a database for identification purposes to assist in resolving crimes in a timely manner? Fingerprints have been used for identifications purposes for almost a century. With our currect technology, don't you think a DNA database would be more appropriate? I just watched a progam wherein an Offender with a long Misdemeanor history had raped and killed an 80 year old woman. The only forensic evidence was his semen. It took over 6 years to arrest the Offender. What's your opinion?
2006-11-18 16:44:55 · 8 answers · asked by COOKIE 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
It's a very appealing idea, as long as it doesn't get out of hand. There should be safeguards, and you did say, "convicted." That's one. We'd have to fight to keep it from being used indiscriminately, like every traffic stop or if you litter. These are summary offenses, usually dealt with by issuing a ticket. But the size of our population and ease of moving around almost makes this proposal inevitable.
2006-11-18 16:55:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Creating a new law based on the most extreme situation is not always a good idea. Besides, do you have any idea how many people have misdos on their records. It's a lot. So for every person who gets caught with a joint and gets a $100 fine (this is a misdo in California, but doesn't require jail time), you want them to submit their DNA.
You should also note that DNA is not fallible. I just read an article in Discover (or was it Scientific American) that stated that the DNA database isn't really all that reliable, but the public sure thinks it is. Moreover, even if you have a good match, the question is whether the DNA found is in the right context in the crime scene. One should also note that this CSI junk you see on TV is totally fictional. I don't think they have "scientists" working for the vast majority of police departments. I see an expanded DNA database as a recipe for conviction of the wrongfully accused.
2006-11-18 16:52:19 · answer #2 · answered by Erik B 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO, that was one person, misdemeanor does not give the right ot take dna, next you will be wanting chips implanted. To much T.V I think, is what i think.Hell we have given half our rights away already, played on by your fears. suburbia white, that is a fright.
I AM
2006-11-18 16:57:34 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, on the same bill to require all newborn citizens submit a DNA sample while their RF ID is being implanted
2006-11-18 16:49:00 · answer #4 · answered by Mike 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Hell no! Some misdameaners are running two stop signs in a row. Stop the fascist destruction of our bill of rights and the ever intrusive dismanteling of our constitution! Enough is enough!
2006-11-18 16:56:17 · answer #5 · answered by freek4sno 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
fingerprints are not taken for misdemaenor offences, only felonies, as for DNA, I could see for violent crimes.
2006-11-18 16:55:48 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes definatly to get the correct person
2006-11-18 16:53:11 · answer #7 · answered by honeysuckle 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No...b/c including misdomeaners would include everyone that was arrested....that would cost a fortune...and who do you think will pay for that?
2006-11-18 16:50:46 · answer #8 · answered by kissmybum 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋