Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Federal Agencies To Collect Genetic Info

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the like-collecting-stamps-only-rude dept.

Privacy 428

protagoras writes "According to a bill approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee, suspects arrested or detained by federal authorities may have their DNA forcibly collected for permanent storage in a central database. The bill is supported by the White House as well, but has not yet gone to the floor for a vote. Current law permits this only for those convicted of a crime. So even though completely innocent, should the Feds decide to detain you for any reason, your genetic data will grace their database beside that from murders, terrorists, and other miscreants." From the article: "The provision, co-sponsored by Kyl and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), does not require the government to automatically remove the DNA data of people who are never convicted. Instead, those arrested or detained would have to petition to have their information removed from the database after their cases were resolved. Privacy advocates are especially concerned about possible abuses such as profiling based on genetic characteristics."

cancel ×

428 comments

FRISTAGE POSTAGE IS MINE GNAA J00 (-1, Offtopic)

dementedd12 (916978) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646417)

GNAA pledges aid to Katrina victims
GNAA pledges aid to Katrina victims
Associated Press, September 11 2005

In an early-morning press conference, reclusive GNAA president timecop declared that the Gay Nigger Association of America will contribute to hurricane Katrina disaster relief efforts. He issued a statement describing the efforts being undertaken to rush relief to New Orleans' former residents, many of whom are black, gay, or both. "My heart tears at the sight of so many flooded niggers", timecop said.

The GNAA is contributing a currently-unknown quantity of sperm, intended to prevent starvation and malnutrition. The sperm is to be delivered this Monday to shelters across the nation. "We are having a non-stop wankathon. I believe we can do this, I believe in my niggas. We will not fail to feed NOLA's hungry refugees." Many have reporters present at the conference questioned the nutritional value of the semen being collected, eliciting angry stares and lip-licking from their host. timecop did not directly answer the questions, saying "Who the hell are you? I don't see you vigorously beating off to save the niggers!"

The next item on the list was free wireless internet spanning the Southern Louisiana region, allowing access to GNAA's Lastmeasure [nimp.org] online service. Lastmeasure is provided free of charge. It is widely touted as "better than FEMA" in the charitable relief field. Lastmeasure surpasses FEMA's disaster aid service by being accessible to any graphical browser on any operating system [slashdot.org] . Lastmeasure will be the only website available, as all other http requests will be redirected. This measure is intended to minimize use of GNAA.net wireless for other than disaster-relief LM. The conference ended with an emotional outburst from GNAA president timecop, crying out, "so many dead, rotting black shits".



About GNAA:
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.

Are you GAY [klerck.org] ?
Are you a NIGGER [mugshots.org] ?
Are you a GAY NIGGER [gay-sex-access.com] ?

If you answered "Yes" to all of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America and the World! You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today!

Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!
  • First, you have to obtain a copy of GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE [imdb.com] and watch it. You can download the movie [idge.net] (~130mb) using BitTorrent.
  • Second, you need to succeed in posting a GNAA First Post [wikipedia.org] on slashdot.org [slashdot.org] , a popular "news for trolls" website.
  • Third, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on irc.gnaa.us, and apply for membership.
Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today! Upon submitting your application, you will be required to submit links to your successful First Post, and you will be tested on your knowledge of GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE.

If you are having trouble locating #GNAA, the official GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is NiggerNET, and you can connect to irc.gnaa.us as our official server. Follow this link [irc] if you are using an irc client such as mIRC.

If you have mod points and would like to support GNAA, please moderate this post up.

.________________________________________________.
| ______________________________________._a,____ | Press contact:
| _______a_._______a_______aj#0s_____aWY!400.___ | Gary Niger
| __ad#7!!*P____a.d#0a____#!-_#0i___.#!__W#0#___ | gary_niger@gnaa.us [mailto]
| _j#'_.00#,___4#dP_"#,__j#,__0#Wi___*00P!_"#L,_ | GNAA Corporate Headquarters
| _"#ga#9!01___"#01__40,_"4Lj#!_4#g_________"01_ | 143 Rolloffle Avenue
| ________"#,___*@`__-N#____`___-!^_____________ | Tarzana, California 91356
| _________#1__________?________________________ |
| _________j1___________________________________ | All other inquiries:
| ____a,___jk_GAY_NIGGER_ASSOCIATION_OF_AMERICA_ | Enid Al-Punjabi
| ____!4yaa#l___________________________________ | enid_al_punjabi@gnaa.us [mailto]
| ______-"!^____________________________________ | GNAA World Headquarters
` _______________________________________________' 160-0023 Japan Tokyo-to Shinjuku-ku Nishi-Shinjuku 3-20-2

Copyright (c) 2003-2005 Gay Nigger Association of America [www.gnaa.us]

Fuck you, Slashdot! (-1, Troll)

zecg (521666) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646422)

I just clicked on this story and got the "Nothing to see here. Move along." comment on the page. Will someone think of the paranoid?

At it again (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646423)

Republicans at it again, always touting "smaller government" while doing the exact opposite...

pathetic...

Cheers,
J

Re:At it again (5, Insightful)

jonfelder (669529) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646547)

The current government is -not- Republican. Just so you know, I'm not either.

They are neo-cons. Republican's are traditionally small government, and pro states rights. The current administration is anything but. There are many true republicans out there that dislike the current government just as much as liberals do.

Re:At it again (1)

cybpunks3 (612218) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646573)

It's for small government if it has anything to do with helping the disadvantaged. They have to get dragged kicking and screaming into it (tsunami, katrina aid, for instance, privatizing social security).

Re:At it again (1)

laffer1 (701823) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646653)

I'm only 26, but generally agree with the traditional Republican ideas. One might label me as a moderate conservative. I'll keep voting for democrats until the republicans wake up.

Re:At it again (2, Insightful)

Schemat1c (464768) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646666)

Republican's are traditionally small government, and pro states rights.

Yes just look at the first Republican president, Lincoln. He was all for small central government and states rights.

Oh, wait...

Re:At it again (5, Informative)

van der Rohe (460708) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646578)

Parent is correct in principle, of course. But it's important to understand that the Republican notions of "smaller government" and "freedom" only have to do with government's relationship with BUSINESS, not with individuals.

"Smaller government" means "less market intervention" and "freedom" only refers to freedom to earn.

Someone's going to mark this as flamebait or troll, but it's not a value judgement. It's just the way things are. In fact, once this is clear you realize that there's nothing contradictory or hypocritical about the Right's message at all.

Re:At it again (1)

Dutchmaan (442553) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646685)

" 'Smaller government' means 'less market intervention' and 'freedom' only refers to freedom to earn.

It's just the way things are. In fact, once this is clear you realize that there's nothing contradictory or hypocritical about the Right's message at all." ...provided everyone defines freedom and smaller government in the way you just did.

Most do NOT define it that way.

Ha! (5, Funny)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646424)

To all those ostrich-human hybrids who have ever said, "But ... this is America, it could never happen here!" I say, "PHOOEY!"

Gattaca, here we come.

Re:Ha! (1)

fryke (265814) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646539)

I'm glad _you_ mention it. Articles like this one should include "US" before words like "Senate", even though to the author it might seem clear...

Re:Ha! (2, Insightful)

Cally (10873) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646641)

This will probably be modded flamebait, and it will probably deserve it here - which is unfortunate, because it's intended seriously.

This is addressed to those Americans who defend the right to bear arms partly on the grounds that it gives the people the right to rise up and overthrow the government if it becomes oppressive or undemocratic. (I recognise there are other arguments, but I'm thinking specifically of this one.) Now it seems to be (a self-confessed liberal - capital L - Brit) that for many of those people who defend guns with the "ultimate governmental veto" point, a government DNA database would seem to be an almost biblically prophetic sign (or do I mean 'Sign'?) that the time to rise up has come, because (as you said) most people who have thought "surely it could never happen here!" is asked - yet here you are... (I can only imagine what NRA types would have said if this had happened under Clinton!)

So, which is it? A harmless but essential means to defend America against the terrorist hordes, or the beginning of the black helicopter putsch to introduce a Liberal secret police rounding up meat eaters and shooting in the streets anyone who goes to church?

They might say "Ah, but we still have a democratic means to express our opposition to this measure", but (a) anyone can see there's no such thing, and (b) Bush IS a Republican, ferchrisakes!

Just curious...

This is especially troubling... (5, Insightful)

null etc. (524767) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646429)

...because of the FBI's recently-announced task force to crack down on "deviant" porn on the Internet. Should you be detained or arrested for such a crime, even if not found guilty, your DNA would be tied on-file to the sexual preferences which caused you to get busted.

What are you going to do about it? (4, Insightful)

CyricZ (887944) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646460)

I'm not sure if you're an American or not, but if you are, what are you planning to do about this? I mean, at least you're aware of this situation now. That's probably a step ahead of most Americans. But are there any Americans who are actually willing to do something serious about this? And by "serious" I mean not just posting messages of displeasure on various Internet forums or blogs.

Re:What are you going to do about it? (2, Insightful)

in7ane (678796) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646496)

Like a good American he will fully comply with his government's new policy. I mean who would oppose such a measure? By cataloguing those who may be interested in pornography you create a database of potential future offenders - and would you oppose a measure that could protect so many children in the future?

Re:What are you going to do about it? (1)

Associate (317603) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646501)

What would you suggest we do?

Re:What are you going to do about it? (2, Insightful)

sgant (178166) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646600)

Exactly...what do we do? We vote, but as I voted in the last election, the guy I was voting against still won. OK...now what? I've written to both my congressmen and senators about topics like the National ID and things like this...they write back to me with a form letter stating that they too are concerned, yet they never say one way or another if they're for or against anything. Which leads us back to the voting booth which has lead no where in the past.

So what would you suggest we do? Take up arms against our government? The only arms I have are the ones attached to my shoulders and possibly a pointed stick. And sorry, I don't want to be detained down in Guantanamo Bay.

Re:What are you going to do about it? (1)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646569)

Well, I'm not going to commit a Federal crime for starters. Then IF it does pass, eventually it will go to the Supreme Court and if it's Unconstitutional, it'll get outlawed.

Anti-conservative Republicans. (5, Insightful)

CyricZ (887944) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646434)

Indeed, this further shows how anti-conservative the Republican Party has become. True conservatives would never support legislation that intrudes so terribly into the lives of innocent citizens. It's against the very ideals that a real conservative holds.

Re:Anti-conservative Republicans. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646456)

That's ok this will get overturned. Religious conservatives do not believe in the existance of DNA, or microbes, for that matter.

Re:Anti-conservative Republicans. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646470)

There's no such thing as a "real conservative". There is no document or standard that describes what a conservative is. You can argue that someone is a conservative, and you can claim to be a conservative, but there is no single definition.

Re:Anti-conservative Republicans. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646478)

Re:Anti-conservative Republicans. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646508)

yea, if it's on the internet, it has to be true.

this too is on the internet, you're a fucking moron.

it must be true too.

Re:Anti-conservative Republicans. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646615)

I know YOU are, but what am I?

Re:Anti-conservative Republicans. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646642)

Arguing on the Internet is like running in the special olympics.. you might win... but you're still retarded.

Re:Anti-conservative Republicans. (1)

mc6809e (214243) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646481)

Indeed, this further shows how anti-conservative the Republican Party has become. True conservatives would never support legislation that intrudes so terribly into the lives of innocent citizens. It's against the very ideals that a real conservative holds.


Yep, but that didn't get many Republicans elected, did it?


Face it. "The people" want the largest possible central government to solve all their problems.


Just reflect on the cries that went up after Katrina. The people want a dictator to come in and take care of them and all their problems. You can't have a small, unintrusive government like that.

Re:Anti-conservative Republicans. (2, Insightful)

Pinefresh (866806) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646483)

I think youre confusing conservativism with libertarianism. Seems to me that all consevatives in recent memory (except maybe Ragan) have been about restricting rights.

Re:Anti-conservative Republicans. (1)

queef_latina (847562) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646515)

See, now I think you libertarians are a bunch of morons(you're all incredibly stupid people), but I commend you for not being hypocrites.

Re:Anti-conservative Republicans. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646488)

Are you saying that the Republican party is a bunch of hypocrites!?

That's a shocker! Have they ever been anything other then a bunch of overbearing power trippers?

But honestly, are there any Conservative republicans left? Anyone who actually believes in smaller government and keeping the military as a defensive force?

Re:Anti-conservative Republicans. (2, Interesting)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646511)

Indeed. I actually got to speak to a real conservative once ... right before he was dragged off by the FBI's Deviant Control Division to have his his DNA sample taken. Apparently, someone had left a picture of a nude Michael Jackson on his hard drive.

Seriously, in the past decade or so I've been seeing less and less difference between the two parties. Oh sure ... they make lip noises about "being the Party of the People" or "wanting to lower taxes because we're the real Party of the People" but all I see is increased government spending, more bureacracy, more waste, and more taxes.

I mean, when you have a Republican cowboy oil-baron for a President, and Democratic leadership that is just as heavily monied, how can we honestly expect our government to "feel our pain" when gas reaches three bucks a gallon. Just watching the Elder George Bush's reaction to a grocery-store laser checkout scanner showed me just how out-of-touch they are with the rest of us.

Re:Anti-conservative Republicans. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646684)

Before he was elected, Clinton hadn't driven a car in decades. When he was president, he drive a secret service car around on the whitehouse lawn and crashed it.

Al gore doesn't know how to use an ATM.

Re:I'm inclined ot believe (1)

symbolic (11752) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646634)


It's not the Republicans to blame for this crap, it's the neo-cons masquerading as Republicans. Check out http://www.newamericancentury.org/ [newamericancentury.org] . That should give people some idea as to why things are happening the way they are.

Excellent (3, Funny)

Solr_Flare (844465) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646442)

Now, if arrested I can attempt a wild, crazed escape and know that if I am killed in the attempt my clone can stand trial for me instead.

Quite a development, really.... (4, Insightful)

Malor (3658) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646444)

It's like bar codes on your forehead, without the pesky tattoo.

This is the ultimate surveillance tool. It trumps all other forms of ID.

Re:Quite a development, really.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646656)

huh

just like finger prints are a form of surveillance right? or a mug shot will tell them where you are at any given moment?

moron

That will help in rounding up the Jews (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646450)


Imagine if Hitler had this capability, now substitute the word "Jews" for any other ethnic minority/oppressed/handicapped people and see how chilling a database like this could be used, but we all know that Hitler and his ideas was just a one off and those kinds of ideas couldnt happen here right ?, right ?

where exactly is America heading ?

Re:That will help in rounding up the Jews (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646675)

<Strong Bad voice>
Godwin'ed!
</Strong Bad voice>

Call me paranoid but... (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646455)

I would suspect the government already has large percentages of the population's DNA/prints on file, they just can't legally use them for prosecution.
If this is the case, a law such as this being passed might give law-enforcement agencies a precedent to be able to access this larger hypothetical already-collected database of information straight away.

Its eugenics back again... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646462)

Check out this URL for some of the history of genetic and racial classification in America. This data is the health insurance companies wet dream. They want to be able to deny coverage based on your genetis background. So, for example, if you had an uncle who got cancer, or a parent who had a predisposition to a disease, you could become unemployable..

See http://waragainsttheweak.com/articles.php [waragainsttheweak.com] , especially the article in Reform Judaism about this 'new kind of selection'.

This is the real reason behind the big push for medical IT, and its vert scary.

For profit health insurance and medical IT are not compatible..

Hitler had a portrait of Henry Ford on his office (0, Offtopic)

ultraworld (822170) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646512)

wall.. Bush's grandfather, Prescott Bush, was Hitler's American financier.. (or 'Hitler's Angel' as the NY Daily Tribune put it) and the US was uber-friendly with many Nazis after WWII. It does need to be added that this was in our fight against also-*quite*-evil Stalin and the then hyperrepressive USSR, but this cozy relationship with fascists and fascism survives to this day, as evidenced by the ongoing 'ethnic outreach' efforts of the GOP, which targets many former fascists and their communities that have emigrated to the US, as natural allies of the American far right.

Wrong (1)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646623)

The New York Herald-Tribune referred to the German industrialist, Fritz Thyssen, as "Hitler's Angel" and mentioned Bush only as an employee of the investment banking firm Thyssen used in the USA.

Shortly after George W. Bush's election as U.S. president, Canadian bloggers, apparently affiliated with perennial presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche, began a determined effort to circulate reports that Prescott Bush himself had been known as "Hitler's Angel".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prescott_Bush#Nazi_ti es [wikipedia.org]

Makes sense. (4, Insightful)

RyanFenton (230700) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646463)

Since they're "detaining" people without charging them with crimes now on a fairly large scale, in cases where they don't want to be forced to show their evidence in a public setting, they'd need this loophole to track people who they feel they unfairly have to release for what they feel are political reasons. Seems a consistant, if highly corrupted logic.

Reminds me of the British legal tradition of jailing people without any right to a speedy trial. Seems like we created a constitution in order to get away from that kind of thing.

Ryan Fenton

Re:Makes sense. (2, Insightful)

timeOday (582209) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646510)

A Consti-what?

Really, I have almost given up on the idea that words on paper have meaning. Today's govt. is so vastly different from even 100 years ago, all with scarcely any alteration to the document that is supposedly its charter.

SLASHDOT SUCKS ASS (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646464)

SLASHDOT SUCKS ASS slashdot sucks ass
SLASHDOT SUCKS ASS slashdot sucks ass SLASHDOT SUCKS ASS
slashdot sucks ass SLASHDOT SUCKS ASS

Great (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646465)

If 1,000,000 different agencies each want a 100 mg sample from me, what does that leave me with?

I love how the title (0, Troll)

Pinefresh (866806) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646466)

implies this is GOING to happen and is about to start. Then in immediately contradicted by the little snippet.

Good job Republicans (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646479)

All this crap in the name of what, fucking Jesus Christ? Take your damn unAmerican ideals elsewhere.

Re:Good job Republicans (1)

east coast (590680) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646538)

Jesus Christ

Yeah, Jesus told them to do it.

Stop being an idiot. It makes it hard to take anything you say seriously.

Re:Good job Republicans (0, Flamebait)

hachete (473378) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646657)

Actually, given that the current WH crew is a bunch of god-botherers, they prolly think that jesus did tell them to do it. Punish all you sinners.

Re:Good job Republicans (2)

queef_latina (847562) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646562)

Republicans are, at their rotting insectoid core, third-world trash.

This reads like a plot from a comicbook (2, Interesting)

Pao|o (92817) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646482)

Wasn't this a storyarc on the Uncanny X-Men comics back in the 80s? All we need now are mutants.

Vote (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646498)

We should get to vote on things like this.

Re:Vote (0, Flamebait)

van der Rohe (460708) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646678)

Vote? You don't get to vote for much more than your student council president. Everything more important is decided outside of the electoral process entirely.

There SHOULD be a flip side (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646500)

What about DNA typing all govenrment officials / employees, and also taping them all the time, with mandatory release of the tapes after 10-20 years ?

have your cake and eat it too? (2, Insightful)

bani (467531) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646504)

if the feds really want the right to forcibly collect dna evidence, then the feds should be forcibly prohibited from blocking admission of defense dna evidence in trials.

Re:have your cake and eat it too? (2, Insightful)

nwbvt (768631) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646541)

"then the feds should be forcibly prohibited from blocking admission of defense dna evidence in trials."

Yes they should. When has a federal court ever upheld a request from the federal goverment to block DNA evidence from the defense?

So? (3, Interesting)

nwbvt (768631) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646505)

How is this different from them collecting fingerprints?

Oh yeah, genetics is a scary new technology whose very mention raises irrational fears.

Sure, this database could be used to intrude on someone's medical conditions. But then again, if some agent of the federal government were inclined to violate the rules governing the use of the database, what would be stopping him from following you around and collecting a sample of your saliva from a soda can or blood from a bandage? Unless you are like the guy from Gattaca and make sure you clean everything you touch...

Re:So? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646537)

what would be stopping him from following you around and collecting a sample of your saliva from a soda can or blood from a bandage

It wouldn't be admissible in court if obtained in that manner. That's the difference.

Re:So? (1)

Associate (317603) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646550)

Fingerprints have never been proven to be unique to every human. It's just assumed that they are. DNA, short of twins, IS unique to every human.

Re:So? (2, Informative)

nwbvt (768631) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646610)

No, its perfectly possible (though highly unlikely) for two non-twins to have DNA that tests to be identical (remember we are not comparing the stands nucleotide to nucleotide). Just like with fingerprints.

Anyways, all you are saying is that it is a more accurate test. Why should that make it worse?

Re:So? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646616)

And yet you'll be hard pressed to find any fact or expert witness to testify that DNA found at a crime seen belonged to the defendent. Yes, they'll testify to the odds that it is the defendent, but never to it belonging to them. Have you ever testified as an expert or fact witness? This is one of those tricks lawyers use to show the jury that the witness is a complete fuckup.

I could tell you more about the joys of testifying to fingerprints, but something tells me you wouldn't care as it doesn't agree with your uninformed understanding of identification analysis.

Re:So? (2, Interesting)

littlerubberfeet (453565) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646599)

The difference is that finger prints are much like a serial number. The identify and differentiate who a person is amongst billions. DNA, on the other hand serves as much, much more then just a serial-number like ID. It is a means to a vast, vast amount of medical information, information on one's family, even one's future children.

Sure, they could collect samples from a saliva sample or band-aid, but this is a congressional-approved, legal database, and having a database allows comprehensive DNA testing easily, cheaply and without public supervision. If they started collecting huge numbers of soda cans, bandages, hars and ass-lint, people would start to notice.

Re:So? (3, Interesting)

necro81 (917438) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646659)

I am not saying that the notion of a government DNA database doesn't scare the crap out of me, but the "So?" poster has a decent point. If I am picked up on suspicion of any crime, or ask for a gun permit, or any number of other licenses, I must submit my fingerprints - I don't need to be convicted of a crime first. Those fingerprint records are entered into a national database along with with terrorists, murderers, and petty criminals.

Let us not forget that, if someone is picked up for some petty crime and has their fingerprints run through the database, they may very well be identified as someone involved in another crime. Now consider that there's a serial rapist out there - a national DNA database would go a long way towards nabbing that guy for every crime he's committed.

Now that I've played the devil's advocate and must now wash my hands vigorously, I have a counterpoint. The key difference here is that DNA is not merely a fingerprint, but contains a tremendous amount of information about you. One cannot tell, from looking at a fingerprint, the owner's gender, age, race, etc. Let's set aside the fact that all that information appears alongside the fingerprint record. When one has a DNA sample of someone, one can run it screen it for a number of things beyond just physical characteristics: it can pinpoint you as someone that has a predisposition to some disease, reveal race and ethnic details beyond one's appearance, could even show you have a predisposition to rage and mental illness.

That notion - that the government could have a searchable database of anyone ever brought in to the station with such information - really scares me. About the only person I think would be worse off having such a database would be my insurance company - but that's a different topic.

Its not about the DNA (3, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646661)

The issue is not that they are collecting DNA, its that they are retaining *any* identifying information of people that are innocent of any crime.

DNA is just the most concrete form of ID we know of.

Genetic Profiling (1)

Bent Mind (853241) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646506)

So even though completely innocent, should the Feds decide to detain you for any reason, your genetic data will grace their database

I have to ask, why the farce of being investigated? Why not just force every resident of the US to submit DNA material. They could build a complete genetic profile, find paterens that match criminal behavior, and arrest people based on the probability of criminal behavior. Given the value placed on DNA evidence, it should be easy to convince people that this is in their best interests.

What if it were universal? (1)

saterdaies (842986) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646509)

What if, rather than just people detained, it were all people either at birth or when they get a license or something? Would that make it better? Then we aren't discriminating against innocent people who just happened to have some bad luck and rather just creating a database that can identify all Americans.

Would this be a little better? Quell all your complaints? Be worse? No difference? I'm curious.

Meh (4, Informative)

lxt (724570) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646517)

Here in Britain, police already have powers to retain DNA of those who are innocent - there was a court case in the Lords a few years ago, where the police had retained the DNA of an 11 year boy accused (and found innocent) of a crime, which led to a 4-1 ruling in favour of the police keeping the samples. For example, sometimes in Britain the police will have a mass dna swab session, where they test say a large number of males in a town. The police can then keep the samples, and use them to link anyone who went on to commit a crime.

Yes, you could refuse to give a sample, but if the police really wanted to obtain your DNA samples they'd just obtain a search warrant for your house, and attempt to collect it from hair/nails etc.

Re:Meh (2, Funny)

Wilson_6500 (896824) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646673)

Yes, you could refuse to give a sample, but if the police really wanted to obtain your DNA samples they'd just obtain a search warrant for your house, and attempt to collect it from hair/nails etc.

Whew. That's creepy. Here come the police: they're searching your house, not for duck porn or drugs or guns, but for your SKIN. That would seriously make me feel like some creepy stalker, if I were a cop and had to visit some guy's house just to swab his toilet seat for a sample of his ass.

So wait... (1)

Pichu0102 (916292) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646522)

...If DNA is required and placed next to high level criminals, does this mean that if you get detained, that you will lose the same rights that people such as convicted terrorists lose even if you're not convicted?

Re:So wait... (1)

yuriismaster (776296) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646631)

Perhaps you haven't heard of Guantanamo Bay?

Your rights are already given up once you get detained as an 'enemy combatant'. You may as well already be dead.

God Bless Corporamerica.

Next step... (1)

dark-br (473115) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646647)

... Guantanamo Bay for everybody! Uhu!

The reason why they want this (4, Funny)

Richthofen80 (412488) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646523)

So, the reason Federal Law Enforcement Agencies want this is because often times crime scences contain a fair amount of DNA evidence. They can quickly eliminate suspects if they know their DNA does not match.

I'm surprised at all the uproar over this. If you are arrested, but later cleared, your fingerprints are still kept. When is the last time your local police station returned your fingerprint card?

I have been arrested and later the charges were dropped. I didn't get my fingerprints back, and I'm pretty sure they could be in a municipal or state database. Fingerprints, like DNA, are unique. Its essentially the same thing.

I found the best way to avoid false incrimination is to not leave my DNA at crime scenes.

Re:The reason why they want this (4, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646613)

"I found the best way to avoid false incrimination is to not leave my DNA at crime scenes."

So what will you do when a criminal _does_ leave your DNA at a crime scene?

Re:The reason why they want this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646617)

I found the best way to avoid false incrimination is to not leave my DNA at crime scenes.

So you wear a clean-room bunny suit when you go out to commit crimes? That's got to be a dead giveaway.

Re:The reason why they want this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646629)

The problem, and the reason everyone is in an uproar is that unlike a fingerprint DNA tells you about the person which can lead to: discrimination, racial or medical profiling. If you had a certian level of something in your system which is usually associated with violence that could be used as evidence(circumstancial or otherwise).

DNA is not simply a more accurate way to show identity. It is the fabric of your vary being. If a corperation got hold of a database like this avertising would be hell. Imagine the scene in Minority Report(TM), where the ads were yelling out his name. This database can and would be misused in the case of privacy loss and possible discrimination.

This type of database could show medical condtions you may not want to be known.

There are lots of problems. This is a system that should definetly NOT be implemented.

Re:They can also quickly ADD suspects. (1)

symbolic (11752) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646664)


Case closed.

1ST: "Haven't done anything, nothing to fear" POST (1)

smchris (464899) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646529)

Well, you know _somebody's_ going to say it.

Not surprising. Heck, I'm not so sure this is even a Neocon issue. I could have seen Clinton and Gore signing on. It's that exhilarating smell of fascism in its springtime everywhere.

Re:1ST: "Haven't done anything, nothing to fear" P (1)

Pichu0102 (916292) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646592)

Yeah, but say that you were at a crime scene before a crime occured, and you were once arrested for something you didn't do also.
If they find your DNA there, they'll be able to arrest you and the chances of being convicted for another crime you didn't do are high, seeing as they already have your DNA, it'll be easier to convict you. I mean, I'd say a jury would rule against someone who was arrested before, even if they were let free.

Typical crap government (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646530)

The Kyl measure was added to a bill to strengthen penalties for violent acts against women and was approved without a roll-call vote. McCurdy said she hopes that negotiations among Judiciary Committee members result in changes before the legislation is voted on by the Senate.

This shit just flies under the radar. Half these asses don't know what is on the bills they pass. Easy to sneak this garbage in with all the crap bills they throw around.

I'm normally in favor of biology, but... (1)

rdwald (831442) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646532)

...if this passes the House and the Senate, we're all really, really screwed. Let's hope this is one of those things that the Senate Judiciary Comittee does to scare us all so that their real plans don't look so evil.

...not that that's good either.

Next step (4, Interesting)

greg_barton (5551) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646535)

The next step is to redefine "detention."

When the TSA pulls you over for a search at airport security, is that a detention? When a police officer stops you for speeding, and leaving before he's done writing you a ticket would be illegal, is that a detention? When authorities stop you in the subway because you fit s certain profile, is that a detention?

Maybe not now, but it's the next step.

Big deal (1)

raoul666 (870362) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646546)

It's nothing new, people. If you've been arrested, they can get your DNA without much trouble. I'm not wearing my tinfoil hat or anything. The handcuffs were on too tight? Great, you left behind a load of skin cells. Took a sip of that coffee the nice officer gave you? Well, it's their cup, and guess what, you left saliva on it.

If they want it, and you're in their jail cell, they've already got it.

This isn't effective (1)

electrosoccertux (874415) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646549)

Most of the terrorists we get now are one shot deals...they pop up out of nowhere without warning. How is this going to protect against them?

Honestly I'm rather a right winged republican, but things like this coupled with seeing the majority of the repub's voting for the PATRIOT act extentio......making me think stuff over again. At least they are dealing with the social security issue in an EFFECTIVE way.

I wouldn't mind this at all! (1)

hvatum (592775) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646555)

... As long as Natalie Portman is the one obtaining the "sample." :-) :-)

passed in California (2, Interesting)

ggwood (70369) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646557)

In my home state, our electorate voted in favor of our state proposition 69 by about 62%. Prop 69 allowed the (mandatory) collection of DNA samples from accused felons. Note: these people have not been convicted. There was some debate as to how easy it would be (and, since we voted for it, how easy it now is) to have such DNA information expunged from the database if one were to be found innocent. As I recall, there would be a hearing before a judge. This is kind of crazy, right? Why isn't it automatic?

Federal DNA DataBanking (2, Funny)

eskayp (597995) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646558)

This is an excellent neoconservative method for King George
to remedy that pesky budget problem he has created
since his appointment by the Supreme Court.
Insurance companies will pay a fortune for this data.
Marketing and sales of the DNA data can be subcontracted
to a deserving large donor/contractor like Halliburton.
Large data-centric corporations can bid on the data
with off-the-books donations to the Republican Party.
If only we could identify and track the DNA coding for
liberalism, populist tendencies, honesty,and fiscal
responsibility, we could sterilize, imprison, and/or
eliminate that treasonous segment of the population.

Why on earth is this Under "Your Rights Online"?!? (2, Insightful)

stevo3232 (794498) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646563)

Why is this under "your rights online"? It may have to do with people's rights (not mine, I'm Canadian) but definitly not online rights. Sure, the data is stored in a database, but that database isn't necessarily online (and a database with that sort of info I'd expect would not be online). Editors sure need to make sure their heads are on straight...

Enter Private Industry (3, Funny)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646570)

From the governments point of view.

Step 1. Detain suspect.
Step 2. Obtain DNA.
Step 3. Sell DNA to private companies for various research
Step 4. Profit!!

From private companies point of view.

Step 1. Obtain ultra cheap source of DNA.
Step 2. Patent private citizens DNA sequences.
Step 3. Profit!!

From Joe averages point of view.

Step 1. Get arrested, detained and have DNA sample taken.
Step 2. Be released without charge.
Step 3. Have results of own DNA sold back to self.
Step 4. ???
Step 5. Profit.

God bless capitalizm. So much better than all that capitalism rubbish with its silly respect for people and all that rubbish.

Seems like a good idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646575)

At least crimes can be solved much more quickly as suspects with matching dna on a scene can be rounded up. I'd vote for it.

Pennies (4, Funny)

kevin_conaway (585204) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646591)

Bah, anyone knows that if you've ever handled a penny, the governments got your DNA. Why do you think they keep them in circulation?

Re:Pennies (1)

Wilson_6500 (896824) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646690)

That's why I melt down all the pennies people give me and mint my own commemorative collector's coins (not valid tender anywhere). If the government wants my DNA, they can buy my coins like everyone else.

The real question is: (1, Troll)

dark-br (473115) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646605)

How many more rights would you give up in name of a so called security?

Fear is the new opium.

All we need now is.... (1)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646619)

nano-bio-tech that can alter DNA markers, or leave some sort of trace in your body to make your DNA "fingerprint" be different... and viola, we have almost every really bad scifi movies coming to fruition!

I wouldn't surprise me if they can already tell North Americans by their DNA because years of eating fast food has altered DNA....

Jesus Hates Freedom. (1, Flamebait)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646624)

Oh how easy it is to destroy America through religious zealotry.

Simply 'detained'? (2, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646627)

If the records are not purged after you are released without being charged ( or charges are dismissed at court ) then there is some major privacy issues that I'm sure the ACLU could get its teeth into.

Next it will be 'everyone that is born, just in case'.

Big Brother.... (1)

tubapro12 (896596) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646630)

Big Brother thinks you are wrong, Big Brother will find you...

Talk about excessive, but I'm not surprised, it was going to happen one day.

oh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13646635)

you mean like in the uk ? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3018504.stm [bbc.co.uk]

just one more reason to be glad i'm not american (2, Funny)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646651)

america really is on a slow boat to hell. lets take a look at the stats shall we? 1. the world hates you 2. your government is setting up gestapo style agencies 3. you RE ELECTED BUSH

Action Item (1)

jcnnghm (538570) | more than 8 years ago | (#13646658)

Does anyone know if this is a monitored action item anywhere yet? If it's not, it should be.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...