Digg Townhall Tonight!
Tune into the live Digg townhall tonight at 5:00pm PST/8:00pm EST.
Feds to collect DNA from every person they arrest
news.yahoo.com — WASHINGTON - The government plans to begin collecting DNA samples from anyone arrested by a federal law enforcement agency — a move intended to prevent violent crime but which also is raising concerns about the privacy of innocent people.
DonWigler- 1259 diggs
- digg it
- theNazz, on 04/17/2008, -13/+164I'll save them the time of swabbing my mouth by spitting on them.
- CarnivalOfDust, on 04/17/2008, -1/+22How long 'til that's a legitimate collection method? Take George out for a publicity tour somewhere, then:
"Good haul, chief, just leave us your jacket and we'll do the rest."- aspec, on 04/17/2008, -4/+2It's already a legitimate collection method. Don't you watch CSI Miami?
- Dred, on 04/17/2008, -0/+5no cause that one sucks, CSI Las Vegas is the best!!!
- CaptainAmerica1, on 04/17/2008, -3/+4We already fingerprint everyone arrested -- how is collecting DNA samples (which is just a high-tech fingerprint) any different?
- boycottadhok, on 04/17/2008, -0/+6you are right, "low-tech fingerprints" also have family history and genetic conditions
- Jlaugh, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2So what happens when they find all about your genetic history from that? Say like wether or not your ancestors where Semitic or African or Tutsi? Maybe your related to a famous criminal. What if the government decides you need to be sterilized for the good of society based on your family medical condition?
- Dewhead, on 04/17/2008, -1/+3I bet the poor souls that have spent time in prison for crimes they did not committ would be happy to have everyone's DNA on file.
- Jlaugh, on 04/17/2008, -0/+5I doubt they'd be helped out at all, the prisons are loathe to let people use the DNA defense after the fact. They typically through every roadblock they can in the way of convicts who claim they're innocent.
- dbs1221, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2There is a big difference between having/using someone's DNA in the manner used in criminal investigations most often, electrophoresis which allows one to compare DNA samples, and a full mapping of the genome (all 3.2 billion base pairs) which would take up much more space and cost hundreds of dollars per person. Only the latter could be used to determine ones phenotypes, race, background without an additional sample for comparison. And even though it could be used to determine these things at the moment we can identify the meaning of only a few base pair sequences.
To make an analogy everyones DNA is like an encyclopedia written in a cryptic language thousands of pages long, at a crime you drop a copy of that encyclopedia, we can't understand any of the words or symbols in it accept maybe a period (.), the, the end, and, and. Its pretty much worthless as a method of learning about you, but if you are caught later we can get another copy of the encyclopedia we can prove the other encyclopedia belongs to you because all the cryptic symbols match up.
- sint4x, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Well if they don't have a finger print, but found some hair... that might put them in the right direction.
- danarama, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2and next you'll be saying "so what we all have to a passport to leave the country, what's the big deal about implanted chips?"
- aspec, on 04/17/2008, -4/+2It's already a legitimate collection method. Don't you watch CSI Miami?
- frostbyt, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Or from your sack.
- homercles337, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2No doubt.
Is this president *****-for-brains, his administration, and the neocons in their "last throes?"- Dred, on 04/17/2008, -3/+4hey ***** for brains what does the president, his administration, or the neocons have to do with this?
- OwdenBowden, on 04/17/2008, -0/+14Don't Swab on Me.
The Revolution is coming.
JOIN or DIE- Railz, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1I wonder how many people even know what that phrase is from. /sigh.
- zaknick, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1all is not lost Railz we are here and the REVOLUTION IS NOW
OBAMA-RAMA
- zaknick, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1all is not lost Railz we are here and the REVOLUTION IS NOW
- Railz, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1I wonder how many people even know what that phrase is from. /sigh.
- LeeSoong, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2Could they test Dick Cheney and George W. Bush ?
I would like to know :
1. Are they living organisms or droids?
2. If Dick and George have DNA - are they Human?
3. If Human, are they evolved like us, or were they Intelligently Designed?- djblac, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1FAIL
- danarama, on 04/17/2008, -0/+7ALL YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION ARE BELONG TO US.
- Defuser, on 04/17/2008, -5/+1Wow, it's Internet Toughguy day here on Digg. Just out of curiosity, dumbass, how often are you planning on being arrested? I used to wonder why Diggers always get their panties in such a bunch whenever a thread on law enforcement pops up, but now I think I'm beginning to understand: you all apparently understand level of ignorant thuggishness a lot better than I would have initially guessed.
- hdhock3y, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3I'm pretty sure the government are the thugs we are dealing with.
- sylvok, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2* Good evening, London. Allow me first to apologize for this interruption. I do, like many of you, appreciate the comforts of every day routine- the security, the familiar, the tranquility, repetition. I enjoy them as much as any bloke. But in the spirit of commemoration, thereby those important events of the past usually associated with someone's death or the end of some awful bloody struggle, a celebration of a nice holiday, I thought we could mark this November the 5th, a day that is sadly no longer remembered, by taking some time out of our daily lives to sit down and have a little chat.
There are of course those who do not want us to speak. I suspect even now, orders are being shouted into telephones, and men with guns will soon be on their way. Why? Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the annunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance, and depression. And where once you had the freedom to object, think, and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillence coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease. There were a myraid of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the now high chancellor, Adam Sutler. He promised you order, he promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent. Last night I sought to end that silence.
Last night I destroyed the Old Bailey, to remind this country of what it has forgotten. More than four hundred years ago a great citizen wished to embed the fifth of November forever in our memory. His hope was to remind the world that fairness, justice, and freedom are more than words, they are perspectives. So if you've seen nothing, if the crimes of this government remain unknown to you then I would suggest you allow the fifth of November to pass unmarked. But if you see what I see, if you feel as I feel, and if you would seek as I seek, then I ask you to stand beside me one year from tonight, outside the gates of Parliament, and together we shall give them a fifth of November that shall never, ever be forgot. - Zettabyte, on 04/18/2008, -2/+1If you get arrested by the FBI. You must of done something really terrible in the first place.
- danarama, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1wrong place wrong time?
- CarnivalOfDust, on 04/17/2008, -1/+22How long 'til that's a legitimate collection method? Take George out for a publicity tour somewhere, then:
- waluum, on 04/17/2008, -9/+134Considering what it takes to get arrested, or detained, by federal authorities these days I would say everyone outside of the Oval Office is in significant risk of having their DNA collected. Do yourself, and your fellow man, a favor: buy a gun, and learn how to use it!
- caferrell, on 04/17/2008, -3/+48Buy a gun and plenty of ammunition. Make sure that your friends do as well. Make sure that you prctice together. Learn to shoot well.
- macsen, on 04/17/2008, -3/+19Bow and arrow or crossbow is better in the long run though. The state can blockade you but you'll still be able to make ammo out of wood and kill deer and *****. Plus they're silent so they don't know where to fire back with overwhelming force.
- Kakemonster, on 04/17/2008, -3/+4O'rly?
- Pssdoff, on 04/17/2008, -1/+6Yeah, you can even make those exploding arrows from Rambo 3. MacGyver made one once out of tree bark and an acorn.
- treeflappa, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2We could ask BA Baracus to make a cannon that fire cabbages.
- Encablossa, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1Yes O'rly
- nobelief, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2hahahahaha good one
- Qumahlin, on 04/18/2008, -2/+2That is why I bought a silencer for my gun...god bless the internet
- Kakemonster, on 04/17/2008, -3/+4O'rly?
- Lyph5, on 04/17/2008, -3/+20The main strength of a well armed population if it ever comes down to armed rebellion is that the soldiers fighting the people have a huge morale hit knowing that their families could be among the people they're firing back on with overwhelming force.
- ThrstForKnwldge, on 04/17/2008, -1/+5Unless mercenaries were used like they're being used in Iraq, then they wouldn't give a ***** who they kill.
- herkimer65, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3That is precisely why they will be using foreign troops.
- Elissar, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1I think America has the advantage of a military full of people who would question orders to march in their own streets, so we can count on many of them helping with the revolution.
- senatorpjt, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3just like they did in NOLA after Katrina?
- waynetheman, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3Please. We've already had post-disaster gun confiscations TWICE now in this country.
Apparently the military is just as sheepled as the rest of the nation.
- slaizer, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Soooo.... shooting the Federal agents who are coming to catch you is a good idea?
- bjornski, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Ask Randy Weaver and David Koresh.
- herkimer65, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Yes
- kball75, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Lol, every article is an excuse to talk about how everyone needs guns.
- lflimon, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Every article there's always someone with an excuse to talk about how every article is an excuse to talk about _____.
- macsen, on 04/17/2008, -3/+19Bow and arrow or crossbow is better in the long run though. The state can blockade you but you'll still be able to make ammo out of wood and kill deer and *****. Plus they're silent so they don't know where to fire back with overwhelming force.
- justjoehere, on 04/17/2008, -1/+18Most people don't know that every single military member is required to provide a DNA sample during boot camp and that data is stored in CODIS. These people weren't even arrested.
- bjornski, on 04/17/2008, -1/+20It could help in identifying the body if all we can find is a foot.
- PeppermintPig, on 04/17/2008, -1/+6If you get into the military and they try to take your DNA, you could refuse, and probably get booted out. Honestly, you ought to know what you're getting into, especially after hearing all the horror stories of other soldiers who've been scammed by the government. In this case it's a choice.
For others, it's a violation of their person and property to take things without consent.- Jlaugh, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4When you join the military they own you, your a corporate asset.
- RRJackson, on 04/17/2008, -1/+5On the bright side, I was at the Tampa VA hospital last month and ALL the parking spots in the main lot are handicapped spots now, so they have free valet parking to off-site lots for non-handicapped parking. So you may have your DNA on-file, but at least you get free valet parking at the VA. ;-)
- Tenlow, on 04/17/2008, -0/+13Yeah but when you sign up for the armed forces, at least in the united states, you're basically signing your life and your rights over to the government. You no longer have the ability to say "hey that's not right" because you signed the paper saying you're ok with that. Those of us who have not signed that paper still have the ability to claim innocent until proven guilty.
- bjornski, on 04/17/2008, -11/+4You sound bitter.
- bjornski, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3Too soon? Did I need the /s tag?
- noahhoward, on 04/17/2008, -16/+4Wow you don't sound like you're paranoid at all.
- Bantec, on 04/17/2008, -1/+11Yeah, and the people who told you a few years ago that they would be collecting and databasing DNA from innocent people were 'paranoid' also. Amazing how people just seem to bend over a little further every year. Don't spit on it, we like the friction!!
- verkon, on 04/17/2008, -7/+6Don't you love that you live in a nation where the only thing you can trust in the end is yourself and not the government that you voted on?
Trust the feds, think of it as this, is makes it easier for them to catch people, and if the DNA doesn't match yours you are pretty much safe.- treeflappa, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2Spook alert!!
- matador3, on 04/17/2008, -1/+3http://www.appleseedinfo.org/
- Gerz1219, on 04/17/2008, -12/+3Why don't you want your DNA collected?
If you rape a woman, and DNA samples prove you are guilty, you'll go to jail. As you should.
If someone else rapes a woman who fingers you in a lineup, and DNA samples prove you're not guilty, you don't have to worry about going to jail for a crime you didn't commit.
In addition, if your DNA is on file, it will be easier for your family members to identify your remains if anything ever happens to you.
DNA banking can't harm you unless you plan on doing something you shouldn't.
Honestly, I *feel* squeamish about the government having everyone's DNA on file, but I can't muster a rational argument in defense of this intuition. Can someone explain to me why this is a potentially harmful invasion of privacy that warrants armed rebellion? Please do not talk about clones in your answer.- mw113, on 04/17/2008, -0/+8If they _need_ my DNA for said conviction, or to prove that I was not involved in a crime, etc, they can ask for it, and they can get it, the same way that they do it now.
In the future, who knows, maybe they'll start profiling with DNA, and build a criminal profile based on patterns in DNA; where will that stop then? Then they'll require DNA samples on birth, to track people in that way. It's a slippery slope. So maybe we don't have anything to worry about in the case of a crime, that's not the only thing it may be limited to. We don't know what else they will start using it for.
If they need to ID my body to family, they can get the DNA from my body part, and ID that way. There's enough similarity in DNA between family members to be able to ID. This is also why there are dog-tags in the military, for ID.- pizpot, on 04/17/2008, -0/+81. deny medical insurance if prone to disease
2. discriminate against race hated by the one in power
3. keep thinking! - DrDash, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1How many crimes have been solved because the DNA of a person was already on file for something and they find some DNA in a case that has no leads? 2 years ago a child was raped and murdered here. Semen left at the scene was matched to a database in California to an ex con. Case solved. If that DNA was not there I bet the case was never solved and that "man" was out there looking for more kids.
- mw113, on 04/17/2008, -0/+6That was an ex-con. So if their DNA wasn't on file, I'd be surprised.
However this issue is that the DNA is being taken on arrest; regardless of if they are innocent or guilty, and then kept on file. If you take DNA on arrest, then an argument can made to also take DNA at other times, when there is no probable cause. - locojones, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3You overlook the most important word in your statement - ex-con. This guy was not only arrested of a crime, but convicted. The difference here is that DNA will be taken from people arrested, even if they're never charged with a crime.
- mw113, on 04/17/2008, -0/+6That was an ex-con. So if their DNA wasn't on file, I'd be surprised.
- pizpot, on 04/17/2008, -0/+81. deny medical insurance if prone to disease
- pizpot, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Discover Magazine wrote about DNA chameleons. They are mostly females who have more than one DNA at the same time. The official scientific community (tenure profs hardly working) denies they exist.
- bjornski, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Interesting. I'll have to look that up.
- niczar, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3I admire you trust in technology. Me, I'm just a lowly software developer, so what do I know about technology? Oh yeah, it always has BUGS and sometimes fail.
- mw113, on 04/17/2008, -0/+8If they _need_ my DNA for said conviction, or to prove that I was not involved in a crime, etc, they can ask for it, and they can get it, the same way that they do it now.
- Bantec, on 04/17/2008, -2/+12Follow your natural instinct. I could go into how massive databases of DNA could be used to profile people to employers, police etc. How a whole new bread of 'smart weapons' could be developed, and for those of you who love to buy into the white man being a genocidal xenophobic power hungry monster....... well the possibilities are endless. Hitler would have loved this information. Would have saved him a ton of bullets. Speaking of Nazi's, health insurance companies could figure out what they are not going to insure you for at birth. If you are naive enough to believe that this info won't eventually be supplied to all the wrong people disregard the aforementioned babbling as complete paranoia by another conspiracy theorist. Turn off your computer, and swallow the load being continuously ejaculated down your throat by the MSM. Mm mm salty!
- Cofaloaf, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2Well we better make sure we don't leave any DNA inventories near the time machines otherwise we're *****.
- Qumahlin, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2Just got finished watching Gattaca didn't ya.
- sinrtb, on 04/17/2008, -0/+6Considering how well the Govt keeps our personal information locked up and safe I think where this could go wrong is obvious. Sure what the govt could do is bad but just imagined when this database is lost/hacked. And looking at the past few weeks of digg its not really an if but more of a when. Its one thing to say to your credit card company "no I was not even in Florida last month" when disputing an erroneous charge, but when they reply with "we have your DNA scan on file". you are kinda screwed.
- Wargalas, on 04/17/2008, -4/+1Oh come on now, this is Digg. Liberals wouldn't even know where to BUY a gun, let alone know where to get one and learn how to use it. They'd have to call their Republican friends.
- Sogui, on 04/17/2008, -4/+1Are you guys serious? Is this for real? The same site that brings you LOLCATS, XKCD, Zero Punctuation is also telling me to form a ***** militia and be prepared to shoot at Federal, State, and even Military authorities....
Damn Digg you scary - Cofaloaf, on 04/18/2008, -3/+1Oh ***** lets revolt! Calm the ***** down its like a modern day fingerprint. I would be perturbed by this if I was considering committing a double homicide this weekend, but unfortunately I just don't have the time so I'm not going to get my panties in a bunch.
- fuzzmeister, on 04/18/2008, -2/+1Here's a simple equation for you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Abrams > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock_pistol
- caferrell, on 04/17/2008, -3/+48Buy a gun and plenty of ammunition. Make sure that your friends do as well. Make sure that you prctice together. Learn to shoot well.
- 2bsbc, on 04/17/2008, -5/+27http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1T8xgHdMEM&feature ...
- stretch611, on 04/17/2008, -1/+13Hell yeah!!!
- LadyKofNYC, on 04/17/2008, -4/+13LOVE LOVE LOVE Rage Against The Machine
My favorite part of the video is the sign that says "SMASH THE STATE".
***** YEAH!!!!- Lyph5, on 04/17/2008, -11/+5You're a tool.
- LadyKofNYC, on 04/17/2008, -3/+4You're a State worshiping prick.
- 2bsbc, on 04/17/2008, -0/+5I like when you talk dirty :)
- GhostyBoy, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3We need more heroes.
- gabulldawg79, on 04/17/2008, -11/+98Just another move towards fascism
- tototest19, on 04/17/2008, -4/+2That's impossible in the "land of the free" where the 1st amendment protects you from evil people... hahaha!
- youracmee, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2I think that the Gov. is getting ahead of its self. The Justice System needs an overall overhaul.
- bagelmaster, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2All the branches of the government need an overhaul
- lacronicus, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2TBH, the government doesn't need an overhaul, the people in it do. The system itself, by and large, works, but the people in it do not. The problem here is that it is ultimately up to the people who gets put into office.
- bagelmaster, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2All the branches of the government need an overhaul
- Falldog, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Funny, I said the same thing when they started taking finger prints.
- mattrh, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Relax for ***** sake. This will only prove your innocence or guilt. Would you rather be falsely convicted based on some ***** eyewitness testimony? This should have been done years ago.
- noahgelman, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2I dont know if this is really fascist. So what if the police have a copy of my DNA, I'm not doing anything with it. What are they going to do, steal it from me? If they want my DNA, they can have it. And if it helps put away a few criminals, then I dont mind too much.
- GoneFishing, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2Free Tibe.... err.... America!!!!!!
- allowners, on 04/17/2008, -7/+22Disturbed - Land Of Confusion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KW8DRSvEoQ- bjornski, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4Whoa. I'd never seen that one. That's a pretty powerful video.
- raisputin3, on 04/17/2008, -1/+7I still like the Original Better http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBdUz_IJ4VA
- bjornski, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4It's funnier, but I think the comedy aspect takes away from the impact of the message.
It's still a good video. But I'll have to say for a cover, Disturbed did a damned fine job with it.
/I still favorited this one too tho.
- bjornski, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4It's funnier, but I think the comedy aspect takes away from the impact of the message.
- Thuktun, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Half Pink Floyd's The Wall, Half G.I. Joe.
- cspivack, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Get your nu-metal out of my internets.
- allowners, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Stop metaling in my affairs.
- PopcornDave, on 04/17/2008, -5/+83Anybody up for a revolution yet? Anybody?
- macsen, on 04/17/2008, -1/+21Don't worry, it's on it's way.
- PeppermintPig, on 04/17/2008, -1/+8On it's way? The Revolution will be outsourced?
:P - madmonkey300, on 04/17/2008, -1/+4once the economy hits us right? that's when they'll round us up and send us to their concentration camps.
- Chimone, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2and its waiting for what?
- PeppermintPig, on 04/17/2008, -1/+8On it's way? The Revolution will be outsourced?
- JDenigma, on 04/17/2008, -4/+31The real revolutionaries are brewing in N.H. at this instant while the rest of the sheep in America remain docile to their bread and circuses on their boobtube.
I hope N.H. does go for secession. It's possibly the only hope at this point.- PeppermintPig, on 04/17/2008, -1/+23VT has the more pronounced secession movement, but I'm not sure how likely either would be. Still support it, though. Race to escape. :)
- USNavyBlue, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3Minnesota has joined the banned wagon of succession also because of the up and coming 2nd Amendment issue before the Supreme Court that will not be in our favor either!
In addition, TN and SC have been on the ban wagon to secession for a long time now and are actively recruiting more states!
This has been brewing for a long time and I think when the USA collapses economically that is when secession will occur. - fokov, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4Its funny how the North fought for a more powerful federal government, even though the South (confederates) listened to the warning from our founding fathers about allowing power to get further and further away from the power. People still view the south as morons, yet so many people in the north now see the error of their ways. Granted some of your families, like mine, didn't live in America during that time. To me it is comical that people thought giving someone else more power over them would be a good idea. But then again, all religions preach slavery. You are a slave to god and must obey him and the ones that say they can communicate to him. They can help you, for a fee of course.
Revolution will not happen when the majority does not want to be free. We can't count on the rich doing it, like when this country was formed. However, that should not stop us from freeing ourselves.
- USNavyBlue, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3Minnesota has joined the banned wagon of succession also because of the up and coming 2nd Amendment issue before the Supreme Court that will not be in our favor either!
- Bantec, on 04/17/2008, -1/+4I don't believe that a state that nominated Hillary, and McCain (??) is in any way revolutionary. Revolution should take place at the poles first. They had a chance to voice, and NH proved it is as mainstream as NJ. Welcome to the parade of the ignorant.
- Sk00L, on 04/17/2008, -1/+3Agreed N.H. is weak, lots of talk no action the polls proved it and if it turns out to be Diebold election fraud i will eat my words but if fraud is even suspected there should already be a revolt in place. Till that time i think NH should have their state motto revoked "live free or die" my ass Hillery and McCain LOL thats NH's statement for freedom! weak!
- JDenigma, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2You two are underestimating N.H. Should you really be surprised that N.H. endorsed Hillary and McCain? Every damn state in this union has been nominating douche bags like them so you're holding N.H. to an unrealistic standard there. You need to pay better attention to what is actually happening in N.H. at the grassroots level. N.H. actually has the "free state project" movement that has been gaining popularity and is becoming more widely known thanks to the Internet. Can you imagine how some movement like this would be doing in the days before the Internet? Hardly anyone would know about it then. Not now thanks to this information age we're living in. Of course N.H. is going to be endorsing politicians like that right now because much like anywhere else in the country, the freedom loving activists are greatly outnumbered. However, all the truly great freedom loving activists who truly love liberty such as the libertarian minarchists and anarchists are starting to grow in numbers and are moving to N.H. They have already been making some waves in that state, which you would know if you had been paying attention.
I assume you two probably weren't even aware of the free state project. You're some random people who came across my comment bringing up N.H. and it probably seems strange to you because you see N.H. as being no different because of the politicians they've endorsed. You're missing the larger picture. N.H. is arguably one of the freest states in the union and is recruiting more people who are willing to fight for liberty there so things are changing there, even if it is slow right now.
One problem they're having there however is the fact that their movement is also getting diluted by Massholes moving to N.H. from Massachusetts. I suppose the only answer to that is for more free state project members to get their butt to N.H. to counteract that. The liberty lovers will be more active and will therefore have more influence.
Just maybe if they can get the winds of secession blowing in the air in that state, perhaps it would scare the statists into wanting to move out of N.H. which would be a good thing.
So I think you two should think twice here about what you're saying there about N.H.
- jinxplayer, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2If any state tries to remove themselves from the union, i GUARANTEE that they will find an army marching to the capitol to take it back.
- JDenigma, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4Whether or not that is true, do you support that?
- jinxplayer, on 04/18/2008, -0/+0Wether or not i support that is moot, a state would never drop out of the US..how do you imagine the state would pay its government workers? No government workers? No cops, firemen, etc... It would never, ever happen, and if you think it could, then you need to use your brain and think about it.
- waynetheman, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3So what then, we shouldn't try?
- sylvok, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3Yes but what if the people were to rise up. People are harder to find then just one states army. Your mother, father, uncle, friend, strangers, anyone could be a revolutionary, but at the same time none of them could. Makes it much harder now doesn't it.
- JDenigma, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Right, much like what our troops are facing in Iraq with decentralized gureilla warfare there or in other such cases as with the Vietnam war.
Let's hope though that it won't have to come some extreme end of days scenario like that where people will be having to whip out their Anarchist Cookbook for survival. It would be much more preferable and nicer if they could manage to successfully rebel peacefully without having government coming down upon them with an iron fist.
- JDenigma, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Right, much like what our troops are facing in Iraq with decentralized gureilla warfare there or in other such cases as with the Vietnam war.
- JDenigma, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4Whether or not that is true, do you support that?
- PeppermintPig, on 04/17/2008, -1/+23VT has the more pronounced secession movement, but I'm not sure how likely either would be. Still support it, though. Race to escape. :)
- Kloud, on 04/17/2008, -0/+10Kinda hard when the sheep will just keep on with their daily lives, because standing up to fight for their rights is just "inconvenient".
- objectcode, on 04/17/2008, -0/+5i'd join but American Idol is on
- RRJackson, on 04/17/2008, -5/+8Said a guy sitting at a computer. There's not going to be a revolution unless it's staged in WoW.
- PopcornDave, on 04/17/2008, -1/+4How the hell do you think a revolution starts? The word has to get around somehow doesn't it?
- RRJackson, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2"Best Revolution *ever*. Now, we should all roll a D20 and those of us who roll a '20' will run our new nation. What do you mean there are Marines outside?"
- PopcornDave, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Hey, if you want to sit around and take it in the ass, be my guest. I'm going to continue to agitate as much as I can and get the word out as much as possible to wake people up. Even if I wake up one or two, to me it's worth it. And by the way, I use a D100 just for luck.
- RRJackson, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2"Best Revolution *ever*. Now, we should all roll a D20 and those of us who roll a '20' will run our new nation. What do you mean there are Marines outside?"
- JDenigma, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4PopcornDave,
These critics are a dime a dozen. I wonder if RRJackson actually thinks a revolution will come about at the ballot box. Fat chance.
- PopcornDave, on 04/17/2008, -1/+4How the hell do you think a revolution starts? The word has to get around somehow doesn't it?
- midbc, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2you must get Yoko Ono's permission first
- dsmx, on 04/17/2008, -4/+1I wouldn't worry if you assume it takes about 150MB to store the DNA profile of 1 person then for every person in the USA they would need 45,000,000,000 MB of storage.
- SwampyUK, on 04/17/2008, -0/+10Do you think the government would have any trouble getting the storage facilities/budget for 41 Petabytes of storage?
- bagelmaster, on 04/17/2008, -5/+1Peta! That's what comes after tera. Me and a friend were wondering the other day but were too lazy to google it... oh man, random memories ftw.
- dsmx, on 04/17/2008, -4/+1I don't think you quite realise just how big a facility you would need for that amount of data. If you use 500GB hard disks you would need 90,000 hard drives.
- youracmee, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1I worry and fret over any Govt. taking loads of personal data anytime, as the Justice System still needs a overhaul. 150MB is a good amount per person and I agree with your input. With the way Technology changes and Bill Gts. Gets the money he want from Wall Street; I would put more concern on some Techie coming up with a new way of storing information soon?
- niczar, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2DNA fingerprinting doesn't work that way, it doesn't need to store all bases (ATGC), in fact it couldn't possibly work that way, as decoding the whole genome takes /years/. DNA fingerprinting only uses samples of the DNA, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dna_fingerprinting
- ad33lshahid, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4thats the dumbest comment ive ever heard. have you ever heard of google? it already stores more information than anything you're currently suggesting. and i see no reason why a string of letters would take 150 MB.
- Kirizan, on 04/17/2008, -1/+0"The entire human genome occupies a total of just over 3 billion DNA base pairs, and has a data size of approximately 750 Megabytes[2]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_genome- ad33lshahid, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2wouldnt they only keep record of the differences between human beings, instead of having the entire recipe for creating a typical human being each time around? it sounds a little redundant to keep 99.9999% of that data...
- Kirizan, on 04/17/2008, -1/+0"The entire human genome occupies a total of just over 3 billion DNA base pairs, and has a data size of approximately 750 Megabytes[2]"
- karolisonline, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2don't worry, google will help them.
- SwampyUK, on 04/17/2008, -0/+10Do you think the government would have any trouble getting the storage facilities/budget for 41 Petabytes of storage?
- clayasaurus, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2o/
- Sogui, on 04/17/2008, -4/+2Man the hyper-reactionaries are really out today. We are freer as a collective people than we have been at any other time in our history... prove me wrong.
We have made great advances from the time when you had to pay a tax and have a certain color/gender just to contribute to our democracy, we have made great advances in personal freedoms, but it has always been at the cost of some degree of privacy.
Now here's a dash of reason... most of the people who are arrested by the Feds usually have a reason to be arrested (gasp they might be guilty too). If you are proven innocent then your DNA will sit in the back of some database, untouched for the remainder of your life, unless you happen by some crazy circumstance to be arrested again by the Feds (but you're innocent as well).
The security of this information should of course be a priority, but you can't use "security" as a justification for withholding any information you feel like keeping yourself. Otherwise your driver's license would just be your name with an anonymous outline. There are always such risks and if we had never taken them then we'd still be living in the dark ages where one's identity consists of a name and a face.
And believe it or not, modern society cannot run off a system when everyone is just a name and a face.- Asrrin29, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2The problem is not how the information is Intended to be used, it is how it could be used by corrupt people, which, in a government, tend to be quite a few number of folks. And once the government has said information, there is nothing stopping them from keeping it until someone passes a law that they can find a loophole in to make it legal to do things that were not the original intent, like sell it to health insurance companies.
There is almost never a danger for the current intent to use personal information. It's all about what happens when that info is used for the wrong purposes.
- Asrrin29, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2The problem is not how the information is Intended to be used, it is how it could be used by corrupt people, which, in a government, tend to be quite a few number of folks. And once the government has said information, there is nothing stopping them from keeping it until someone passes a law that they can find a loophole in to make it legal to do things that were not the original intent, like sell it to health insurance companies.
- macsen, on 04/17/2008, -1/+21Don't worry, it's on it's way.
- mynemyne, on 04/17/2008, -2/+82I comment very rarely but this deserves it. Awful, awful, awful! Yet another sign the water is boiling around the frog. Will anyone jump? Arrested, not convicted! That bears repeating of course but I will move on to remind everyone of how insecure, and apparently easy to lose, databases are.
- noahhoward, on 04/17/2008, -14/+5You do know this is absolutely no different than fingerprinting and mugshots right?
- DrDash, on 04/17/2008, -7/+1I agree, and will get buried with you. The first time this database catches some rapist or whatnot it would be worth it. To many people think its an invasion of privacy, what exactly is it invading... who you are? Your parents are? the fact that you commited a crime?
- yournightmare, on 04/17/2008, -0/+5Forget "invasion of privacy," please explain in detail how this policy would not be *forcing* you to waive your 5th Amendment rights. I'll just play dumb and ignore the fact that you think getting arrested = committing a crime.
- lacronicus, on 04/17/2008, -3/+1How does this in any way infringe upon your right to not self-incriminate? If the prosecution has evidence against you, be it your DNA or an eyewitness, they have the responsibility to use it. The only thing this really changes is that the DNA is cataloged instead of collected each time you're arrested.
- Bantec, on 04/17/2008, -0/+5How about when your health insurance company calls and says they are dropping coverage for a certain type of disease, because they can detect its imminence. Or, when a potential employer decides not to go past a first interview because your DNA profile was not what they were looking for? How about when the scientific community finishes mapping the human genome, and the rest of your life is pigeon-holed. If you think there is a difference between the haves and the have nots today.... wait.
- lacronicus, on 04/17/2008, -3/+1How is looking at you DNA any different than an interview or background check, or any other collection of information on you? The only difference between them is that DNA can't lie, which I would think would be better.
- Jlaugh, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4What is your DNA is found to not be up to snuff? Will you be automatically disqualified from certain positions?
- Bantec, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1I agree, it's wonder full technology. We will be able to identify all sorts of 'undesirable behavior types' before they inevitably wreak havoc on our carefully managed lives. Think about it... We could I.D. these people at birth. Given our track record for treating or imprisoning, we would stick to our mod-us operand and have 'institutions' for these children. Meanwhile the rest of us would live our sheltered lives, continually identifying more 'undesirables' and increasing (little by little mind you) the amount of throw aways every year. 'What a wonder full world this could be....'
Also, when the 'elites' decide that it's becoming too crowded, they can id certain genetic 'defects' and wipe out whole groups/races/ethnicity's with targeted attacks. We could finally get rid of all the trash and we wouldn't even have to line them up and shoot them over big ditches, or herd them into 'showers'. Amusing, but tedious.
If your interests lie in pharmaceuticals, the possibilities are endless. You could actually create new targeted perfectly engineered diseases once a year, and make billions of dollars on the 'treatments'. Why cure them? I too my friend, love capitalism.
And for the military industrial complex. WEEEEEE!!! You think 'Smart Bombs' are scary?
Your completely right. Giving somebody an ink imprint of your fingers, and limited documented facts regarding your criminal, health and buying history is exactly the same as handing people as trustworthy as government employees a complete schematic of 'you'. Your 'source code' if you will. Exactly the same.
- lacronicus, on 04/17/2008, -3/+1How is looking at you DNA any different than an interview or background check, or any other collection of information on you? The only difference between them is that DNA can't lie, which I would think would be better.
- herkimer65, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Comparing DNA to a fingerprint? Are you serious?
- DrDash, on 04/17/2008, -7/+1I agree, and will get buried with you. The first time this database catches some rapist or whatnot it would be worth it. To many people think its an invasion of privacy, what exactly is it invading... who you are? Your parents are? the fact that you commited a crime?
- noahhoward, on 04/17/2008, -14/+5You do know this is absolutely no different than fingerprinting and mugshots right?
- Minarchian, on 04/17/2008, -5/+52There goes yet another piece of our 4th and 5th amendments.
- KMye, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4This is why we have a judicial branch of government. If this actually goes into effect, one of the first people affected by it needs to refuse it, the ACLU needs to get behind them, and the laws allowing this can be challenged as unconstitutional.
- AlwaysAwake, on 04/17/2008, -7/+38Welcome to slavery. We are all expendable now. the republic and democracy is dead.
- Sunsetter, on 04/17/2008, -0/+5But the Polyarchy is still going strong.
- coyote1284, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2As long as everyone remains entertained and on anit-depressants, no one will care.
- CaptainAmerica1, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2We already fingerprint everyone arrested -- how is collecting DNA samples (which is just a high-tech fingerprint) any different?
- pizpot, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2both bad
- lacronicus, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1How do you expect them to check your fingerprints against the ones at the crime scene if they can only take your fingerprints *after* you're convicted? Same with DNA. They already collect the data when you're arrested, the only difference is that it's cataloged to save both of you time.
- pizpot, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2both bad
- TrevorBelmont, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2I fear I risk the wrath of the shovel for saying this but what does your comment have to do with slavery or with everyone being expendable? I don't like the idea of the government collecting DNA at all but your comment seems off topic at best and aimlessly paranoid at worst.
- mattrh, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1yes, we are now complete slaves to society because they will take our precious DNA and catalog it.
- Waiting2awake, on 04/17/2008, -5/+36OK, yet again I am forced to ask(as I have for the last 6 years or so now).....
America, is THIS enough for you to do something?- justjoehere, on 04/17/2008, -5/+5We know the answer of the sheep already.
- noahhoward, on 04/17/2008, -11/+8no, why is this any different to you than fingerprinting and mugshots? You people say THIS is the step on the fascist path, that this makes us a police state. You think they can plant some sort of evidence now. What was stopping them from planting fingerprints before?
What is different now? Ranting about a conspiracy isn't enough, you have no evidence you have wild speculation about completely normal events, law enforcement is updating their technology, there is nothing wrong with that.
This thread reads like a bunch of raving lunatics were suddenly given internet access.- MrESaulved, on 04/17/2008, -2/+6Allow me to take a DNA sample from you then.
No complaining! As I am sure you are guilty, maybe not right this very second (but who knows?) of a federal 'offense'. Such as tax shenanigans...ever cheat on your taxes? Ever? Remember you are under oath and lying is also a Federal Offense. Maybe you littered in a national park, or had sex in one. Or didn't use a FULL gallon water to extinguish that fire, if you even had the *proper* permit. Or maybe you like to dance at the Jefferson Memorial?
What? You don't trust me with your DNA? But you trust the government, and the government is comprised of people...people just like me and I don't trust myself not to use DNA samples of treacherous, traitorous weasels for my own greater-good purposes.- CaptainAmerica1, on 04/17/2008, -8/+2So, don't complain if a loved one of yours is murdered, a suspect is arrested, but freed because the cops couldn't take a DNA sample to match with evidence.
- MrESaulved, on 04/17/2008, -2/+4No person should be compelled to provide evidence against himself. This is a principle I live by. Your overly emotional appeal does not over rule my principles.
To answer your question, if I knew, to my own set of exacting standards, beyond a resonable doubt who was responsible for the death of my loved ones, and the trial did not result in conviction (for any reason including a botched search warrant for collecting evidence) I would not hesitate to enact revenge against the responsible party and suffer the legal consequences from said act, if any.
Now, ***** off and die you fascist, manipulative and intellectually inferior thug.
- MrESaulved, on 04/17/2008, -2/+4No person should be compelled to provide evidence against himself. This is a principle I live by. Your overly emotional appeal does not over rule my principles.
- noahhoward, on 04/17/2008, -4/+3Do you go to the bank? The grocery store? You're doing the same thing every single day you give a stranger your identity. There is no ***** dfference if you want to live life as a paranoid ***** do it, no problem. The government has my DNA already, all they need to do is check my Air Force medical records, yes Ive commited 'crimes' I could be pulled in for, I've said '***** Bush' I've said '***** Clinton', 'I've said ***** Israel' but I'm still here.
Paranoia is a mental illness, go get help. - CaptainAmerica1, on 04/17/2008, -4/+1Big words for a small boy... I think I hear your mommy calling down to the basement for you. Run along now...
- MrESaulved, on 04/17/2008, -1/+3Those voices in your head haven't helped you yet and won't help you now. I see right through you and you know it, so move along.
- waynetheman, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2@noahhoward
"Do you go to the bank? The grocery store? You're doing the same thing every single day you give a stranger your identity."
You don't GIVE YOUR DNA to those people, you moron! What is wrong with you, that you can't see a clear, substantive difference between a FINGERPRINT, a PICTURE, and an *actual piece of your person, all genetic info intact*?!
I'm so sorry you've screwed yourself by joining the Air Force and giving them your DNA. Sucks to be you. That doesn't mean you have to drag the rest of us down to your level just because YOU were a dupe.
- CaptainAmerica1, on 04/17/2008, -8/+2So, don't complain if a loved one of yours is murdered, a suspect is arrested, but freed because the cops couldn't take a DNA sample to match with evidence.
- gabulldawg79, on 04/17/2008, -1/+4Actually nothing has stopped them from planting fingers prints or creating false evidence. It has been a practice of elements of our government for years. Try reading a book called Confessions of an Economic Hitman. It is a book written by a former CIA agent whose entire purpose was to destroy and manipulate the economy of countries around the world. If you think our government is beyond lying, smearing, or creating false evidence then you need to wake up from fairytale land, because they can and have. Ever heard of the Iran Contra Scandal or the Gulf of Tonkin? Beside comparing fingerprints and DNA is like comparing apples and oranges, they are two completely different things. All a finger print could be used for is to indentify someone, where as DNA could be used for many other things besides indentification. Bottom line is we are supposed to be land of the free and federally collecting DNA violates the spirit of our Constitution and has no business in a democracy.
- CaptainAmerica1, on 04/17/2008, -3/+1Oh, you mean Perkins' work of fiction? Yeah, I read it... Too bad Perkins falls into the category of a wild-eyed, foaming at the mouth conspiracy nutcase.
By the way, he never was a "CIA agent."
- CaptainAmerica1, on 04/17/2008, -3/+1Oh, you mean Perkins' work of fiction? Yeah, I read it... Too bad Perkins falls into the category of a wild-eyed, foaming at the mouth conspiracy nutcase.
- Sidonas, on 04/17/2008, -1/+3'why is this any different than fingerprinting or and mugshots?'
Because I am not a soldier. I did not volunteer to be one, sign my writes away to become one or otherwise consent to give any portion of my body (See: DNA) over to government processing. If I am under suspicion of having broken a law, take a picture of me and grab some fingerprints to compare to what may be there on the crime site. When you have reason to believe that DNA is required (my finger prints are there, you have a witness who saw me wandering about) then you can ask for DNA or legally pursue a warrant for it. Unless I signed away my rights to the military, skipping steps in the legal process is not allowed. - Gwennyk, on 04/19/2008, -0/+0"No evidence, wild speculation"
Of course silly me, I'm not the man on the TV telling you it's normal and right, so why would it be?
Look around at all the people who actually read Acts that are passed, who actually look through history and see a certain trend of lies and more laws, a tightening of the grip on us and the way we live our lives.
You should try it sometime.
p.s. Would you prefer it if we wore suits when we told you this? Something to make us look authoritative, so that you'd swallow whatever we said right down nice and easy? hmm?
- MrESaulved, on 04/17/2008, -2/+6Allow me to take a DNA sample from you then.
- coyote1284, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4Naaaaaa!
- newoccupant, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2First the Nazis came…
First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me—
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
- http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Martin_Niem%C3%B6ller
- LadyKofNYC, on 04/17/2008, -3/+24Well at least they're no longer trying to keep their assault against the Constitution on the down low anymore.
- pizpot, on 04/17/2008, -0/+7Notice the big push in new laws coming now, at the end of W's term. This way the next gov't gets a break and the population is fooled that something changed.
- stealthc, on 04/17/2008, -5/+681) The feds keep using more and more force
2) The feds are completely unresponsive when asked to abide by the Constitution
3) The feds ignore our petitions completely
4) The feds keep using more and more surveillance and control
You may not want to believe that there is a conspiracy to shut down freedom in America. But if there were such a conspiracy, HOW WOULD THEIR BEHAVIOR BE ANY DIFFERENT?
This threat to freedom requires *action* in response. Make life a living hell for the tyrants. It's up to you to figure out how.- frostbyt, on 04/17/2008, -10/+2Do nothing wrong and you will be ok.
- mw113, on 04/17/2008, -0/+6Until they change the definition of "nothing wrong".
- lacronicus, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Then *that* is the time to cry foul! Cameras, DNA, fingerprints; it's all only one half of the equation, and it's the half that can either be properly used or misused. The line between utopia and dystopia isn't the means those in control convict a person, it's the laws that they convict them for breaking.
- Pssdoff, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3Thats right, keep picking the cotton....
- mw113, on 04/17/2008, -0/+6Until they change the definition of "nothing wrong".
- yournightmare, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1"You may not want to believe that there is a conspiracy to shut down freedom in America. But if there were such a conspiracy, HOW WOULD THEIR BEHAVIOR BE ANY DIFFERENT?"
--I can't figure out why you have 25 diggs as I'm writing this. America has been traveling down this path for roughly 70 years, since the end of the Lochner era. Obviously, 70 years is an extremely unreasonable length of time to hold together a conspiracy. The sheer logistics of keeping a conspiracy secret for that long and passing it along to people who weren't even born when the SECOND generation of conspirators started to retire makes this practically impossible. So that's the first main reason I don't believe there is a conspiracy. Second, if there were a conspiracy THEIR BEHAVIOR WOULD BE DIFFERENT because there would actually be some sense of urgency in their actions due to the practical impossibility of holding a conspiracy together for any substantial length of time. So we wouldn't be seeing the slow erosion of our rights over a period of 70+ years. We would be seeing relatively quick, decisive actions taken to limit our rights and increase the power of government. Then there's lots of little things that shoot holes in the "conspiracy" argument, such as why would the people who started the conspiracy 70+ years ago even bother to start it knowing that NOBODY they know would benefit from it?- Jlaugh, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3A religion could easily keep a conspiracy going for any length of time.
- TsuruchiBrian, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Each generation of authoritarians benefits from the continually worsening system of "democracy" that we have.
- stealthc, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1-----------------------------------------------[The Point]---------------->
.
.
[You]
What I was saying is that it doesn't matter whether there's a conspiracy or not. Their actions are just as if there were, which is bad enough. - stealthc, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Also, just because you can't conceive of someone doing it does not mean it can't be done.
- Gwennyk, on 04/19/2008, -0/+0Okay, so the majority of power remains in the hands of the same families now as it did years and years ago, most of the US presidents were related in some way. Before you start talking about it being pointless for people to do this think about the reaction of the public it they would have taken away all freedoms and civil rights outright. There would be a complete revolt. The idea is that it's little by little, take a look at all the laws that have been passed, not only recently but years ago; it's one thing at the time and the majority of the public do not notice and have been so dumbed down by ***** education systems and a throw away culture which emplores young people to sit in front of TVs or computers on facebook all day long, that they don't care.
The reason that comment got 25 diggs, in my personal view, is because it is correct in the sense that police are gaining more and more power. I live in England and my friend got pulled over because they thought he was driving drunk, he was hauled into a police station and now they have his fingerprints, DNA, everything. Then he was released because he hadn't actually done anything wrong. They can stop and search us, they can pull us over and enquire as to where we are going and why, they are desperately clawing at the ID card idea. Democracy doesn't suddenly go down hill. Conspiracy or not it isn't a sudden process. It can't be. And the end sentence of the above post is the main point as far as I'm concerned; Our freedom is under threat, and so what are we going to do about it?
- zephyr42, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Terrifying picture you paint there.
The FEDS work for US.... think about it.- stealthc, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1If they actually did work for us, do you think the TSA would exist?
- frostbyt, on 04/17/2008, -10/+2Do nothing wrong and you will be ok.
- michael4lsu, on 04/17/2008, -11/+44Just another incremental step toward their Master Plan. Who knows what they will do with this database?
Manufacture blood, skin cells, or hair with your cloned DNA to plant false evidence as they see fit to frame the enemies of their tyranny for crimes the elite committed?
Manufacture biological weapons that target people with specific genetic "deficiencies" as they see fit for their eugenics program?
Make it a matter of "national security" to ensure that certain jobs only be filled by those who they deem genetically acceptable as a way to discriminate against those who they do not deem religiously and/or politically acceptable?
Anyone who thinks this DNA database is no big deal, just watch the movie Gattaca: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119177/- atact88, on 04/17/2008, -17/+4Cut back on the schizophrenic sci fi, dude....
Congressmen and Presidents are already all Yale, Harvard, or Columbia graduates. Didn't need no DNA for that. - XFARB6, on 04/17/2008, -1/+0"Manufacture blood, skin cells, or hair with your cloned DNA to plant false evidence as they see fit to frame the enemies of their tyranny for crimes the elite committed?"
That's good. Can I give you a list of the usual suspects right now?
- atact88, on 04/17/2008, -17/+4Cut back on the schizophrenic sci fi, dude....
- bosssmiley, on 04/17/2008, -7/+23Doesn't that contravene the 5th Amendment? No man being obliged to incriminate himself and all that...
Or has that silly old outmoded amendment now been rescinded /in camera/ by the ruling order and their Enabling (sorry, Patriot) Act?- davewashere, on 04/17/2008, -9/+8"The Constitution is just a piece of paper, no different than what I use to clean my backside."
- George W. Bush (slightly paraphrased) - noahhoward, on 04/17/2008, -3/+10No, DNA is just a high tech fingerprint. They did this well before the Patriot act, get your facts straight.
- SpykerSpeed, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3The 5th flew out the door way back when the feds started requiring people to divulge all their sources of income and the amounts for taxation to them in a 1040 form. You're forced to sign a document that could be used as evidence against you in a court of law.
- hdhock3y, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Constitution? What's that? According to our government I'm pretty sure that doesn't exist anymore...
- davewashere, on 04/17/2008, -9/+8"The Constitution is just a piece of paper, no different than what I use to clean my backside."
- Look4Truth, on 04/17/2008, -9/+24Why people aren't waking up to the forming police state is beyond me. What the establishment is doing to us is criminal yet people don't care as long as they have booze and a clicker. It's disgusting.
- noahhoward, on 04/17/2008, -12/+6What is the establishment doing to you? What change to your life has been made, how many round-ups of the population have been made, when was the last time the feds busted down your door for saying ***** george bush? There is no ***** police state, get a life,.
- jgzman, on 04/17/2008, -1/+6Emphasis on the word 'forming.' This isn't a police state, but they are working on it.
- Look4Truth, on 04/17/2008, -1/+5Research all the executive orders Bush signed there chief, no need to get all bent out of shape. It's not about the Democrats or Republicans, it's about the global government that's forming. Both sides are bought and paid for at the top and so is the lamestream media. Turn off the idiot box and research outside the establishment propaganda, it's not hard to find the truth if you just look.
- zaknick, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Dude my life and family has been turned upside down and destroyed by the Establishment in Washington... ***** off
just because it doesn't happen to millions of people only hundreds of thousands doesn't mean there are no flaws in government policy as cooked up by theso0called establishment
- bjornski, on 04/17/2008, -3/+10I've been seeing it, and talking about it for years.
Many of the people who used to say I was nuts are waking up now, and getting pretty shaken when they realized just for far into the plans we've gone. - Gwennyk, on 04/19/2008, -0/+0People are waking up...it's just that nobody knows what to do about it all. They're all still like sheep looking for someone to lead them the right way. I don't see that happening anytime soon.
- noahhoward, on 04/17/2008, -12/+6What is the establishment doing to you? What change to your life has been made, how many round-ups of the population have been made, when was the last time the feds busted down your door for saying ***** george bush? There is no ***** police state, get a life,.
- TomK88, on 04/17/2008, -3/+39I can see this as acceptable if you are found guilty of a crime...but just for being arrested? Absurd.
- bjornski, on 04/17/2008, -0/+18And it's getting easier and easier to be detained every single day.
- lacronicus, on 04/17/2008, -3/+1They have to collect evidence against you before they can convict you, so the only real difference this makes is whether they keep it on catalog or not; they have to give you the test anyway so they can check it against the crime scene. TBH, the only thing cataloging can do is make it quicker for both of you should you be arrested again.
- SpykerSpeed, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3You might want to limit it to being found guilty of a VIOLENT crime. Downloading music shouldn't mean getting your DNA sample added to a database. But I, being a freakish libertarian, don't support the government ever having anyone's DNA on permanent record.
- 7fields, on 04/17/2008, -22/+16They already collect a mug shot and finger prints. I'm not sure why this is any worse.
- atact88, on 04/17/2008, -17/+11Overreaction is a trademark to this website.
- Daniel591992, on 04/17/2008, -11/+1Yeah, really. Who cares? Don't be an idiot and get arrested...
- waynetheman, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2Because only "idiots" get arrested. Nice world you live in there....
- Daniel591992, on 04/17/2008, -11/+1Yeah, really. Who cares? Don't be an idiot and get arrested...
- noahhoward, on 04/17/2008, -11/+7It's not we just have a bunch of retards here that have no idea what a fascist regime would be like.
- inspecality, on 04/17/2008, -3/+8Of course you would though.
- noahhoward, on 04/17/2008, -7/+2Yeah I've got handy references like history books and dictionaries.
- Daedalus81, on 04/17/2008, -2/+5Well, if you read them then you would probably agree that this would be something that a facist regime would use. We have the same books you know.
- PeppermintPig, on 04/17/2008, -2/+10An American fascist state will have similar traits as other fascist states that have come before, but the branding, the look and feel will be unique based on nationalistic aspirations. Those in power may point to 'former national greatness', 'wisdom of the founders' or 'obedience to the law', and contrast these against the current situation, decrying anything that they claim defies the esoteric standard of nationalism that they profess. Phrases and words will be manipulated and re-purposed to support the actions of the state, while those individuals in power defile law and principle to promote their personal agendas. They will also openly break the law and defend their actions under the argument that they serve populist interests of defense and protection of the people. Symbols such as the American flag, which carries with it fond memories for many citizens, will be used to cloak the regime. Let's hope you can distinguish the warning signs through the propaganda, because fascism has a common thread even though it appears in many forms and degrees.
- noahhoward, on 04/17/2008, -6/+3Right so what does that have to do with what is essentially high-tech fingerprinting, something they have been doing for years. If the goal is a police state what has been taking them so long?
- PeppermintPig, on 04/17/2008, -2/+6You brought up the subject, so you tell me.
You're suggesting it's a tin-foil conspiracy perhaps? Many individuals who believe in the 'NWO Conspiracy' also think they can use the government to bring about justice. And no two conspiracy theorists believes the exact same thing as well. It's practically a form of dramatic entertainment where they 'research' what's going on and then do nothing about it.
That's not to say there isn't a police state. Many characteristics of a police state already exist. People typically cite militarization of the force as one element. War on drugs would be another.
Having a police force at all may certainly be one marker if we saw through the eyes of an American who lived before the US even had Police. And did we have chaos in the streets before that time??
Incrementalism allows people to tolerate restrictive changes in the governing structure. There's only so much that bloated bureaucracy and corrupt officials can do through a year to advance a police state, so it's naturally a slow progression. - noahhoward, on 04/17/2008, -5/+1"Incrementalism allows people to tolerate restrictive changes in the governing structure. There's only so much that bloated bureaucracy and corrupt officials can do through a year to advance a police state, so it's naturally a slow progression."
That is one of the keythings that make the paranoia and conspiracies completely ridiculous. For the incremental police state theory to be valid we would already have to be under the control of one group, every politician in every country with the same policies would have to be in on it as would all the politicians who came before them.
For example, militarizing police: Which makes more sense?
- The police were militarised as a response to an eye-opening incident where the police were outgunned (fact)
- The people who thought up SWAT were part of a conspiracy that started decades before they came to 'power'.
Every 'marker' of a police state can be individually explained with facts, if all of these things happened in a short time I'd see a problem, but with the separation between them it is more of a natural progression. In the instance of police militarization, it is the end result of the police trying to stay a step ahead of criminals and vice versa. - skanton, on 04/17/2008, -1/+0You pursue your interests, they pursue theirs. Their real interests work against yours.
Why is it so hard for you to believe that these people are working against you? It is in their best interest to exploit you. And they do.
If you really want to know about our reality, google a speaker by the name of MICHAEL PARENTI.
- PeppermintPig, on 04/17/2008, -2/+6You brought up the subject, so you tell me.
- noahhoward, on 04/17/2008, -6/+3Right so what does that have to do with what is essentially high-tech fingerprinting, something they have been doing for years. If the goal is a police state what has been taking them so long?
- inspecality, on 04/17/2008, -3/+8Of course you would though.
- yohnstoppable, on 04/17/2008, -16/+10It isn't any worse. People here just like to overreact to everything. Fingerprinting and mugshotting people upon arrest has done a LOT of good towards crime solving, and dna is just a better way of doing it.
Seriously, digg is full of some really stupid people. A bunch of little crybabies who overreact to every single story with "are we revolting yet!" or "It is 1984 irl!" If you actually believe it is THAT bad, then why are you sitting at home doing nothing but annoying people online with your stupidity?- Bantec, on 04/17/2008, -4/+5When we overreacted a few years ago and told you that they would start massive DNA databases, people like you said we were being 'crybabies'. It seems that some people see the writing on the wall and others don't. The police state is coming so hard and fast, that you are becoming part of the minority. Problem is, the converts (originally a little slow on the uptake) are not moving fast enough. People will read about us in history books, and wonder 'why we didn't do anything'. Because we were surrounded by mass stupidity. Smile *****!!
- coyote1284, on 04/17/2008, -2/+3"People will read about us in history books" No, they won't, comrade. BTW, we have always been at war with Oceana.
- Bantec, on 04/17/2008, -4/+5When we overreacted a few years ago and told you that they would start massive DNA databases, people like you said we were being 'crybabies'. It seems that some people see the writing on the wall and others don't. The police state is coming so hard and fast, that you are becoming part of the minority. Problem is, the converts (originally a little slow on the uptake) are not moving fast enough. People will read about us in history books, and wonder 'why we didn't do anything'. Because we were surrounded by mass stupidity. Smile *****!!
- PeppermintPig, on 04/17/2008, -3/+16Corruption and abuse. We like to think the law will do good things, but time and again the bad apples rise through the ranks and use their positions to commit crimes themselves, which include trampling over the rights of the innocent.
- noahhoward, on 04/17/2008, -9/+51. That is no excuse to block beneficial advances.
2. *****, name the times the fingerprint database was abused. How many children who were fingerprinted as part of safety programs were conveniently accused of some crime when they spoke out against the government years later. It is utter crap and you know it.- Daedalus81, on 04/17/2008, -1/+4Honest questions...
Is it possible to plant fingerprints? Is it possible to plant DNA evidence? Which is easier? Is it possible to abuse the DNA in some other way?- noahhoward, on 04/17/2008, -5/+4Yes. Yes. Fingerprints. Like any other technology on earth it COULD be abused, my point was, that there is no reason to think they will because they have shown no government wide inclination to do so in the past.
- lacronicus, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Of couse it's "possible" to plant fingerprints. Of course it's "possible" to plant DNA. It's also "possible" to plant shoeprints, blood, murder weapons, dirt, bloodstains, anything you might find in a crime scene. However, does that mean we should simply disregard the entire crime scene, *just* because someone *might* have planted fake evidence?
- PeppermintPig, on 04/17/2008, -3/+4So individuals in government have shown no inclination to abuse the system?
The question isn't so much whether fingerprints or DNA are useful for identifying individuals, or whether they can be used to frame others, but rather who is fit to oversee such materials since this influences whether the advance is being used in a beneficial way that promotes justice. Without the context of reality, you only see the benefit of the advancement of forensics and DNA. Who touts its beneficial qualities?
Over time, the government expands its role and justifies new ways of using such material. In this regard, DNA has vastly greater potential of use and abuse than a fingerprint.- noahhoward, on 04/17/2008, -4/+2Individuals, yes. Those same individuals have also been prosecuted for their crimes, falsifying evidence is falsifying evidence it is a crime that exists with or without the tools to do it.
Do you determine who is fit to oversee your bank account? Your mortgage? Who determines that the guy who installed your electrical system is fit to do so? Reality considered DNA is still just an advancement in an existing field, there is no new way of using it there is no change it is simply more accurate.
- noahhoward, on 04/17/2008, -4/+2Individuals, yes. Those same individuals have also been prosecuted for their crimes, falsifying evidence is falsifying evidence it is a crime that exists with or without the tools to do it.
- Daedalus81, on 04/17/2008, -1/+4Honest questions...
- noahhoward, on 04/17/2008, -9/+51. That is no excuse to block beneficial advances.
- kymike, on 04/17/2008, -1/+9There is one very important difference: With DNA, you can get partial matches to family members. By collecting DNA from the large number of people that are simply arrested (not just the ones that are convicted), the government will be able to build up a DNA database that might eventually be able to allow them to track down anyone (through a DNA relationship tree) - whether they have your specific DNA or not.
- kymike, on 04/17/2008, -0/+5I forgot to mention why this is important: Increasingly, our (federal) government attempts to legislate moral issues that would be better left for the states or local city governments to handle (if at all). I wouldn't have a problem if such evidence - along with all the other eavesdropping - was ONLY used for violent crime, and could be guaranteed to only be used for that purpose.
But, unfortunately, it doesn't work that way. As the government gets more intrusive, they step on more and more toes. Right now, many of you may not care if, for example, marijuana is illegal, even for medicinal purposes. But then a number of people didn't like it when the federal government made online poker illegal. Eventually, government will step on your toes, too.
Such a DNA database - making use of partial matches - will give the government an incredible amount of power to arrest and convict people for "moral" crimes - which shouldn't even be regulated by the government (and that's a big IMHO, obviously.)- kymike, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3Btw, as an example of how DNA can be used to find related family members, check out the following DNA genealogy site:
www.familytreedna.com
- kymike, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3Btw, as an example of how DNA can be used to find related family members, check out the following DNA genealogy site:
- kymike, on 04/17/2008, -0/+5I forgot to mention why this is important: Increasingly, our (federal) government attempts to legislate moral issues that would be better left for the states or local city governments to handle (if at all). I wouldn't have a problem if such evidence - along with all the other eavesdropping - was ONLY used for violent crime, and could be guaranteed to only be used for that purpose.
- atact88, on 04/17/2008, -17/+11Overreaction is a trademark to this website.
- pleiadianagenda, on 04/17/2008, -7/+25What a disgusting mess. How long before the showers and the ovens? The founding fathers are spinning in their graves. This is absolutely and purely a fascist move. Sickening.
- LadyKofNYC, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3Agreed. I think even the central bank loving Federalist, Hamilton, would take issue with this.
- atact88, on 04/17/2008, -18/+5I suppose you all are against fingerprinting and mugshots as well? This is just a more accurate method....
- MikeFromAmerica, on 04/17/2008, -0/+10I'm against fingerprinting innocent people. If you're found innocent or charges are dropped, all of that information should be destroyed.
- bagelmaster, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4Yes, I agree. Except I would probably even wait until they were CONVICTED not just arrested or put on trial, to take the sample. And if they were later found to be innocent of that crime, then the data should be destroyed.
- atact88, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Waiting until after conviction defeats the purpose, doesn't it? It makes the last 20 years of forensic technology pointless. We're back to witnesses, polygraphs, and circumstantial evidence.
If having my DNA on file means the feds can rule me out as a suspect without busting down my door and arresting me in order to supoena my DNA, I'm all for it. - lacronicus, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2Taking a fingerprint after you're convicted means they couldn't have used your fingerprints to convict you. Same with DNA. Problem with that is, many cases are successfully solved through those means.
- atact88, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Waiting until after conviction defeats the purpose, doesn't it? It makes the last 20 years of forensic technology pointless. We're back to witnesses, polygraphs, and circumstantial evidence.
- waynetheman, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Good call. Amazing how few people even think this far ahead.
- bagelmaster, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4Yes, I agree. Except I would probably even wait until they were CONVICTED not just arrested or put on trial, to take the sample. And if they were later found to be innocent of that crime, then the data should be destroyed.
- waynetheman, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1You don't have a clue what information is present in one's DNA, or what can be done with it, do you?
- Parkinsons, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1No. Please tell me.
- atact88, on 04/19/2008, -0/+0I'm a biochemist, I'm very aware of what's in DNA. I'm not alarmed, because the media is stupid and misinformative 99% of the time.
- MikeFromAmerica, on 04/17/2008, -0/+10I'm against fingerprinting innocent people. If you're found innocent or charges are dropped, all of that information should be destroyed.
- coldfire201, on 04/17/2008, -3/+14What was so wrong with the 5 amendment... nothing! Who is John Galt?
- Vileputrid, on 04/17/2008, -4/+421984 was NOT an instruction manual!
- stealthc, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3Apparently it was.
- syphern, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2Was it really homie?
- DailyWail, on 04/17/2008, -5/+15Welcome to England!
- ravage86, on 04/17/2008, -4/+25Tomorrow: scientists find gene that increases the chances of someone being violent, 10 million americans sent to camps as a result.
- RRJackson, on 04/17/2008, -14/+2Good. At the very least they should already be sterilizing violent criminals, but we wouldn't want to prevent them from exercising their "God-given" right to fill the world with more violent criminals.
- papipablo, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2Supreme Court said that was unconstitutional in the 19th Century.
- RRJackson, on 04/17/2008, -3/+2McCain will be in a position to seat a couple of justices during his terms in office. Maybe something can be done about changing that.
- papipablo, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2Look up the words "stare decisis."
- RRJackson, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2A decision made in the 19th century before Miescher had even discovered DNA shouldn't be all that hard to overturn.
- papipablo, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2Skinner v. Oklahoma is the Court's benchmark on this issue. I post this link for people curious about sterilization. I know this troll's reasoning is limited to saying "ditto."
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?n ... - RRJackson, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2Because if you don't marginalize anyone who disagrees with you then you don't feel secure that your opinions contain the only "truth" in the discussion.
Even in that decision Justice Jackson was clear about the science being beyond their understanding: "I also think the present plan to sterilize the individual in pursuit of a eugenic plan to eliminate from the race characteristics that are only vaguely identified and which in our present state of knowledge are uncertain as to transmissibility."
Except that we can identify genetic markers that are common to people with aggressive tendencies now. And science is getting clearer on what markers are indicative of what traits all the time. Three-strikers carrying the relevant markers should never be able to reproduce.
Of course, a much more reliable method of sterilization is execution. Three strikes and you forfeit the right to appeal and we expedite the process of getting the body on a slab works fine if you prefer that. Maybe even auction off the organs to reimburse the state for all the effort of providing a trial at all. - bjornski, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Well said, RR.
- bjornski, on 04/17/2008, -1/+3"It's just a god-damn piece of paper!"
- RRJackson, on 04/17/2008, -3/+2McCain will be in a position to seat a couple of justices during his terms in office. Maybe something can be done about changing that.
- stealthc, on 04/17/2008, -3/+3I really hope you're being sarcastic, or ironic, or something. Eugenics is antiquated social-engineering quackery that should have died with the mad scientists in the 1800s who dreamed it up. Unfortunately the brain damage lives on in the collectivist crazies who talk like you.
- RRJackson, on 04/17/2008, -3/+3The eugenics movement died out, but surely you don't think there are no such things as hereditary traits? Selective breeding transformed the wolf into 800 breeds of domesticated dog.
- papipablo, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2Supreme Court said that was unconstitutional in the 19th Century.
- bjornski, on 04/17/2008, -1/+8We're only detaining them for "pre-crime" reasons. I'm sure you understand.
- RRJackson, on 04/17/2008, -7/+1Someone needs to stroll through the Non-Fiction section from time to time.
- inspecality, on 04/17/2008, -1/+7They release calming gas, we become reavers.
- stealthc, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2Now *that* would be pretty awesome. A reaver death is probably an appropriate consequence for pushing tyranny.
- coyote1284, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2You can't stop the signal!
- slightlygifted, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1who do you think is going to take people away to camps? you realize the army and police are also made up of americans? with minds that can think? they are not just government drones who would drag off friends and family to camps or even themselves just cause "the government" (im pretty sure they have to go through a lot of legislature to pass a law and everyone will know about it) told them to? get a grip and stop going crazy cause the house is considering ways to lower crime. and as for your genetic info being shared to insurance companies......they dont ask for your genetic info when you take out a life insurance policy because it costs a lot of money to find that stuff out and frankly they already take enough blood and urine samples to find out all of your medical info before selling you a policy so shut it.
- Parkinsons, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Not to incite goodwins law but... You could say the same of the people in Nazi Germany.
- RRJackson, on 04/17/2008, -14/+2Good. At the very least they should already be sterilizing violent criminals, but we wouldn't want to prevent them from exercising their "God-given" right to fill the world with more violent criminals.
- govsucks, on 04/17/2008, -1/+18When the government controls your health care do you really think they will have a hard time getting your DNA? I mean really, the same people that bitch about this will ASK for the feds to take care of their health. They could easily keep a database of everyone in the nation without having to arrest you. Socialism = Slavery to Government
- Sinnic, on 04/17/2008, -2/+3The same people?
Ron Paul thinks you need to get out more. - lacronicus, on 04/17/2008, -3/+1But socialism also = people run government. So really, you're "enslaved" to yourself and society. IIRC, that's exactly what life is.
- waynetheman, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Yeah, because I, as a single individual member of society, can single-handedly determine who gets elected, what laws get passed, how they're implemented, and how the Bush/Clinton administration two generations down the line will make use of said laws.
Brilliant.
- waynetheman, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Yeah, because I, as a single individual member of society, can single-handedly determine who gets elected, what laws get passed, how they're implemented, and how the Bush/Clinton administration two generations down the line will make use of said laws.
- slightlygifted, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1wow how is having your dna on file such a bad thing? they take your fingerprints when your arrested and they take your footprints at birth, if anything this kind of stuff will just help you if you are innocent.
- govsucks, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Yeah, its OK for the government to have your "Source Code". I'm sure they won't do anything bad with it.
- Sinnic, on 04/17/2008, -2/+3The same people?
- seraphisset, on 04/17/2008, -1/+11I know I'm not the only one hearing the jackboots approaching.
- itsgotime, on 04/17/2008, -1/+9It's not just the Federal government. The state of Maryland is doing it too: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/politics/ba ...
- RRJackson, on 04/17/2008, -19/+2Good. Hopefully it becomes practical to have DNA on everyone soon. Enough of this crap where you arrest someone and can't sift through their aliases.
- waynetheman, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Control freak.
- omnithought, on 04/17/2008, -2/+18"We're going to take a sample of your DNA, and this will prevent you from ever doing anything illegal again!"
Yeah, that'll work.- lacronicus, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2No, it's supposed to make sure you never get away with anything again. logical fallacy ftl.
- jpittawa, on 04/17/2008, -14/+4Why is this such a big deal? Every person arrested has their picture and their fingerprints entered into CODIS. Every person who has driven a car on city street or used an ATM or walked into a bank is been photographed. Far more personal information is disk somewhere in Asia.
- waynetheman, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Sit down for a second. Write out a list of differences between having a fingerprint, and A PIECE OF YOUR PERSON on file. Then come back and tell us that there's no substantive difference between the two.
- yohnstoppable, on 04/17/2008, -15/+3I have some extra tin foil hats if anyone is interested. Buy one get one free while supplies last!
- waynetheman, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2Yeah, because government is infallible, never makes mistakes, and never has agents that do bad things....
- yohnstoppable, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1I hear blackhawk helicopters in the distance. Run before they take you away!
- waynetheman, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1You're laughing at this development?
You would have been a great German circa WW2.
I give up though. Just roll back over and go to sleep. It'll all be alright.
- waynetheman, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1You're laughing at this development?
- waynetheman, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1....
- yohnstoppable, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1I hear blackhawk helicopters in the distance. Run before they take you away!
- waynetheman, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2Yeah, because government is infallible, never makes mistakes, and never has agents that do bad things....
- vrich187, on 04/17/2008, -3/+20"Papers, Papers, where are your papers?" No big deal right? I wasn't using my civil liberties anyways.
- weside, on 04/17/2008, -2/+6Awesome. I've been calling for this for years.
- mdcraig62, on 04/17/2008, -1/+8so I guess they will have to hire more people at the Ministry of Love to handle this?
- Gwennyk, on 04/19/2008, -0/+0Most definitely! :P
- Kmap, on 04/17/2008, -1/+5I plead the fif!
- mal1964, on 04/17/2008, -1/+3A new sub-division of the FBI will be in charge of it; "FedNA"
http://www.fedna.org/ - mrzack, on 04/17/2008, -2/+7I told you people, SEE!! Police state!! 1984, Soylant green, Half-Life 2, Children of Men, Minority Report, the Running Man, Johnny Mnemonic, Big Brother Is watching!!!!
- verkon, on 04/17/2008, -4/+1Halo! Wait, no no, never mind.
- coyote1284, on 04/17/2008, -1/+5You forgot Brave New World (which is what the current entertained and doped society looks closer to)
- moocow1452, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1I'm more of a 451 person myself, as that is as far as my radar goes.
- DeadElephant, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2The Giver, Anthem, also good reads.
- erickssm, on 04/17/2008, -15/+1if you dont want your DNA on record, dont get arrested! its not different then a finger print....why do all the nuts assume that innocent people will be hurt by something like this?
- ripple123, on 04/17/2008, -1/+6Thats ***** brilliant man. Why didn't I think of that. That you find it impossible to conceive that a innocent person could be arrested shows just how idiotic you are.
- CaptainAmerica1, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1Take a breath -- last time I checked there is no requirement to be guilty of something to be arrested.
- waynetheman, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Because innocent people get arrested, and then subsequently acquitted, by the hundreds every day in the U.S.
Do you also run around trying to get rid of seat belts, telling people that if they don't want to get hurt they just shouldn't get into accidents?
Moron.
Think before you try to defend this government.
And then hey, you can be first in line to give them your DNA, or a egg or sperm sample, or whatever other damnable fascist nonsense they want from us.
- ripple123, on 04/17/2008, -1/+6Thats ***** brilliant man. Why didn't I think of that. That you find it impossible to conceive that a innocent person could be arrested shows just how idiotic you are.
- hokie47, on 04/17/2008, -13/+4It is not much different than finger prints
- jp12380, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4Except for the fact that once they have your DNA other people could possibly gain access to it for other purposes other then identification. They can figure out all of your genetic defects, that information hopefully will take out of the hands of insurance company's as well as any one else that would use it to your detriment.
- waynetheman, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2You can't have your most private genetic deficiencies analyzed from a fingerprint.
You can't be cataloged according to family, ethnicity, skin color, or sub-group-of-your-choice from a fingerprint.
You can't be cloned from a fingerprint.
Did you even give this a second of thought, or do you just defend everything your government plans to do?
How about they take a sperm sample too, while they're at it? Would you still defend this?
- Hubris, on 04/17/2008, -1/+13First provision in this legislation should be that all members of Congress, the senate, the judiciary, and every federal agency capable of arresting the public should have all their DNA entered into the system.....to prove how it truly isn't invasive of privacy and everybody should be thankful for the privilege.
- walls750, on 04/17/2008, -2/+8that a boy...take my DNA, then grow some tissue or hair or what ever human parts from it, and then throw that newly grown part on a crime seen, and BOOM, fcuk me...One thing for sure, i won't raise my future children in North America. I'll move into some country where people aren't afraid of protesting hand to hand with government police.
- Brasky, on 04/17/2008, -8/+4The fact that you can't even use the word "seen" in the right context shows you are a moron that shouldn't raise children. Why the ***** does everyone here think they are so ***** important that they will be framed? Who here will be detained by federal authorities in the first place? Calm down and go have a beer...
- walls750, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4give me a break...i wrote that waking up...you know exactly what i meant but just couldn't help your self. You'll argue about a misspell, but not on that fascist issue. You know what, go fckn stick a RFID up your a**
- temsi, on 04/17/2008, -0/+5You're both missing the point.
It's not about anyone being framed for anything.
It's about this being a blatant and transparent violation of the 4th and 5th Amendments - and because it CAN lead to someone being wrongly accused of a crime.
The 4th because it's an unreasonable search (a warrant must specify what is being sought - a blanket warrant for "any crime" does not work).
The 5th because if they can link your DNA to a crime scene, even if you were just an innocent bystander, you could easily find yourself on the business end of a criminal charge, just because you were there. If this happens, then you've been forced to incriminate yourself, by giving up your DNA for testing.
This is a REALLY bad idea.
Let's examine this with a hypothetical:
10 years ago, while in college, you go out for drinks, meet a girl, go home with her and sleep with her without using a condom.
The next morning, you find out she was raped and killed later that night by someone else.
Your DNA is now evidence collected at the scene of a rape and homicide.
You have no alibi for your whereabouts that night, and you don't know anything about what happened, so you decide not to talk to the police, as you feel you might be considered a suspect, and you're 6 months away from finishing medical school.
Today, while traveling with your wife and 3 children, you get detained by an Air Marshall, on suspicion of smoking in the restroom of an airplane (but it wasn't you, it was the guy who was in there right before you).
Since the Air Marshall is a Federal Officer, he takes your DNA sample as he's required to do according to this law.
Your DNA goes into the system, where it is soon matched with the DNA collected from the body of that girl you slept with 10 years ago - placing you at the scene, and as someone who had sex with her that night.
You get arrested, and since you have no alibi, your DNA was found inside the victim, a witness identifies you as the man she was seen leaving the bar with that night, and the fact that you never talked to the police at the time, you're now likely to get convicted for a crime you didn't commit, all because someone else smoked in an airplane restroom - and because your 4th and 5th Amendment rights were violated.
This law is ***** and it MUST be stopped.- herkimer65, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2I wish you had been the first poster on this thread. This was truly well put.
- CaptainAmerica1, on 04/17/2008, -3/+2Don't worry -- you'll probably get a collection of mental giants like those who were on the O.J. jury on yours and you'll walk, no problem.
- lacronicus, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3It's always been theoretically possible to commit the perfect crime, but does that mean we should simply not bother with the investigative process? If you have a problem with this, you should have a problem with shoe prints (using someone elses shoes), eye-witnesses (masks), or just about anything else you might use as evidence from a crime scene, and everything we've used in the past was far easier to fake.
- XFARB6, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1Don't let the door slap you in the ass.
- Brasky, on 04/17/2008, -8/+4The fact that you can't even use the word "seen" in the right context shows you are a moron that shouldn't raise children. Why the ***** does everyone here think they are so ***** important that they will be framed? Who here will be detained by federal authorities in the first place? Calm down and go have a beer...
- itsmattgw, on 04/17/2008, -2/+7most of the time when i'm arrested it was because i just got rid of some DNA
- verkon, on 04/17/2008, -13/+2This will not hurt innocent people, it will just make it easier to catc