White House Seeks to Expand DNA DATABASE...

USA Today ^ | 4/15/2003 | Richard Willing

[michaelje]

WASHINGTON

[nanny]

Are you sure? There are a lot of snide uninformed childish replies on articles like this... they sometimes are misinterpreted.

I am not too sure about a lot of things - but that remark was meant to convey skepticism.

[nanny]

There are a lot of snide uninformed childish replies on articles like this... they sometimes are misinterpreted

And I am sorry it was not meant to imply you were not telling the truth and wasn't meant as an insult. If it seemed that way - I apologize profusely.

I just a cynic about anything that involves government.

[stuartcr]

Right, you associate child-porn with someone, and nothing can be done to regain their credence, everyone will automatically hate them. Makes you wonder if the whole kiddie-porn thing isn't some big potential set-up, to be used when necessary. Rather nefarious.

[thepitts]

Exactly. The only "privacy" being protected here is the "privacy" to commit a crime without being caught using DNA evidence -- not the kind of "privacy" that the Constitution protects or our laws should protect.

Care to expand on that?

[stuartcr]

Glad to see I'm not the only one...I'm an 'energy-vampire troll'.

[APBaer]

"The ONLY reason they want that database is to have a collection of criminals from which to chose from when a crime is committed."

"Hello Director, yes, I have checked the files and we are in luck, we do have a sample of Dr. Hatfill's DNA on file.?

"I should take a swab of it and report to where"?

[APBaer]

"90% of this forum believe anything Bush/Ashcroft say and do is gospel."

If that is so, then truly 90% of this forum are nuts.

[Polonius]

BTT

[dirtboy]

Adding profiles from thousands of adult arrestees and juvenile offenders would greatly expand the DNA system's worth by increasing the number of potential matches, administration officials say.

And if we put ALL citizens in there, it would REALLY become effective!

Screw this nonsense. This White House is going too far with its proposals.

[dirtboy]

The only "privacy" being protected here is the "privacy" to commit a crime without being caught using DNA evidence

It's not even about privacy. It is about preventing creeping incrementalism to where everyone in the country is treated as a suspect for crimes.

[kaylar]

I think that's exactly what's going on, and I may have a little personal experience with this:

Back in 1998, when I was much less 'net savvy' (and much more naive), one of the web sites I frequent had "kiddie porn" posted to it. It was of "Little Miss Nude" contest entrants, three of them. Two were little girls of 5-7, the oldest must have been 12 or so, and she had developing breasts and pubic hair. The guy who posted the link and jpg was highly indignant over the whole thing, as the web site was purportedly the online diary of one of the contestant's mother. "How can parents do something this vile to their child?" we all wondered, and we all ran over to the diary to get the info to send to the authorities. I went, confirmed, and contacted the FBI with the web site's address(actually, it's US customs that handles child porn, but I didn't know that at the time).

About an hour or so after the initial post, another person posted a warning : Do NOT go to that website! It's a "honey pot" meant to give the authorities the ISPs of kiddie porn enthusiasts. The poster strongly hinted that s/he is affiliated with law enforcement, and knew this from personal experience....FWIW.

I wonder if the people arrested on federal charges, and their invariable child porn, all have the exact same jpgs found on their hard drives? If it is federal agents sending the exact same images to hard drives over and over again, how would jurors know, as the cases would all be in different cities and states?

[Poohbah]

With your DNA, the govt could clone you and commit crimes with your clone, or use your clone as a political assassin.

In my case, the clone would be 38 years younger than me.

He wouldn't be a problem--in terms of being able to commit crimes--until I turned 50 or so, and then a single eyewitness would undo the whole scam.

[dirtboy]

So far this Administration and it's Justice Dept. hasn't found a freedom or privacy it wouldn't violate.

It isn't even about privacy. It is about the right as a citizen to not be treated as a suspect of a crime without due process. Someone who was arrested but not convicted did not commit a crime as far as the law is concerned, but they would be lumped together in a class with convicted criminals under this proposal.

[chnsmok]

I give up on this administration. Cannot think of anything else to say. I am just sitting here shaking my head and wondering what is next.

[stuartcr]

These criminals would be convicted strictly on DNA evidence, no eye-witnesses.

[stuartcr]

There's probably enough different .jpgs around so that wouldn't happen. Once a pariah, always a pariah.

[Poohbah]

These criminals would be convicted strictly on DNA evidence, no eye-witnesses.

OK...as an evil gooobermint archconspirator...

Would you be willing to bet your life on that?

If you guess wrong, it IS your life.

[stuartcr]

There's very little that I would bet my life on.

[Poohbah]

The poster strongly hinted that s/he is affiliated with law enforcement, and knew this from personal experience....FWIW.

Just as you can believe that all those 20-something blondes with big boobs are just waiting around in chat rooms, eh?

[Poohbah]

In other words, if you were the evil goobermint arch-conspirator, you wouldn't go ahead with your uniquely boneheaded idea :o)