNA sample of newborn babies. Mandatory fingerprinting is probably not as feasible, but I definitely would not be opposed to mandatory DNA databanking. Now, I know that this is infringing upon our rights as citizens of this great country, but come on, if you're not committing a major crime where your DNA is going to lead to your arrest and conviction, you have nothing to worry about. In my opinion, every law abiding citizen should be for this. I'm sure there are tons of cases where the law enforcement has DNA and only needs a match. One in particular (the one that made me start this thread, essentially...although I've felt this same way for a long time) is of a serial killer operating in the LA area. He's killed either 11 or 12 people in the last 20 years (he went many years in between murders). The law enforcement has fingerprints as well as DNA samples, but they simply cannot match them to anyone in the country that they have on record.... What are your thoughts...
I completely agree! Except I think your idea is not aggressive enough. Personally I think we should go with RFID implants also. DNA is simply not enough. With RFID's, we can have it sync'ed with our bank account. Just think, no more losing cash or getting robbed. No hot checks. Also, these RFID's can keep track of where we are. That way, we know where the criminals are at all time, and if in the event you might be accused of a crime, you have an alibi. Also, we can have little cameras and microphones implanted. But before we do all that, we first must abolish the 2nd amendment. My bigger concern is how to convince everyone else a totalitarian state is the way to go, much less socialism. Any Ideas? KThxBye
Right. And we should have the police conduct random searches of homes. After all, if you're not doing anything wrong, you should have nothing to worry about. And maybe we should round up all people of Arab descent, and put them in death camps (did I say death camp? I meant happy camp!) until they can prove that they aren't terrorists. After all, if they're really innocent, then they have nothing to fear, right? Ooooh, or wait: how 'bout barcodes tattooed on every infant? Or maybe we could just have 'em lo-jacked? Or we could just keep our civil liberties intact.
Jumping the gun there a bit, SpaceGhost? I'm sure there are people out there that would agree. If you're not going to commit murder, rape, or any sort of other major crime in which your DNA could be used to convict you, then why would you care? This all hinges upon the possibly naive idea that this information would stay in the government's hands, and nothing of ill-nature would come about it. I would say the current DNA/Fingerprint system works in that way...
So many people have sacrificed their lives so we can have freedom and you want to have a police state?
Wellllllllllll seeeee .... this is what we call the "fox guarding the hen house" analogy. Would you rather fight the one criminal with many guns or the one criminal with the most powerful army on the planet? In perspective, I would rather my personal information be plastered on the front page of yahoo.com before I trust any intentions by your trusted government.
Not a police state, just an expansion of the modern DNA/ Fingerprinting database. I know, I know, it's an ethics violation, but I'm just wondering why those opposed are opposed. It seems to me that it's the same logic as those that say "YARRRR..HE'S TAKIN' MY GUNS AWAY!" when someone proposes a ban on assault rifles...
Ever seen Gattica? When they were created, social security numbers were strictly prohibited from being used for identification. BTW, the government can't compel you to be fingerprinted without probable cause, either.
There are millions in this country right now, with no documentation at all. There's a lot of work to be done to be all-inclusive and fair. Regarding fingerprinting and DNA, is it feasible that these can both be artificially re-created? Suppose an illegal (as of now...) clone is made by some secret organization, using a random citizen's dna? Can glue-on fingerprint patches be made, using a copy of your fingerprint?
I think the reason they are opposed is that it is an ethics violation. It is a dangerous tool, and impossible to avoid the information leaking.
I intend to obey the law, but what if one my daughters grows up to be a criminal and I sent her down the river by submitting her DNA at her birth? No thanks; I'd rather she got away with it.
Hi, we're from the government. In an effort to eliminate genetically transmitted illnesses and transform our nation into a race of healthier humans we intend to cleanse the genetic pool of unwanted pollutants. The genetic screening conducted on your newborn infant indicates a predisposition towards a potentially life threatening genetic illness. We have undertaken the necessary sterilization of the child to inhibit the transmission of this gene in future generations. Since you are the parents of this child, we're going to need you to come with us for a procedure. By the way, we have cleared you of involvement in any recent crimes.
+1 FTW. I'd add to it, but the sarcasm oozes whatever else I'd want to add, so I will just say 'nicely put.'
exactly. putting aside the obvious civil rights issues, there are a lot of innocent explanations for your DNA to be at a crime scene, not to mention someone planting a coke can you drank from, or hairs from your comb, etc.
As a permanent resident who willingly surrendered his fingerprints to the government about 5 years ago, I can testify that I have not as of yet been framed for any heinous murders by those guys in black Suburbans wearing suits and aviators. I can obviously understand the outrage at the suggestion, but I can confess that I've wondered this myself. Of course, a quick Google search of HPD crime lab and the thought of government possession of more DNA samples of innocent people sends shivers down your spine. It seems like a classic case of liberty vs. security. So apparently in this country, you can tap my phone but not my prints (unless you're an immigrant, then you're SOL). Also, I distinctly remember putting a thumb print on a scanner at the DPS when getting a driver's license. Was I imagining that or is the OP on to something?
