Posted on 11/18/2001 3:00:46 PM PST by michaelje
The article says "FEDERAL OFFENSES." I don't think John Ashcroft is concerned about State laws.
No, we have a few serial offenders right here on FR. But if you're concerned about which offenders Ashcroft will include in this database, you might want to drop him a line. Maybe he can clear it up for you.
Can you tell me what this has to do with the Patriot Bill & the Federal database? Somehow you got off the subject.
I wish I had a dollar for every database my name is in...I'd be able to retire tomorrow.
Pleas get real. here is no state in the union that are enforcing "sodomy" or adultery laws and they are misdemeanor offences anyway. Get a grip!
I have no doubt that it has the potential to solve crimes, but does it not also have the potential to be misused? Is it at all possible for it to be extended to yet another group of people the government deems necessary to watch or have on file? This is not black helicopter stuff, it is just reasonable concern of powers I have never given the right of to bureaucrats and politicans. While I agree that many in the country are clammoring for protection from terrorists and criminals I fail to see why I have to yeild freedom for security only to get neither one of them. Bad guys will still do what they do, terorists will still blow themselves up trying to make their points in their own sick and twisted way. That we have a DNA sample of them will only help confirm their bloody pulp mess in the rubble after they are done.
But if you want to worry about something before it's even a reality...knock yourself out! It's just reminiscent of those Democrats who need to fear monger over everything.
Is disagreement with an issue fearmongering?
And while I'm on the subject of paranoia, what about all those medical clerks and medical transcriptionists who have access to every aspect of your physical and mental health record? Not to mention the bean pickers who have access to your credit report, your personal finances, pin numbers, credit card expenditures. Hell, at any time, any one of these minimum wage telephone operators can tell you where you spent your vacation last year or where you ate dinner last week.
I don't like anyone but those whom I allow to see any of those things. Am I supposed to throw my hands up and say "Oh heck, I just give in to it all." because some aspects of my privacy are known or violated by private sector and government? The answer is no. At all times I will resist this effort. And I practice what I preach too. I yeild very little to any and to those who claim they have to have my information because of some INVENTED law they claim to know, and even in their assertions I demand proof and have not lost yet. Yes, My numbers, credit and health may indeed be out there, but it does not mean that I am willing to make it any easier for people to look at it.
And if you're worried about your email...keep worrying, because anyone of those tech support folks who work for your internet supplier can access your email at any given time. They've got your password to do so.
LOL!! And I do not send anything on an e-mail that I would not want read as if it were on a post card.
P.S. Hope you can sleep okay tonight.
If my infant does not wake me there will be no reason not to.
Cheers!
Of course it does, but if we worried about the potential of all things being misused before we enacted anything, nothing would ever get done.
"I fail to see why I have to yield freedom for security..."
How would YOU be yielding your freedom for security if only criminal offenders, ie., terrorists were required to give DNA samples?
"Is disagreement with an issue fearmongering?"
Your disagreement is based on the fear that the government will go overboard on its enforcement or misuse of the law. Since you are dealing with scenarios that haven't occurred yet, I'd say that's an alarmist attitude. But if that's your belief, you're entitled to it. I don't have to agree with it. I prefer to deal with situations as they arise. There are enough existing problems to contend with, without speculating about problems that may or may not arise.
"Yes, My numbers, credit and health may indeed be out there, but it does not mean that I am willing to make it any easier for people to look at it."
The point I am trying to make is that while you and others are worrying about the government getting personal information about you, knowing your whereabouts, tracking you, etc., people (peons) who work for the banks, companies, health institutes, etc. already have access to all that information anyway. You have no control over whether a phone representative for Chase Manhatten decides to pull your credit report up on their computer screen, or if that hospital or doctor's office clerk, who happens to be bored and looking for something to read, decides to pull your record off the shelf and start perusing it. Some companies may have safeguards against this kind of stuff, but not all of them do, and if my guess is right, very few do. You know the old saying about security...if it costs too much money, forget it. We learned that with the hijackings.
"If my infant does not wake me there will be no reason not to."
Been there, done that! Good luck!
Ordinary citizens are arrested when they break the law. Yes, even ordinary citizens can and do break the law. I'm not saying that there haven't been arrests that were questionable, but you have to remember that not all criminals were framed (that's their most used excuse).
The Federal government would have a hard time ordering the local PD's to arrest everyone for spitting on the sidewalk, etc. And even if they did, where would they put them all? There just isn't enough room in the jails/prisons to lock everybody up on a whim. In short, the scenario you present would never happen.
That's not correct. Here's a really good chart showing the qualifying offenses for all 50 states plus federal.
As a member of the criminal justice system for the past 22+ years, I support this law wholeheartedly. I've got no problem with individuals serving time for these offenses having to give DNA samples. It just might end up saving someone's life or assisting in solving a string of crimes.
Many of these felons have previously committed similar offenses for which they were either given probation, light sentences, had charges dismissed, and/or actually served time on another bid. Also, the practice of plea-bargaining is used frequently so the perp rarely does the time for the actual crime(s) he committed.
Of course it does, but if we worried about the potential of all things being misused before we enacted anything, nothing would ever get done.
Fair argument, heck thats what I love most about OSHA, after all, if this nation had to be founded using their overly ridiculous standards we would have never had and industrial age, and the nation would never have had its first paved road due to the failure to pass the environmenal impact study.
"I fail to see why I have to yield freedom for security..."
How would YOU be yielding your freedom for security if only criminal offenders, ie., terrorists were required to give DNA samples?
I never said I would be doing it under the specific conditions you mention, I mean to say that it is possible to happen when this program is broadened. Of course it is meant to get passed with only the bad guys in mind. Ever see who the gun laws really restrict??? They came into being to stop the bad guys, who disobey them to begin with. The crime is not stopped by it, it is only defined by it.
"Is disagreement with an issue fearmongering?"
Your disagreement is based on the fear that the government will go overboard on its enforcement or misuse of the law. Since you are dealing with scenarios that haven't occurred yet, I'd say that's an alarmist attitude. But if that's your belief, you're entitled to it. I don't have to agree with it. I prefer to deal with situations as they arise. There are enough existing problems to contend with, without speculating about problems that may or may not arise.
Yes, I do fear SOME PEOPLE in government, not all, I dare say not even most, but definately some. I would equate my fear to this particular legislation with that of many laws that are laws with so-called "Grandfather" clauses. We have many laws today that have had "Grandfather" clauses. It is a sinister and insidious way to steal rights and liberties from future generations by allowing the present day people to have a particular freedom, but in forth coming years it will no longer be allowed. What is to stop evil people in government from incremental encroachment with this "Data base"? After all, people will get "used" to the law, it did not affect them....relax, its just to get the "Bad guys". After all, if you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to hide. Right? I say not just wrong, but seriously so. I have everything to hide. I am a private citizen, I obey the law and I have the right to my privacy in all things.
The point I am trying to make is that while you and others are worrying about the government getting personal information about you, knowing your whereabouts, tracking you, etc., people (peons) who work for the banks, companies, health institutes, etc. already have access to all that information anyway. You have no control over whether a phone representative for Chase Manhatten decides to pull your credit report up on their computer screen, or if that hospital or doctor's office clerk, who happens to be bored and looking for something to read, decides to pull your record off the shelf and start perusing it.
As I said, I agree, I do not have control over that, but if there was one set of laws I would love to see enforced absolutely is the 1978 Privacy act and all such related legislation, and that privacy, supported by the Constitution, is also from the prying eyes of any governmental entity. As I said before, yes, my infor, your info, and millions others info is out there, it does not mean that we support the destruction of our privacy all for the false sense that some DNA material will stop a crime. It will only be useful AFTER the fact.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.