US Set on Expansion of Security DNA Collection 162
An anonymous reader dropped us a link to this New York Times article about a 'vast expansion' of DNA sampling here in the US. A little-noticed rider to the January 2006 renewal of the 'Violence Against Women Act' allows government agencies to collect DNA samples from any individual arrested by federal authorities, and from every illegal immigrant held for any length of time by US agents. The goal is to make DNA collection as routine a part of detainment as fingerprinting and photography. Privacy experts and immigrant rights groups are decrying this initiative already. Many are also skeptical of lab throughput, as FBI analysts indicate this may increase intake by as much as a million samples per year. There is already a backlog of 150,000 samples waiting to be entered into the agency's database.
This has been done for a while over here. (Score:5, Informative)
Of course, the innocent have nothing to fear from this. We Love Big Blair.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
the library and school meals, and this is done without
the consent of (or even consultation with) parents.
Let the demise of freedom in the UK be a salutory warning
to others around the world. It is only the inactivity of
my stupid stupid countrymen that has allowed this nighmare
to arise.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:This has been done for a while over here. (Score:4, Informative)
I suppose you're referring to this [yorkpress.co.uk], which affected eleven schools in a single city, and like I posted elsewhere [reddit.com]:
So no, our government doesn't fingerprint children in schools, unless you count one city where it was tried and rejected by the public and politicians alike.
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you. Yes, I'm primarily interested in the UK. A little bit of research on that story turns up more information [theregister.co.uk] and a followup [theregister.co.uk]. It looks like MPs hassled the government [theregister.co.uk], it was determined that parental consent is necessary [theregister.co.uk], and the fingerprinters are backing off [theregister.co.uk], or at least making parents aware of the issue.
Following it up with a better source, Greg Mulholland MP [theyworkforyou.com] seems to be the MP that is pressing the matter the most [parliament.uk] and he's not dropping it [parliament.uk]. Seems to be a good bloke all around - against ID c
Re: (Score:2)
Our lunch cards are still just chip based, not fingerprint-based.
Re: (Score:2)
Familial Hits (Score:2)
dna is cool (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:dna is cool (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:dna is cool (Score:5, Insightful)
DNA gives them a device with which they can point at you and say: "He did it, his DNA was found on the scene". How are you going to disprove that? Perhaps you visited in the past, perhaps not at all. Maybe the wind blew a hair in.
Now suddenly, everyone with his or her DNA in the database is a suspect. Irrespective of the likelihood that you were in the area, otherwise engaged, or involved with the subject of the crime. Your status has been instantly degraded from "free citizen" to "potential suspect in ALL crimes".
Moreover, everyone with his or her DNA NOT in the database is much less a suspect. Think about that for a while.
A DNA test is a "closest match" test, and is only right about 99% of the time. People forget that, juries especially.
B.
Mod Parent Up (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
DNA evidence is like any tool: you can use it the right way, and you can use it the wrong way. Conv
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
True. But there still is context to consider even in these cases. All you have to do is look at the Duke rape case to see what race, rape, and DNA did or did not do. "Workable applications" means absolutely nothing to prosecutors these days; the people collecting this database currently and historically are there to rip apart civil rights, not enforce them.
Further, juries do not tend to deliberate all that intellig
Re: (Score:2)
AFAIK, there are several levels of DNA profiling possible, the simplest, quickest and cheapest provide only a one in a few thousand chance of a duplication. The most expensive, complex and slowest can provide a one in several million chance of a false positive.
All of these tests are better than 99% certain because the labs will do more than just let a "closest match" search convict a criminal. They will provide a "decode" of the v
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
But again, there may not be enough material on, say, a single hair follicle, to do all these tests... which is why using it on blood and semen samples is much more accurate.
But I agree with grandparent - while a DNA sample database isn't nec
Re: (Score:2)
Suppose we have got a test which will give wrong answer in one out of 10 millions tests and we need to solve a homocide case. If we start with a number of suspects (say 10 gang associate deal recently with the victim) and use DNA test to nail down the right guy, the test is pretty robust (as long as the lab does not cross-contaminate/ mis-label the sampl
You're right, but... (Score:2)
Basically, just do your best to stay out of the database if you don't want to be a suspect in every unsolved crime for the rest of your life. Good luck though... It won't be long until they start taking fourth graders on a field trip to the police station, where they get fingerprinted and swabbed "for fun". They already do it for fingerprints, so why not DNA too?
You're innocent until they're not sure wh
Re:dna is cool (Score:5, Insightful)
Collecting extensive information about people and a "hand over your papers" style government, are more akin to fascist states and dictatorships.
Re: (Score:2)
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner.
You are damn right the people don't trust democracy, and they shouldn't either.
Enough with the damn wolves and lambs quote! (Score:2)
Capitalism is two wolves haggling over how much a lamb costs.
Democracy is three lambs voting to make eating lamb illegal.
Historically, that's a little closer to the truth. People who hate democracy and want to replace it with "market based solutions" scare the crap out of me. I'll be damned if I'm going to let the people with the most money make all the rules.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When all the world is owned, those who do not own the means of production become the slaves of those who do, as otherwise
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps you should do some more reading on the subject then, like the article Soft Surveillance: Mandatory Voluntarism and the Collection of Personal Data [dissentmagazine.org] by Gary T. Marx [mit.edu]. Here's a good quote:
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I think that in a free nation, any citizen not convicted of a crime who is confronted by a government agent trying to remove any part of his or her flesh, ought to be encouraged to break said agent's arm.
The sovereignty of the state ends at my skin. No medical procedure, no matter how trivial, can legitimately be forced on an free innocent adult.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Eventually most people will be in the database whether they like it or not. Already anyone in the military has DNA recorded. Some government jobs as well.
Re: (Score:2)
2. You could make the decision to keep a DNA sample without the government passing a law that required it.
3. There's a snowball's chance in hell of getting mutilated that badly.
4. Being recognizable after death (or others being recognizable to me) is not important enough to me to get me to hand over DNA samples to the government.
Re: (Score:2)
They sacrifice our freedom in the name of "safety" (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:They sacrifice our freedom in the name of "safe (Score:2)
In America; screw missing papers.
In Soviet Russia, missing papers screw YOU!
Re:They sacrifice our freedom in the name of "safe (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
B.
Re:They sacrifice our freedom in the name of "safe (Score:2)
Yeah, but they had ideals about how they thought individuals and society should act. That's why one of my philosophy books on that era was called "The Age of Ideology". America slipped into pragmatism a long time ago: "If it produces results, do it." Lately we've gone way Postmodern and if getting medieval on your ass feels good even if critics in the know who have tortured or been tortured tell you it doesn't work we'll do it anyway for the short-
Re:They sacrifice our freedom in the name of "safe (Score:2)
scary quote from the article (Score:5, Insightful)
brr.
I can see where this is heading. "Robbers don't just rob, they also murder." --> "Beggers don't just beg, they also murder." --> "People spitting on the ground don't just spit on the ground, they also murder."
Basically what she's saying is that all criminals are inherently equal, and potential murderers, and thus deserve to be treated in the worst way.
Now pray, do tell me that that is not a scary viewpoint.
B.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Another frightening stereotype that's drawn up to justify these measures seems to be the idea that illegal immigrants are generally sexual predators:
Re:scary quote from the article (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
You have a valid point there ... facts are facts.
However, what is implied from the facts, and the actions that are taken based on them, is what's under discussion. My main worry is that the statistics are being used to lump all illegal immigrants into the same category; potential violent criminals. They are definitely being targeted specifically. Okay, so racism is perhaps a bit harsh, but it certainly is discrimination.
Re:scary quote from the article (Score:5, Insightful)
"The number of sexual assaults committed by illegal immigrants is astonishing."
The implication is that illegal immigrants commit a huge number of sexual assaults; worded that way it sounds as though they commit a disproportionate number, perhaps even the majority of them.
Yet there are no figures given to back up that statement, and "astonishing" is a subjective (and emotive) term. It's FUD at the very least, if not outright racism.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
There is a difference between "13% of people here illegally have been convicted of a crime in their home country," and "13% of people who are here illegally and who make enough trouble or slip up enough to get caught been convicted of a crime in their home country".
There's also a huge leap between "have a criminal record" and "have commited sexual assault".
The Kyl quote seems to skip
Re:scary quote from the article (Score:5, Interesting)
It amazes me how effectively the Mexicans have been turned into the new enemy in the US.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How is it racism? I didn't see him mention race anywhere, it can only be racism if you believe illegal immigrants belong to a particular race. The foundation of your accusation of racsim underlies your own racism.
Re: (Score:2)
brr.
I can see where this is heading. "Robbers don't just rob, they also murder." --> "Beggers don't just beg, they also murder." --> "People spitting on the ground don't just spit on the ground, they also murder."
Basically what she's saying is that all criminals are inherently equal, and potential murderers, and thus deserve to be treated in the worst way.
Now pray, do tell me that that is not a scary viewp
Re: (Score:2)
What people did in their past, is their business. If they want to tell me, that's fine, it'll make me understand them better. If they do not want to tell me, equally as fine. They suffered for their sins, either mentally, physically or both.
That does not mean I unconditionally trust people.
B.
Re: (Score:2)
What people did in their past, is their business. If they want to tell me, that's fine, it'll make me understand them better. If they do not want to tell me, equally as fine. They suffered for their sins, either mentally, physically or both.
That does not mean I unconditionally trust people.
I'm an information junky. If the public wants to know about only a certain class of criminal, I ask why not all former criminals? I have kids, but generally don't care
We have two evil trends converging here (Score:5, Insightful)
The second is the "buy now!" corporation state behavior that has every purchase, every click, every commercial fast-forwarded through monitored and recorded and analyzed, while MAFIAA-DRM "loss prevention" and RFID tags in your underwear close the few remaining loopholes.
Between the politicians greed for limitless power and the corporations limitless greed for wealth, the average citizen doesn't stand a chance. Like the frog in the pot of water, they keep raising the temperature and we keep not noticing. When I read these stories I think: "By God, if there was anywhere to go, I would".
private dna registrars (Score:5, Interesting)
What will you do when goverment decides private firms (haliburton, or one of your private health insurance corporations) are the best entities to run these things. Outsourcing, anyone?
How do you absolutely guarantee that the DNA database wont be used for employee application selection, or for deciding your premium on your health insurance?
I'll just mention that Sweden has a (for medical use only - but that's currently under discussion) DNA database of all in sweden newborns since 1975 (if you havent specifically asked for non-participation), called the PKU database. It's still ongoing (my little dude was just last week registred - he's a couple of weeks)
Certain "high profile" crimes have been resulted in that the use of this database is under discussion - and the debate is for what uses this database could/should be used.
My hopes are that never, ever will this database be sent to the US/Feds/CIA (as flight iternaries are), and also that private corporation use is prohibited. Think of the society where your employer knows all about your DNA... (go see GATTACA).
Re: (Score:2)
Certain "high profile" crimes have been resulted in that the use of this database is under discussion - and the debate is for what uses this database could/should be used.
My hopes are that ne
Re: (Score:2)
Im sorry to point out that you should focus more on the "something you are" aspect of the discussion - as the DNA you get from birth is what you have to deal with, and you are currently unable to do anything about it.
So basically you miss the point where someone who is ok, but with the genes (trait) for becoming an alcoholic could be ban
Sad (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm a European, I love to travel, and I've recently decided I'm not going to travel to the USA until things improve there. How sad is that?
How quickly things can change...
Re: (Score:1)
Truely sad (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Huh ? Well, of course we don't enjoy first amendment protections, considering that the constitution of the US doesn't apply here. However, similar terms can be found in the constitutions/equivalents thereof of many European countries ("Europe" isn't a country).
Then pick a country (Score:3, Insightful)
My point was that the original post lamented about how horrible things were getting in the US while ignoring the fact that many personal rights are more restricted in the majority of European countries.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I'll prefer breasts and profanity over Holocaust denials and swastikas any day.
"Freedom from bodily harm" (Score:2)
So how exactly is that enforced/guaranteed by a government? Did they arrest everyone who called for the death of the Mohammed cartoonists? (I believe calling for the beheading of someone would certainly be considered a threat to bodily harm.)
How about all of those household injuries and car accidents?
Re: (Score:2)
We've got some wonferful history, some magnificent castles and the like. But the weather's frequently damp and drizzly, it's absurdly expensive to travel anywhere (petrol costs about 85p/litre), most of our major towns and cities are essentially gridlocked for much of the day and don't have a public transport system to speak of. To top the lot, the present government has spent the last 9 years dreaming up scheme after scheme, each more ridiculous than the last. Most of them i
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I guess it is different visiting somewhere than b
Re: (Score:2)
Looks like the tourism industry is noticing.
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/TRAVEL/01/31/internati onal.travel/index.html [cnn.com]
What are "riders" doing in 2006? (Score:5, Insightful)
Riders is a total loophole in the democracy that's possible to drive a dictatorship through. Given your use of power internationally (both diplomatic and violent power), we would prefer if you had a better functioning democracy. Do you have any estimated time-to-fix? Even a time-to-start-working-on-a-fix would be helpful.
Thanks!
Eivind.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Isn't that one of the things that makes Americans so proud and superior to the rest of the world ?
Apart from your second amendment and such, you still have the right to vote (and to run for office - that's equally important) over there.
Re: (Score:2)
Effectively, you CAN campaign for reforms of this, and any campaign done by a foreigner will be ineffective.
And I already just did the only thing that I can do: Appeal to the people of the US to help turn it into a proper democracy, which they can do by being OUTRAGED at the existence of riders and unread laws. Scream about it. Tell your neighbour. Tell
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This has nothing to do with
Re:What are "riders" doing in 2006? (Score:4, Insightful)
If you want to draw a line down the middle and say "only your side of the house is on fire" then by all means have at it. You could pitch in too if you wanted though. Simply by voting in your own country (lead by example) and educating everyone you come in contact with online about the dangers we face from giving up our privacy and freedoms. I'm sure pissing in our faces and asking "how's the weather" isn't the right way to go about it though.
Re:What are "riders" doing in 2006? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not just that your side of the house is on fire, you're also making everyone else pour gas on their side.
Do you think my country can do anything about the ever-increasing loads of crap that I get shoved down my throat everytime I enter the US ? I'm still putting up with it because of family over there, but once they revoke the visa waiver program ("security experts" are in favor of this measure, or so I've heard), I'm going to call it quits.
My wife doesn't get fingerprinted or otherwise harassed when we return from the US.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know what country you're from but if you're big enough to make some of our businesses feel the hurt from lack of tourism then simply not coming here and letting us know why could be enough to get something positive happening in congress. As long as our constitution is still standing there is a chance we can undo all these knee-jerk anti-terrorism laws and poli
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What are "riders" doing in 2006? (Score:4, Insightful)
However, at this point the major problem I see isn't local: It is global, and it is that the US is slipping with fear. This brings the major democratic problems of the US to the foreground, and "riders" is one of these. The other primary problems are disenfranchment of the voters, IMO primarily due to indirect effects of the election system (winner-takes-all giving a two-party system instead of the plurality of parties typical when using a more proportional system of voting) and the use of paid advertising for candidates, thus giving the impression that only those with money can win (which may or may not be right, there's reasonable economic arguments that it isn't.)
Anyway, since you did not like my way of attempting to humourously highlight these problems: How would you highlight them? How would you point out, in this forum, that the US has large democratic issues and hopefully get some of the people living there riled up about these issues enough that they start to do something about them? How would you get you yourself riled up enough that you start to actively work to get the US to have a better democracy?
In all friendliness and with the hope of a better tomorrow, Eivind.
S.O.S. (Score:2)
Voting appears ineffective. Total system corruption appears inevitable. Please send another copy of manual of Democracy, ours has been misplaced. Please instruct on how to reboot the system.
Help!
- U.S. Citizens.
Bahumbug (Score:2, Insightful)
How many criminals wear gloves? That's how many criminals will potentially carry a bottle of somebody's cultured DNA.
Illegal immigrant rights (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Ok so I pull you over for having a tail light out, your committing a crime, do we take your DNA and test it on the spot? you dont have anything to hide right so let me go back to my patrol car and grab my kit, your not on file you say? well in the eyes of the law you just commited a crime, ill be taking a sample now thank you
Re: (Score:2)
No, in the eyes of the law, you are a suspect. You aren't a criminal until you either plead guilty or are found guilty in court.
Re: (Score:2)
Fingerprints are bad enough (Score:3, Insightful)
But DNA? They say they are collecting it for identification, but it's practically your personal biological blueprint. Once enough of the population has their DNA recorded, you can expect to see all kinds of non-identification uses and novel abuses. Expect to see the data sold to companies that do background checks, so that potential employers can check for the "alcohol abuse gene" or the "predisposed to violent rage" gene, or subtle forms of racial discrimination like the gene that causes sickle-cell anemia.
Who knows what the future holds? Privacy is like Pandora's Box - once you give it away, you can never get it back. Anyone clinging to the, "If you haven't done anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about" meme just lacks imagination.
Re: (Score:2)
Damn, like I need two more strokes against me...
I thought this was done already (Score:1)
Ooohh, be carful of little Bobby, better give us a sample of his DNA to hold on record forever.
keep your siblings out of trouble too (Score:3, Insightful)
Finally- remember that you don't have to be arrested for them to get your DNA. You may be a model citizen, but have a family member who, eg, because he is at an anti-war rally, gets arrested and gets his DNA taken, and then the government essentially has your DNA too.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
6 degrees (Score:4, Insightful)
I hate to invoke the ol' Slippery Slope argument, but it sure seems like a classic case where the government is poring grease on the slope as we speak.
Tom Caudron
http://tom.digitalelite.com/ [digitalelite.com]
This is just another part of the camel.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, but that camel's nose is under the tent - you already let him in. You (the public) has begged and begged for a nanny state that watches over you and caters to your every whim. Got a problem with your neighbor? Let the courts decide. Your crop failed this year? Beg the government for disaster assistance. Hurricane wiped out your below-sea-level home? It *must* be the government's fault for not protecting/saving you, and then complain because the government handouts are insufficient or slow.
It goes back to the line from "A man for all seasons" - (IIRC) would you tear down the law to get at the devil? Of course? Then what will you hide behind when he comes back at you with his terrible power? If you demand the government keep you safe, employed, fed, housed, and happy, you're a hypocrite if you don't realize that logically this requires extensive surveillance. Kind of like the parent of a toddler.
Sorry, but we're getting exactly what we've spent at least the last 50 years begging for - government uber alles. Is it such a shock that the government (in order to protect us from stubbing our toe) wants to begin tracking where we are, what we do, and whom we do it with?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:This is just another part of the camel.... (Score:4, Insightful)
While my State legislators may be a pack of bastards, they're an accountable pack of bastards who have to live where they plan on shitting. The damage they can do is limited to one state.
Guess what, if my legislatures fuck up my state, I can leave it. Within an hour I can be living in any of three other states. It would suck, but I could commute until finding a job closer to my new home.
The reason I despise intrusive legislation at the Federal level is because leaving the country is not something that can be quickly done, compared to moving 100 miles.
As for calling people hypocrites, I fail to see how demanding X, Y, Z logically leads to extensive surveillance. You left out that part of your argument.
hospitals are already collecting dna (Score:2, Interesting)
Reinvent Gattaca (Score:2)
This could work similarly, if one was, say,
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. You get stuck in jail, because you're guilty, and you're easy to convict. The DNA proves it.
At the best, they're forced to pay you off,
You might want to know that not all US states have laws about the compensation of people who have been imprisoned mistakenly. So, even on the chance that you do get released from prison, there might not be a big cash prize waiting for you out
Predicted 10 years ago (Score:2)
another brick in the wall of safety. (Score:2, Interesting)
This battle's been lost long ago (Score:2)
Right when the original fingerprinting became routine.
DNA (the genetic fingerprinting) is no different... It helps law-enforcers and is not any more invasive, than the long-accepted practices.
Whether we should've accepted the original collecting (and archiving) fingerprinting of suspects (rather than convicts) is another story. Maybe, those cleared by the trial should have their fingerprints (and any collected DNA-samples) destroyed. Or, maybe, there is nothing wrong with police having them — how
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
* Yes, a catalog of finger prints seems rather bening.
* Yes, there is a difference between a finger print catalog and a DNA catalog.....
DNA can show if you are a carrier for a variety of genetically based health problems, and as has been mentioned already, the chances are that this information would most likely be managed if not also obtained by the private sector at the beh
That's Nothing (Score:4, Informative)
Then the card is placed on file at a "secret location" where security includes a "locked gate", and kept until they're 21 1/2, although I don't think the program has been active that long, so no actual destruction of records has taken place.
Luckily, when my child was born, I was able to get them to certify that they had destroyed the blood sample, but they really resisted it.
I tell people about this and they think I'm a nut, but I don't want my kid's DNA in a government warehouse for mass importation into some database.
rape kits (Score:2)
I am sure other crimes will be the same...so what does this DNA database do? I think its primary function will be data mining. Maybe not at first, but eventually through something like the freedom of information act or som
Re: (Score:2)
Of course not ! If they did, they cannot prevent the evil terrorists from entering the US under false identities. The information is basically kept forever (decades), to be able to check your fingerprints against the ones taken from you when you entered earlier.