Prosecutors Want Your Bodily Essence, DNA at Arrest?

[BehindBlueI's]

Who is giving you this information? I don't claim to be an expert on how forensic labs identify DNA samples but from what I do know you are underinformed or have been lied to about the techniques, equipment, and technology involved.

Not sure who brought up sequencing but it isn't necessary to make determinations about things like genetic disease. Some of the STR loci that FBI requires for an entry into their DNA database can be used to identify genetic disease, and it would be trivial for the same technicians to use the same sample and the same equipment to look at other STRs.

I can only refer you to the links and video I've already put up. Believe what you like.

 

[Fargo]

How about collect DNA at a certain felony conviction level?

We already do, but that isn't enough of a "tool" for some.

 

[halfmileharry]

We already do, but that isn't enough of a "tool" for some.

"Give 'em an inch...."

 

[Old Dog]

From a simple technical perspective, DNA contains much more useful information about a person than a fingerprint. So much more than I'm opposed to the State collecting it at all, ever. This is partly because we all have a right to be secure in our persons against unreasonable search and seizure, and the overwhelming majority of information DNA can provide is likely not relevant in any given State investigation. It is also because even if the State could be trusted to extract only the relevant information, it is incapable of securing it or any that it doesn't extract, from 3rd parties.

With your fingerprint I can uniquely identify whether or not you touched something with your fingers. With your DNA I can know roughly that, and where your family tree originated, what genetic diseases your have, and your susceptibility to a range of other diseases. I can predict your response to several genetic therapies as well as a number of other medical treatments. Very soon I'll likely be able to know quite a lot about your mental health. In the future I'll probably be able to make a genetic copy of you rather quickly, as opposed to now when I can just make copies of some of your body parts.

If if I get some combination of your kids' DNA, your parents', your siblings', or your spouse's some more possibilities open up for knowing quote a bit.

I have to agree with Stickfight--NO DNA collection for these very reasons. Too many people just do not realize the insecurity of state held data. Also the state sells information to 3rd parties, and there is no limit to what they are willing to sell. Also 3rd. parties are currently used to manage State required info (BMV, fingerprints, hunting license, etc.) so the precedence is already established.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Correct me if I'm mistaken... Don't you have to give at least one fingerprint to receive your driver's license?

Granted, it's not mandatory to have a DL, and I don't know if that is required for a state ID or not, but..... how many of us don't have either one?

And of course, if you want to vote, you have to have one, though you don't HAVE to vote...



Good thing such things are not mandatory for the general public.

Blessings,
Bill

I don't think this is correct.

Error mine. When I got my first DL, I was in Texas, which has had mandatory printing for DLs since 1969. I knew I remembered that. I thought I recalled being printed again when I got my Indiana license, but obviously, I was mistaken.

Thank you for the correction!

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Alamo]

Error mine. When I got my first DL, I was in Texas, which has had mandatory printing for DLs since 1969. I knew I remembered that. I thought I recalled being printed again when I got my Indiana license, but obviously, I was mistaken.

Thank you for the correction!

Blessings,
Bill

If Texas fingerprinted for DLs in 1969, it must have gone away a long time ago. I got my first Texas DL in 1998 and no fingerprints then or at renewal. No current requirement for it either.

 

[Bill of Rights]

If Texas fingerprinted for DLs in 1969, it must have gone away a long time ago. I got my first Texas DL in 1998 and no fingerprints then or at renewal. No current requirement for it either.

My first DL was in the 80s. I think I renewed 2 or 3 times.

 

[Alamo]

My first DL was in the 80s. I think I renewed 2 or 3 times.

Looks like my error -- "the internet" says Texas does grab a single print. I sure don't remember that, seems like I would have noticed. Also, a few years ago the DPS started taking full 10-finger prints, but the Leg quashed this, statutorily restricting the DPS to collecting only a single print and requiring DPS to destroy the 10-print records it had. Huh. Missed that completely.

 

[z96Cobra]

If you want my bodily essence you'll have to let me take you to dinner & a movie first... or something...