Nija
12-24-2003, 09:46 AM
taken from /.
Calif. DNA plan (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20031223/pl_nm/crime_database_dc_1)
Calif. DNA Plan Draws Ire of Civil Libertarians
Mon Dec 22, 9:10 PM ET
Add Politics to My Yahoo!
By Gina Keating
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - California law enforcement officials are backing a proposed ballot measure that would give them authority to operate the largest DNA database in the nation -- one that opponents said on Monday is prohibitively expensive and a potential threat to privacy rights.
The measure, championed by a Newport Beach, California, man whose brother and sister-in-law were murdered in 1980, would expand the range of crimes for which felons must submit DNA samples to the state's database to include nonviolent offenders, juveniles and uncharged suspects.
The proposal has inflamed civil libertarians, who contend it flouts constitutional protections against unreasonable search and seizure, and has drawn the ire of public defenders who say it overburdens the cash-strapped state.
"Should we allow the government to engage in widespread searches?" Francisco Lobaco, the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites)'s legislative director, said.
"It's the same concept as engaging in a non-consensual search of everybody leaving a mall because somebody has stolen something ... and putting that (information) in a database," Lobaco said.
Los Angeles County Deputy Public Defender Jennifer Friedman, a DNA expert, said the costs of gathering and testing DNA combined with the huge volume of tests required by the proposed measure -- some 400,000 a year when it is fully implemented -- made it fiscally unsound.
The program would be funded through a $10 surcharge on misdemeanor bail forfeitures, and would generate an estimated $25 million per year. Friedman said the state is already unable to keep up with its mandate to test all violent felons.
"I suspect they are not going to be able to pay for the scope of this program from money from the court. This is going to be enormously expensive," Friedman said.
But Bruce Harrington, the lawyer-real estate developer who funded the initiative with $1.5 million of his own money, said the basic DNA test called for in his measure costs closer to $50 each than the $1,000 each described by opponents.
If voters approve the measure, it will allow California authorities to get DNA samples from everyone arrested or convicted on felony charges, as well as from misdemeanor sex offenders -- both adult and juvenile.
Harrington has obtained support from the state's district attorneys association and expects the measure to appear on the November 2004 ballot.
He dismissed the ACLU's concerns about invasion of privacy as "a straw man argument," pointing out that the measure has extensive protections that purge DNA information when a suspect or convict is exonerated.
"The issue of DNA testing is no different than taking fingerprints at arrest ... this is the same methodology and reasoning that the (U.S.) Supreme Court has supported," he said. "I would expect the ACLU would recognize that we can exonerate suspects and not let them clutter up the investigation of a ... crime."
The database could make a dramatic difference in helping police solve so-called "cold crimes," such as the 1980 murders of Harrington's brother and sister-in-law by a serial killer who has never been caught.
Police believe the killer, known as "The Original Nightstalker," murdered at least 10 people and raped more than 50 women across the state before his spree ended mysteriously in 1986.
"There have to be hundreds of people who were touched by this and have not been able to bring closure to this," Harrington said. "DNA is where we need to be in solving crimes ... and exonerating the innocent."
I personally don't like the idea of collecting DNA, for anyone.
here are some of the more interesting comments from /.'rs
2006 - Every baby born(for thier own saftey)
2008 - Every Person who commits a Crime (We HAVE to track them!)
2012 - Every Citizen (you have nothing to hide do you Comrade?)
Trust us, we're with the government.
Oh, it'll only be used for felonies.
Two years pass
Felonies, and extreme, non felonious cases.
Two years pass
Felonies, extreme non felonious cases, and lookin funny.
What's that? Why, of course, we'd never use your toll bridge fast-pass to log your comings and goings!
I'm sure there will be quite a few "big brother" privacy claims posted, but frankly I HOPE that this happens. I have no qualms what so ever.
Now, if California wanted to make the database for every single citizen, I would object. If it was for anyone convicted of anything (parking tickets included), I would object. But it's not...
It's FELLONS. These are not jaywalkers, they are murderers, rapists, duggies (dealers, trafficers, etc), and more. I don't mind this segment of the population losing a little bit of their rights, because they chose to give them up when they decided to commit a crime. I don't mind this just like I don't think felons should be allowed to have guns (I am otherwise very supportive of right to bear arms). They are FELLONS, we shouldn't be crying for them.
Now that said, there are bound to be false convictions, and this is the one caviat that I have. When a false conviction is found, that person's DNA needs to be removed from the database IMMEDIATLY and any convictions/etc based on the DNA that was collected because they were a fellon (fruit of the poisonous tree). But ONLY THAT DNA. If the person submitted their DNA during the investigation, that obviously gets to stay in the database, it's only DNA collected after they were convicted that should be "tossed" in such a case. If this part is held, I have no qualms what so ever.
Bring on the database.
Two sides
This story has two sides. DNA is a god send to those charged with finding criminals. It is almost impossible not to leave some dna at a crime scene even for pros and most crimes are not committed by pros. If the police had access to a database with everyones dna then a hell of a lot more crimes could be solved and a lot faster at a lesser cost and with less change of false arrests or the criminal committing another crime while police are investigating.
On the other hand is a huge privacy issue. While it is true that the innocent SHOULD have nothing to fear the sad fact is that this is not true. Nor can we assume that even if it is true now that it will remain true in the future. The germans had a registration of who had what religion in the 1930's. We all know how that ended. Can you be sure who is in charge of the US or any country proposing a similar scheme in 10 years? That is now 3 elections away.
I have little patience with people just concerned with their privacy. Most of them are just people who don't want to be caught should they ever decide to commit a crime. Guess what sherlock that is part of the reason for introducing such a thing. "Commmit a crime and we will find you" as opposed to now, "Commit a crime and maybe we will find you". The higher the chance of getting caught the more people will be deterred.
On the other hand I do have my doubts if such a system in future might not be abused. So on the one hand yes everyones dna logged will make life a lot harder for criminals. It will also make life a lot easier for anyone seeking to oppress non-criminals in the future. Or people we consider now to be innocent but who might be made to be guilty in the future.
The answer? I don't have one. Anyone who claims they have one are lying. Don't believe those who guarantee the safe use cause they can't. Don't believe the privacy people cause they are not now the victims of crime. The moment their child is murdered they will change their tune faster then a prisoner on his way to the chair.
yes... i'm trying to get people talking because i have nothing to do at work... :)
Plus i think this is very interesting
Calif. DNA plan (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20031223/pl_nm/crime_database_dc_1)
Calif. DNA Plan Draws Ire of Civil Libertarians
Mon Dec 22, 9:10 PM ET
Add Politics to My Yahoo!
By Gina Keating
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - California law enforcement officials are backing a proposed ballot measure that would give them authority to operate the largest DNA database in the nation -- one that opponents said on Monday is prohibitively expensive and a potential threat to privacy rights.
The measure, championed by a Newport Beach, California, man whose brother and sister-in-law were murdered in 1980, would expand the range of crimes for which felons must submit DNA samples to the state's database to include nonviolent offenders, juveniles and uncharged suspects.
The proposal has inflamed civil libertarians, who contend it flouts constitutional protections against unreasonable search and seizure, and has drawn the ire of public defenders who say it overburdens the cash-strapped state.
"Should we allow the government to engage in widespread searches?" Francisco Lobaco, the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites)'s legislative director, said.
"It's the same concept as engaging in a non-consensual search of everybody leaving a mall because somebody has stolen something ... and putting that (information) in a database," Lobaco said.
Los Angeles County Deputy Public Defender Jennifer Friedman, a DNA expert, said the costs of gathering and testing DNA combined with the huge volume of tests required by the proposed measure -- some 400,000 a year when it is fully implemented -- made it fiscally unsound.
The program would be funded through a $10 surcharge on misdemeanor bail forfeitures, and would generate an estimated $25 million per year. Friedman said the state is already unable to keep up with its mandate to test all violent felons.
"I suspect they are not going to be able to pay for the scope of this program from money from the court. This is going to be enormously expensive," Friedman said.
But Bruce Harrington, the lawyer-real estate developer who funded the initiative with $1.5 million of his own money, said the basic DNA test called for in his measure costs closer to $50 each than the $1,000 each described by opponents.
If voters approve the measure, it will allow California authorities to get DNA samples from everyone arrested or convicted on felony charges, as well as from misdemeanor sex offenders -- both adult and juvenile.
Harrington has obtained support from the state's district attorneys association and expects the measure to appear on the November 2004 ballot.
He dismissed the ACLU's concerns about invasion of privacy as "a straw man argument," pointing out that the measure has extensive protections that purge DNA information when a suspect or convict is exonerated.
"The issue of DNA testing is no different than taking fingerprints at arrest ... this is the same methodology and reasoning that the (U.S.) Supreme Court has supported," he said. "I would expect the ACLU would recognize that we can exonerate suspects and not let them clutter up the investigation of a ... crime."
The database could make a dramatic difference in helping police solve so-called "cold crimes," such as the 1980 murders of Harrington's brother and sister-in-law by a serial killer who has never been caught.
Police believe the killer, known as "The Original Nightstalker," murdered at least 10 people and raped more than 50 women across the state before his spree ended mysteriously in 1986.
"There have to be hundreds of people who were touched by this and have not been able to bring closure to this," Harrington said. "DNA is where we need to be in solving crimes ... and exonerating the innocent."
I personally don't like the idea of collecting DNA, for anyone.
here are some of the more interesting comments from /.'rs
2006 - Every baby born(for thier own saftey)
2008 - Every Person who commits a Crime (We HAVE to track them!)
2012 - Every Citizen (you have nothing to hide do you Comrade?)
Trust us, we're with the government.
Oh, it'll only be used for felonies.
Two years pass
Felonies, and extreme, non felonious cases.
Two years pass
Felonies, extreme non felonious cases, and lookin funny.
What's that? Why, of course, we'd never use your toll bridge fast-pass to log your comings and goings!
I'm sure there will be quite a few "big brother" privacy claims posted, but frankly I HOPE that this happens. I have no qualms what so ever.
Now, if California wanted to make the database for every single citizen, I would object. If it was for anyone convicted of anything (parking tickets included), I would object. But it's not...
It's FELLONS. These are not jaywalkers, they are murderers, rapists, duggies (dealers, trafficers, etc), and more. I don't mind this segment of the population losing a little bit of their rights, because they chose to give them up when they decided to commit a crime. I don't mind this just like I don't think felons should be allowed to have guns (I am otherwise very supportive of right to bear arms). They are FELLONS, we shouldn't be crying for them.
Now that said, there are bound to be false convictions, and this is the one caviat that I have. When a false conviction is found, that person's DNA needs to be removed from the database IMMEDIATLY and any convictions/etc based on the DNA that was collected because they were a fellon (fruit of the poisonous tree). But ONLY THAT DNA. If the person submitted their DNA during the investigation, that obviously gets to stay in the database, it's only DNA collected after they were convicted that should be "tossed" in such a case. If this part is held, I have no qualms what so ever.
Bring on the database.
Two sides
This story has two sides. DNA is a god send to those charged with finding criminals. It is almost impossible not to leave some dna at a crime scene even for pros and most crimes are not committed by pros. If the police had access to a database with everyones dna then a hell of a lot more crimes could be solved and a lot faster at a lesser cost and with less change of false arrests or the criminal committing another crime while police are investigating.
On the other hand is a huge privacy issue. While it is true that the innocent SHOULD have nothing to fear the sad fact is that this is not true. Nor can we assume that even if it is true now that it will remain true in the future. The germans had a registration of who had what religion in the 1930's. We all know how that ended. Can you be sure who is in charge of the US or any country proposing a similar scheme in 10 years? That is now 3 elections away.
I have little patience with people just concerned with their privacy. Most of them are just people who don't want to be caught should they ever decide to commit a crime. Guess what sherlock that is part of the reason for introducing such a thing. "Commmit a crime and we will find you" as opposed to now, "Commit a crime and maybe we will find you". The higher the chance of getting caught the more people will be deterred.
On the other hand I do have my doubts if such a system in future might not be abused. So on the one hand yes everyones dna logged will make life a lot harder for criminals. It will also make life a lot easier for anyone seeking to oppress non-criminals in the future. Or people we consider now to be innocent but who might be made to be guilty in the future.
The answer? I don't have one. Anyone who claims they have one are lying. Don't believe those who guarantee the safe use cause they can't. Don't believe the privacy people cause they are not now the victims of crime. The moment their child is murdered they will change their tune faster then a prisoner on his way to the chair.
yes... i'm trying to get people talking because i have nothing to do at work... :)
Plus i think this is very interesting