Well this seems constitutional

F

FUCK THE POLICE

911 EVERY DAY
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,351526,00.html

Feds Plan to Collect DNA Samples From Everyone They Arrest


WASHINGTON — The government plans to begin collecting DNA samples from anyone arrested by a federal law enforcement agency — a move intended to prevent violent crime but which also is raising concerns about the privacy of innocent people.

Using authority granted by Congress, the government also plans to collect DNA samples from foreigners who are detained, whether they have been charged or not. The DNA would be collected through a cheek swab, Justice Department spokesman Erik Ablin said Wednesday. That would be a departure from current practice, which limits DNA collection to convicted felons.

Expanding the DNA database, known as CODIS, raises civil liberties questions about the potential for misuse of such personal information, such as family ties and genetic conditions.

Ablin said the DNA collection would be subject to the same privacy laws applied to current DNA sampling. That means none of it would be used for identifying genetic traits, diseases or disorders.

Congress gave the Justice Department the authority to expand DNA collection in two different laws passed in 2005 and 2006.

There are dozens of federal law enforcement agencies, ranging from the FBI to the Library of Congress Police. The federal government estimates it makes about 140,000 arrests each year.

Those who support the expanded collection believe that DNA sampling could get violent criminals off the streets and prevent them from committing more crimes.

A Chicago study in 2005 found that 53 murders and rapes could have been prevented if a DNA sample had been collected upon arrest.

More at link....
 
As constitutional as Social Security, Welfare, EPA, OSHA, Federal school funding, etc. That is, not at all.

BTW, I favor a Constitutional amendment to give the Fed authority to regulate interstate issues on the environment, but far less authority than they have usurped with the present EPA.
 
Wow now EVERYONE will get arrested and then "well shucks gee golly gee we made a big fucking mistake" but only after they have held you for a few hours, swabbed your cheek and then sent you on your way. This is your federal police powers under the Bush Administration.
 
I do not see any constitutional difficulty if certain restrictions are observed. Since the sampling would be part of the arrest process, then due process and/or reasonable suspicion requirements under the 4th and 5th Amendments would be satisfied. But I would recommend one additional limitation to secure the objection about the data base possibly being misused against the innocent.

If the accused is acquitted of the crime then the sample should be destroyed and the data base record erased. But acquittal also be limited to being found not guilty by a jury, or having a conviction overturned. In cases where a charge is simply dismissed, or not pursued, then the sample stays in the data base for some reasonable period of years - say, like 7 which is a common number for statutes of limitations. Then if no additional arrests are made against the individual during that period, the sample is removed.
 
Socrtease said:
Wow now EVERYONE will get arrested and then "well shucks gee golly gee we made a big fucking mistake" but only after they have held you for a few hours, swabbed your cheek and then sent you on your way. This is your federal police powers under the Bush Administration.
Click to expand...
I do not see that happening. (And not because I in any way trust Bush.) If they even tried, the number of false arrest lawsuits would quickly put a stop to it.
 
Good Luck said:
I do not see that happening. (And not because I in any way trust Bush.) If they even tried, the number of false arrest lawsuits would quickly put a stop to it.
Click to expand...
All they have to do is manufacture the bare minimum of probable cause. It won't happen over night but they will come up with ways to arrest more people just for DNA
 
It's always the conservatives who are the first to stand in line to have their rights taken away if they think it'll make'm safer. Case in point - see above.
 
Well Acorn is right about it being equally Constitutional to those programs, but obviously stopping this is infinitely more important; as I would hope he would admit as well.
 
Epicurus said:
Well Acorn is right about it being equally Constitutional to those programs, but obviously stopping this is infinitely more important; as I would hope he would admit as well.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Social Security is totally illegal and unconstitutional.

Morons.
 
as long as their passing laws to keep us citizens from carrying guns to protect ourselves in a National Park, or smoking in public, etc, etc, etc.

why not take our DNA anytime, they should be able to just knock on our door and demand it..

It's for our own good.
 
ib1yysguy said:
It's always the conservatives who are the first to stand in line to have their rights taken away if they think it'll make'm safer. Case in point - see above.
Click to expand...
This from one of the more adamant anti-gun twits? Give it a break. Your hypocrisy is showing.

There has been a world wide finger print data base for nearly three decades. it was started before DNA identification was even dreamed of. If an identification data base is such a threat, why did they not start making excuses for arrest when fingerprinting was the main ID method?

There is good cause for protecting our liberties. Making sure random arrests or mistaken arrests do not increase would be a reasonable precaution. And I already proposed limitations which would prevent the database from being misused against law abiding citizens. The use of DNA identification is an important tool in law enforcement when used well. It would be better if we insisted on limitations and protections which allows law enforcement to do their job without worrying about it being misused, as opposed to simply throwing out the entire idea simply because you do not like the current asshole in the White House.

Let me ask this: would you be as afraid of this program if Obama were president?
 
Good Luck said:
This from one of the more adamant anti-gun twits? Give it a break. Your hypocrisy is showing.

There has been a world wide finger print data base for nearly three decades. it was started before DNA identification was even dreamed of. If an identification data base is such a threat, why did they not start making excuses for arrest when fingerprinting was the main ID method?

There is good cause for protecting our liberties. Making sure random arrests or mistaken arrests do not increase would be a reasonable precaution. And I already proposed limitations which would prevent the database from being misused against law abiding citizens. The use of DNA identification is an important tool in law enforcement when used well. It would be better if we insisted on limitations and protections which allows law enforcement to do their job without worrying about it being misused, as opposed to simply throwing out the entire idea simply because you do not like the current asshole in the White House.

Let me ask this: would you be as afraid of this program if Obama were president?
Click to expand...
I a word, Yes.
 
Watermark said:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,351526,00.html

Feds Plan to Collect DNA Samples From Everyone They Arrest


WASHINGTON — The government plans to begin collecting DNA samples from anyone arrested by a federal law enforcement agency — a move intended to prevent violent crime but which also is raising concerns about the privacy of innocent people.

Using authority granted by Congress, the government also plans to collect DNA samples from foreigners who are detained, whether they have been charged or not. The DNA would be collected through a cheek swab, Justice Department spokesman Erik Ablin said Wednesday. That would be a departure from current practice, which limits DNA collection to convicted felons.

Expanding the DNA database, known as CODIS, raises civil liberties questions about the potential for misuse of such personal information, such as family ties and genetic conditions.

Ablin said the DNA collection would be subject to the same privacy laws applied to current DNA sampling. That means none of it would be used for identifying genetic traits, diseases or disorders.

Congress gave the Justice Department the authority to expand DNA collection in two different laws passed in 2005 and 2006.

There are dozens of federal law enforcement agencies, ranging from the FBI to the Library of Congress Police. The federal government estimates it makes about 140,000 arrests each year.

Those who support the expanded collection believe that DNA sampling could get violent criminals off the streets and prevent them from committing more crimes.

A Chicago study in 2005 found that 53 murders and rapes could have been prevented if a DNA sample had been collected upon arrest.

More at link....
Click to expand...

the original form of this had a provision that if the person was either not charged or not found guilty, the sample would be destroyed and the record purged - sure it will, this may just fall between the cracks and not get purged or a way is found to include it in some other database

how long before this will include a traffic stop

has anyone considered the cost of such a program and what an incredible invasion of civil liberties this is

hell, if you are arrested and finger printed, those finger prints are not destroyed...:pke:
 
Last edited:
I'm one of the more anti gun twits? That's news considering I own guns, love my guns, and want to be able to carry my guns in national parks. I'm one of the less anti-gun twits.
 
Good Luck said:
I do not see that happening. (And not because I in any way trust Bush.) If they even tried, the number of false arrest lawsuits would quickly put a stop to it.
Click to expand...

it's called qualified immunity. your lawsuit will not go anywhere.

This just gives me further incentive to make sure that if I'm ever falsely arrested, that I take as many down with me as possible.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top