 |
|  |
 |
translucent
Webmaster Lord of Laziness
Registered: May 2001
Location: Over there
Posts: 36634

Top 10 List: < click >
|
Your DNA or else: Police to collect your genetic material |
http://news.com.com/2060-10796_3-0.html?tag=nefd.bl
The Violence Against Women Act may be about to do violence to Americans' right to privacy.
A U.S. Senate committee has adopted an amendment to the VAWA legislation that would add the DNA of anyone detained by the cops to a federal DNA database called "CODIS."
Note that it doesn't require that you're convicted of a crime or even formally arrested on suspicion of committing one. Mere detention -- might a routine traffic stop eventually qualify? -- will be sufficient for CODISification. (Current law only authorizes blood or saliva swabs and entry into CODIS for people convicted of a crime.)
Ethan ********, a Washington attorney and privacy specialist, notes: " The bill grants states carte blanche to write laws allowing (DNA) collection" even "as a condition of getting a drivers license!"
This proposal is the brainchild of two Republican senators, Jon Kyl of Arizona and John Cornyn of Texas. They say it's necessary to help catch violent criminals -- although the genetic material would remain in the database if the person is detained or arrested but not charged with a crime.
"Tresor never sleeps"
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
10-03-2005 01:05 PM |
|
|
|
 |
 |
Aquisces
|/|/|/|/|/|/|
Registered: May 2003
Age: 115
Location:
Posts: 1332
Top 10 List: < click >
|
Re: Your DNA or else: Police to collect your genetic material |
 | Originally posted by translucent
http://news.com.com/2060-10796_3-0.html?tag=nefd.bl
Ethan ********, a Washington attorney and privacy specialist, notes: " The bill grants states carte blanche to write laws allowing (DNA) collection" even "as a condition of getting a drivers license!"
|  |

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
10-03-2005 01:31 PM |
|
|
|
 |
 |
QueenChaos
Mama Goddess Sexpot
Registered: Jul 2003
Location:
Posts: 3482

Top 10 List: < click >
|
I can see why they think this might aid in catching criminals, however, I personally feel as though they are going about it all wrong.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
10-03-2005 01:41 PM |
|
|
|
 |
 |
yallzrcrazy
answering phones....putting letters in envelopes
Registered: Mar 2002
Location: away
Posts: 12334
Top 10 List: < click >
|
oh no! so, if i'm arrested or detained, the government will have my dna in case i commit a crime in the future?!?! i'm deeply offended. imagine what the could do with it! clone me? find out my probability for cancer and assasinate me before they have to pay for my medicaid? track me down if i ever try to change my identity?
this is something straight out of gattacca!
"you are the gayest monster since gay came to gayville."
-master shake
18 days until yallzr22....the most boring age in history.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
10-03-2005 01:43 PM |
|
|
|
 |
 |
translucent
Webmaster Lord of Laziness
Registered: May 2001
Location: Over there
Posts: 36634

Top 10 List: < click >
|
DNA is something that is supposed to uniquely identify us much in the same way as fingerprints do. I personally don't see any difference as far as law enforcement goes. Furthermore, there is absolutely no reason why a law-abiding citizen should not have to be uniquely identified in order to obtain a driver's license or passport (sorry, under 21 clubbers).
"Tresor never sleeps"
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
10-03-2005 02:00 PM |
|
|
|
 |
 |
kbronsito
Giggity
Registered: Jul 2005
Age: 41
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 22187

Top 10 List: < click >
|
if the government wants my DNA I think its only fair that they get it after I get in my money shot with the Bush twins.
i heart my sniffy friends, but i'd rather get some head
ZOMG!!! I think it is awesome that Andy Moor is coming to DC. His track "Air For Life" that he did with Above and Beyond is awesome!!
Also his recent one "Daydream" is spectacular!!!
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
10-03-2005 04:34 PM |
|
|
|
 |
 |
GirlieGirl
valley of ice
Registered: Aug 2002
Location: main room. speaker.
Posts: 11997
Top 10 List: < click >
|
This is fucking stupid. Obviously these dudes were sitting down talking over some beers while coming up with this half-assed idea. A scarily-high percentage of rape kits never even get tested because it's so expensive to test the DNA of criminals we ALREADY have. So we're going to collect more useless DNA that's never going to be used to solve crime? Wtf are we going to do with women's DNA? I think it's pretty safe to say close to 100% of the douchebags that commit rape are male. Do we reeeeally need to waste all that tax money testing people? x 100 This is so stupid that I'm not even worried about it.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
10-03-2005 08:03 PM |
|
|
|
 |
 |
Mongold
Junior Member
Registered: Mar 2019
Location:
Posts: 1
Top 10 List: < click >
|
Can someone point out to a theory like this that actually came true?
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
03-20-2019 01:17 PM |
|
|
|
 |
 |
albion
Happiness is a healthy body and a sick mind
Registered: Feb 2005
Age: 115
Location: a fuck of a long way outside the beltway
Posts: 7288
Top 10 List: < click >
|
 | Originally posted by Mongold
Can someone point out to a theory like this that actually came true? |  |
no idea who you are, but here you go:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_National_DNA_Database
"Though initially only samples from convicted criminals, or people awaiting trial, were recorded, the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 changed this to allow DNA to be retained from people charged with an offence, even if they were subsequently acquitted. The Criminal Justice Act 2003 later allowed DNA to be taken on arrest, rather than on charge. Between 2004 when this law came into force and 2012, anyone arrested in England and Wales on suspicion of involvement in any recordable offence (all except the most minor offences) had their DNA sample taken and stored in the database, whether or not they are subsequently charged or convicted."
I start things, but I never
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
09-10-2019 03:15 AM |
|
|
|
 |
 |
albion
Happiness is a healthy body and a sick mind
Registered: Feb 2005
Age: 115
Location: a fuck of a long way outside the beltway
Posts: 7288
Top 10 List: < click >
|
 | Originally posted by translucent
DNA is something that is supposed to uniquely identify us much in the same way as fingerprints do. I personally don't see any difference as far as law enforcement goes. Furthermore, there is absolutely no reason why a law-abiding citizen should not have to be uniquely identified in order to obtain a driver's license or passport (sorry, under 21 clubbers). |  |
Having just spent yesterday afternoon in a course on DNA and data science, albeit for the genomics of cancer.
The problem is that, while your DNA IS unique, the tests used to compare DNA samples don't use the entire genome, they just use a small part of it (well several small parts). That loses some information, and these small parts aren't quite as unique as the entire genome would be. These features are then used in the databases to compare genetic profiles, NOT the entire genome, and so a 'hit' on a database is no longer a unique identification.
[The same is true with fingerprints, you don't store the entire fingerprint in a database you just store a few (mathematical) features of it.]
This becomes a statistically significant problem when you have a very large database - the more people you have in there, the more likely you are to make a false ID.
When you're comparing against samples from crime scenes, other problems are cross contamination from other sources, degradation of the sample (long term exposure to sunlight and bleach can both do damage) and poor quality or very small samples. If you have a VERY small sample you first have to make it bigger by using a process (PCR) that makes many copies of the original DNA so that you then have enough to experiment with, and this step can also mess up your sample if you're not careful. All of these things can introduce errors into your DNA profiling match.
The point being that if you have a DNA sample from a crime scene and you put it into your database looking for someone who matches that profile, there is a not insignificant chance that the person who comes out the other end is just a coincidence and not a true positive result. And the REAL problem is that people think that genetic profiling is infallible and tantamount to a statement of guilt and so a false ID becomes very difficult to argue against.
DNA evidence works well when you have DNA and already have a suspect/small group of suspects for whom there is already evidence against, and you use DNA profiling as another layer of evidence against that person.
DNA profiling does not work well when you just use it for a fishing expedition on an entire population.
And THIS is why a genetic database is not a good idea.
I start things, but I never
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
09-10-2019 03:52 AM |
|
|
|
 |
 |
translucent
Webmaster Lord of Laziness
Registered: May 2001
Location: Over there
Posts: 36634

Top 10 List: < click >
|
I keep seeing stories how people who sent their DNA samples to some ancestry site are getting matched to crime scenes.
"Tresor never sleeps"
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
09-10-2019 12:47 PM |
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|