Skip to main content

View Diary: SCOTUS to decide on DNA collection in rape case. (89 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  What Does Law Enforcement Learn From Your DNA (7+ / 0-)

    that it doesn't learn from your fingerprint? As far as I can tell, at this time all that either of them tell the justice system is that you are absolutely 1 specific human being out of 7 billion.

    Now if Aetna somehow winds up with it, that's a shitload of problem for me.

    Maybe that's the sufficient reason to to worry.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 06:47:35 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  I think there are privacy issues in theory. (0+ / 0-)

      All of these can be dealt with using relevant legal infrastructure. (I almost added a Health Care tag for this very reason. To think if we had a robust health care system, a whole lot of the practical reason for concern is moot...)

      Breathe in. Breathe out. Forget this, and attaining enlightenment will be the least of your problems.

      by rb137 on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 06:50:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  It Is A Tough Call. I Mean I Want People That (5+ / 0-)

      break a law, saying raping a women, to go to jail for a long, long time. But, and I hate to use a phrase often used by the right, but I view it as a "slippery slope." To me the next thing you know we start to have a database of DNA for everybody. Who knows where things do from there.

      I just feel, and I almost sound like Rand Paul here, that if I pay my taxes. I don't break the law. I keep to myself .... well then the government should just leave me alone.

      And if you don't have a court order, I don't really want to give you my DNA. Let you in my house. Have you read my email. Well it is a long list of things I would like to protect.

      When opportunity calls pick up the phone and give it directions to your house.

      by webranding on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 06:53:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Slippery slope is a logical fallacy. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Otteray Scribe, misslegalbeagle

        Just sayin'. Your DNA swab can protect you if you're innocent.

        Breathe in. Breathe out. Forget this, and attaining enlightenment will be the least of your problems.

        by rb137 on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 06:57:27 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Completely agree. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        rb137, webranding, dufffbeer

        Not without a court order.

        The captioned case seems to hinge upon the collection of DNA -- what the defendant argued was an illegal search -- and the "fishing expedition" undertaken to match his DNA to past, unsolved crimes with DNA samples/records on file...  Where was the reasonable suspicion or cause for the search?

        ugh.

        I am HATING the "logical conclusion" of my own argument...that is, letting the perpetrator of a heinous crime walk on a technicality??!!!??...double ugh!!

        Still...::sigh::...that "slippery slope" thing.

        "The most potent weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed." ~ Steven Biko

        by Marjmar on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 07:01:37 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I Am So With You. I Hate Where (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          rb137, Marjmar, notrouble

          my comments here lead. I mean there are so many unsolved violent crimes in the US. What stops law enforcement maybe saying in the years ahead we just need DNA from everyone so we can run it?

          When opportunity calls pick up the phone and give it directions to your house.

          by webranding on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 07:05:25 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Taking that another way (0+ / 0-)

          If I'm stopped for speeding, and my name is entered into the computer, the system is not allowed to tell the cop who stopped me that by the way I'm wanted in three states on suspicion of kidnapping and murder? After all, it has nothing to do with a traffic violation, so having my name show up for something else would be fishing, right?

          •  No because you have already passed the point (0+ / 0-)

            of either probable cause or reasonable suspicion for those crimes. In an arrest for one you don't automatically have it for others.

            "Speak the TRUTH, even if your voice shakes."

            by stellaluna on Thu Nov 29, 2012 at 04:10:41 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  I would argue that probable cause (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          rb137

          existed for the first crime (the one he was currently being held for).  He can't argue that once they have his DNA, they can't compare it to DNA for other unsolved crimes.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site