Wheeee…….. down the slippery slope we go!
The Justice Department is completing rules to allow the collection of DNA from most people arrested or detained by federal authorities, a vast expansion of DNA gathering that will include hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants, by far the largest group affected.
The new forensic DNA sampling was authorized by Congress in a little-noticed amendment to a January 2006 renewal of the Violence Against Women Act, which provides protections and assistance for victims of sexual crimes. The amendment permits DNA collecting from anyone under criminal arrest by federal authorities, and also from illegal immigrants detained by federal agents.
The goal, justice officials said, is to make the practice of DNA sampling as routine as fingerprinting for anyone detained by federal agents, including illegal immigrants. Until now, federal authorities have taken DNA samples only from convicted felons.
Taking a DNA sample at such an early point of contact with the system implies movement in a direction for which we may not be ready.
Nobody objects these days to having their fingerprints taken. In fact, we’ve long-since passed the “arrest” threshold for recording them. Polimom, for instance, has never been detained by federal authorities, but my fingerprints are in the FBI’s database, just like anybody else who served in the military.
Fingerprints are merely a part of our identification process. But DNA isn’t a fingerprint, is it?
Prior to now, it’s been thought of as a tool for definitively placing someone at a crime, or for exoneration. So why would the government be collecting DNA so widely? Is the technology advanced so far that we can, in fact, add it as a standard datapoint in the personal identification process?
If it isn’t, or if we’re not prepared — all of us — to add our DNA to the database, then collecting samples from people still considered “innocent” under our Constitution requires a bit more thought.
* * * * *
Added: This has to be the worst reason I’ve ever seen to support something:
You know this is a good thing to do not just because it’s common sense but because all the right people are hysterical.
There are reasons to assemble a DNA database — but that ain’t one of them.
h/t – memeorandum.
Actually, a ‘good’ DNA sample is every bit as valid an identifier as a fingerprint. The real problem is, as you somewhat alluded to, why they are doing this – in other words, what they want the samples for. That is far scarier: at first pass, the intent is to build up a massive database they can run samples recovered at crime scenes through, in an attempt to improve their “solve” rate. Certainly a noble idea, right? And, who in their right mind would be opposed to solving murders, rapes, and child molestations? But, once they have this database, there will be temptations to see what else they can do with it. For example, can we use DNA profiles to determine who might be susceptible to certain medical conditions, then sell that data to advertisers? Or, if we can determine that certain DNA markers indicate a predisposition to certain anti-social attributes (for example, burglary or spousal abuse or opposition to government policies) we can “flag” those individuals for special treatment (e.g. detention during certain holidays, or when the President is in town.)
Given the government’s single-minded focus on data-mining as a means of catching maybe-terrorists, this is certainly something to keep one awake at night.
~EdT.
And, it looks like the commenters over at TMV are even helping make my point.
~EdT.
I agree with Ed in that DNA evidence that’s collected and managed properly is an excellent identifier of individuals. As most you know, being a Houstonian, there are problems with this aspect of the technology.
This is all the more true because the interpretation of DNA evidence is a specialized function. Ask lay persons to verify that a fingerprint matches and you’ll get fairly good results. Not so with DNA processing. This creates a potential single point of failure, as we’ve seen with the HPD lab.
But even if DNA is handled correctly there are huge ethical problems with the collection of samples from innocent people. Marry these DNA samples with a moderately sized database and you’ve got a national registration system that even a government agency could implement without difficulty. These systems, of course, live forever.
In my opinion, the risk to civilians from such a database’s existence, even in the hands of an elected government, outweighs its possible benefits in terms of increased security.