Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Bloody Sam Roberts
But the perp wasn't released in the first instance because the State lacked his DNA samples. He was released for insufficient evidence.

You're begging the question.

If a perp is arrested for one crime, and printed, and then it turns out he didn't commit that crime, but his prints are on a murder weapon in another, he won't be released, even though there is insufficient evidence to hold him on the crime for which he was arrested.

This is exactly analogous to my DNA hypothetical. The DNA sample would have prevented the release of the perp who raped and killed your family member.


Secondly, the likelyhood of your scenario happening to me is a billion to one chance when compared to the odds of my insurance company getting the information from the gubmint's DNA database and restructuring my premiums based on what that info reveals.

LOL! That's utter and unfounded speculation on your part. DNA extraction from prisoners and arrestees will solve and prevent many more crimes than it already does. You have no data set for insurance companies accessing DNA databases, and it would be a simple thing to legislate against such abuses. You'd own the insurance company if they did that to you.


Now let's ask another question: Are you willing to pay higher premiums for insurance because your supposedly private DNA submission was found to reveal a family history of diabetes?

No, and fortunately that's a separate issue, and there is already legislation on the books preventing it.


I hate to use the tired old phrase...but having everyone submit to to giving DNA samples to The State is a slippery slope that we dare not venture onto. I have an inexhaustible faith in the darker side of human nature and Man's ability to corrupt and pervert just about anything he lays his hands on.

That would concern me too, but not everyone would be submitting DNA samples under Proposition 69. Prisoners and arrestees, that's about it (I'm not sure about parolees). DNA would be taken as evidence, because it is evidence.

38 posted on 12/07/2004 1:59:22 PM PST by Fatalis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]


To: Fatalis
DNA would be taken as evidence, because it is evidence.

Yes, initially...but to my cynical thinking it is only opening up a door.
I guess on this issue, I lean a bit more towards Libertarian.

On the other points...you are correct. My arguments were specious, at best. I'm never at my best when trying Freep at work. I need my pajamas on to do a proper job of it.

40 posted on 12/07/2004 2:05:17 PM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts (All I ask from livin' is to have no chains on me. All I ask from dyin' is to go naturally.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

To: Fatalis
My understanding: state convicts currently surrender DNA, so

What's the point of prop 69, given:about 6% of the population commits 80% of the crimes & we've already got their DNA

( ) A new bureaucracy for law enforcement w/ attendant funding & union membership
( ) A new source of power/control over the "subjects"
( ) other

It's gonna be as effective as ballistic fingerprinting in solving crime

60 posted on 12/07/2004 2:41:33 PM PST by TheOracleAtLilac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson