Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 6/17/2009 8:11:28 AM EST
DNA anyone?

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/state/content/local_news/epaper/2009/06/16/0616dna.html

can someone tell me how to link this properly...but for right now, just copy and paste....sorry.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 8:14:45 AM EST
[Last Edit: 6/17/2009 8:15:03 AM EST by M4StuGots]
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 8:55:53 AM EST
One of the rare times I agree with the ACLU -
The shift is an overstep of government, objected Howard Simon, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida. At a minimum, he argued, DNA samples should be destroyed once someone is found not guilty or charges are dismissed.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 9:08:51 AM EST
So how long will it be till the DNA samples at childbirth come in to effect?
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 9:32:35 AM EST
you mean it isn't already?
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 9:40:35 AM EST
I read this yesterday. I started to think about it though. When you are booked they take your finger prints, guilty or not. That practice has stood up in court as constitutional hasn't it? What is the diff with DNA? Still bothers me though
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 11:12:10 AM EST
i got no problem with this since it would only apply to felons, who in my opinion, when they decided to commit said felony, they decided to put them selves through added scrutiny in the community as well.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 11:24:35 AM EST
Originally Posted By Dogue:
One of the rare times I agree with the ACLU -
The shift is an overstep of government, objected Howard Simon, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida. At a minimum, he argued, DNA samples should be destroyed once someone is found not guilty or charges are dismissed.


I don't trust them to "delete" the info when you're found not guilty either. It's hard enough for the government to keep track of unimportant paperwork much less something like this.



Originally Posted By mercdank:
i got no problem with this since it would only apply to felons, who in my opinion, when they decided to commit said felony, they decided to put them selves through added scrutiny in the community as well.


Article says it applies to anyone arrested and not even charged so not only felons will be in there.


Link Posted: 6/17/2009 12:55:12 PM EST
[Last Edit: 6/17/2009 12:55:51 PM EST by Reorx]
< Warning - SLIPPERY SLOPE - Warning >

Bad idea!
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 1:27:08 PM EST

Originally Posted By Hendricks5150:
So how long will it be till the DNA samples at childbirth come in to effect?

No, you're not thinking BIG enough. How much longer before they require each felon to be chipped with and RFID chip, then each petty criminal. Once this is working wonderfully some bright eyed Democratic Asshat will propose that all Children are chipped at birth so we can track them. "It's for their own good"

Think BIG, there is no end to the all seeing eye of our benevolent overlords.

Link Posted: 6/17/2009 1:50:41 PM EST
[Last Edit: 6/17/2009 1:51:22 PM EST by mercdank]
Originally Posted By bearclaw:
Originally Posted By mercdank:
i got no problem with this since it would only apply to felons, who in my opinion, when they decided to commit said felony, they decided to put them selves through added scrutiny in the community as well.


Article says it applies to anyone arrested and not even charged so not only felons will be in there.




correct, it says it would apply to all of those arrested in connection with a felony, and all juveniles arrested. the article also states that currently the judge can order dna samples from any criminal, so why not the ones that will be criminals, ie those arrested in connection with a felony. i think they are also going for juveniles arrested, as there is a correlation of juvenile arrests, and future felonies. the article also says that the person can request their dna be destroyed if they are found to be inocent, or have the charges dropped.

once again, a felony is pretty much the biggest deal if you get arrested. felonies encompass murder, rape and arsen, certainly not "small" crimes. if you decide to commit a felony, then in my eyes, you have also decided to be subject to additional scrutiny and laws applicable only to you and your fellow felons.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 7:06:08 PM EST
Originally Posted By mercdank:
Originally Posted By bearclaw:
Originally Posted By mercdank:
i got no problem with this since it would only apply to felons, who in my opinion, when they decided to commit said felony, they decided to put them selves through added scrutiny in the community as well.


Article says it applies to anyone arrested and not even charged so not only felons will be in there.




correct, it says it would apply to all of those arrested in connection with a felony, and all juveniles arrested. the article also states that currently the judge can order dna samples from any criminal, so why not the ones that will be criminals, ie those arrested in connection with a felony. i think they are also going for juveniles arrested, as there is a correlation of juvenile arrests, and future felonies. the article also says that the person can request their dna be destroyed if they are found to be inocent, or have the charges dropped.

once again, a felony is pretty much the biggest deal if you get arrested. felonies encompass murder, rape and arsen, certainly not "small" crimes. if you decide to commit a felony, then in my eyes, you have also decided to be subject to additional scrutiny and laws applicable only to you and your fellow felons.


I would never argue with this. The problem is what happens when you get falsely accused of the crime. Then you have to "request" your rights be given back? wtf is that shit. If i don't commit a crime I shouldn't have to ask for my rights back. In fact they should have never been taken in the first place.

Even so, I'm always of the frame of mind that if you give the .gov an inch they will take a mile. And with the way things are going these days probably more than one mile.

Link Posted: 6/17/2009 7:23:49 PM EST
Originally Posted By bearclaw:
Originally Posted By mercdank:
Originally Posted By bearclaw:
Originally Posted By mercdank:
i got no problem with this since it would only apply to felons, who in my opinion, when they decided to commit said felony, they decided to put them selves through added scrutiny in the community as well.


Article says it applies to anyone arrested and not even charged so not only felons will be in there.




correct, it says it would apply to all of those arrested in connection with a felony, and all juveniles arrested. the article also states that currently the judge can order dna samples from any criminal, so why not the ones that will be criminals, ie those arrested in connection with a felony. i think they are also going for juveniles arrested, as there is a correlation of juvenile arrests, and future felonies. the article also says that the person can request their dna be destroyed if they are found to be inocent, or have the charges dropped.

once again, a felony is pretty much the biggest deal if you get arrested. felonies encompass murder, rape and arsen, certainly not "small" crimes. if you decide to commit a felony, then in my eyes, you have also decided to be subject to additional scrutiny and laws applicable only to you and your fellow felons.


I would never argue with this. The problem is what happens when you get falsely accused of the crime. Then you have to "request" your rights be given back? wtf is that shit. If i don't commit a crime I shouldn't have to ask for my rights back. In fact they should have never been taken in the first place.

Even so, I'm always of the frame of mind that if you give the .gov an inch they will take a mile. And with the way things are going these days probably more than one mile.



yea that would be my main issue with this, and i agree about overwhelming government intrusion.
Top Top