DNA samples/missing children

[Leeloo-Minai]

Should DNA samples be taken at birth to help track missing children?

This was the question posed by AEtv between Cold Case commercials.

Some claim is will help identity bodies found that are unidentifiable.

Others claim an Orwellian invasion of privacy.

Your thoughts?

[fli]

At 4/11/07 12:48 PM, Leeloo-Minai wrote: Should DNA samples be taken at birth to help track missing children?

This was the question posed by AEtv between Cold Case commercials.

Some claim is will help identity bodies found that are unidentifiable.

Others claim an Orwellian invasion of privacy.

Your thoughts?

I highly agree with this.
I mean, as much as I believe in freedoms and rights--

I don't see how this could be invasive IF we put in laws that prevents all access to DNA access unless the case involves with a missing person or indentification of bodies.

Although, much more contraversial... I believe repeated felons (I mean... big time crimes. Not petty stealing and marijuana crap like that...) should have their DNA submitted in a data base.

So many cold case files have been solved because of that.

[Paradigms]

Although, much more contraversial... I believe repeated felons (I mean... big time crimes. Not petty stealing and marijuana crap like that...) should have their DNA submitted in a data base.

All criminals that are arrested, even for small things, have to have fingerprint scans, and their fingerprints are put into a database, to find out if a crime did happen, if it was one of those people.

[Korriken]

I'm all for DNA database. It would be a great Identification tool. of course the information would have to have many of the same rules medical records have, confidential, no access for anyone without your consent, and a federal law prohibiting businesses from mandating you release the info to them as a requirement for hiring.

It could work if it was implemented right, of course you also got those who are scared shitless of the whim of the government actually having a tool to use against criminals.

[MortifiedPenguins]

At 4/11/07 01:37 PM, fli wrote:

At 4/11/07 12:48 PM, Leeloo-Minai wrote:

I don't see how this could be invasive IF we put in laws that prevents all access to DNA access unless the case involves with a missing person or indentification of bodies.

Please, and what stops the government from infringing on those laws by Executive Order as seen in bills as the PATRIOT ACT.

I don't need to give up any more of my personal information to the government without Due Process of Law.

Although, much more contraversial... I believe repeated felons (I mean... big time crimes. Not petty stealing and marijuana crap like that...) should have their DNA submitted in a data base.

And I believe other wise.

[stafffighter]

I have to agree here that d.n.a sampeling at birth, much like the simularly themed microchip implantation have far too much potential for missuse to be done en masse. It's not that I doubt the pure science of it. It's more that I don't trust the motivations of anyone who'd be willing to do that to a population.

[Korriken]

At 4/11/07 06:05 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

Please, and what stops the government from infringing on those laws by Executive Order as seen in bills as the PATRIOT ACT.

since WHEN did someone get wrongfully locked up for something due to the patriot act? liberals seem to have something major against the patriot act, like the government is running around locking up people for no apparent reason, like the government taps every phone call and listens in, beating off to you as you tell someone else how your day went.

I don't need to give up any more of my personal information to the government without Due Process of Law.

have something to hide there? hmm? a few... skeletons in your closet?

Although, much more contraversial... I believe repeated felons (I mean... big time crimes. Not petty stealing and marijuana crap like that...) should have their DNA submitted in a data base.

And I believe other wise.

do you have any idea the power prosecutors would have over criminals if they had a DNA database? not to mention save people a lot of frustration due to wrongful arrests. the cops find a raped and brutalized woman on the side of the road on the verge of death. she dies in the hospital. they find semen in her and compare it in the database, it points to some guy that the cops would have otherwise never found. Personally I would rather have the maggot locked up for the rest of his life or executed for his crime, rather than let him have the chance to do it again.

[stafffighter]

At 4/11/07 06:17 PM, Korriken wrote:

At 4/11/07 06:05 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

I don't need to give up any more of my personal information to the government without Due Process of Law.

have something to hide there? hmm? a few... skeletons in your closet?

So do you beleive then that we were given the right of privacy soley due to skeletons in ones closet?

the cops find a raped and brutalized woman on the side of the road on the verge of death. she dies in the hospital. they find semen in her and compare it in the database, it points to some guy that the cops would have otherwise never found. Personally I would rather have the maggot locked up for the rest of his life or executed for his crime, rather than let him have the chance to do it again.

A few holes in that theory.

1. The event could have been staged.

2. She could have had consentual sex then been beaten up.

3. He might have had partners in the crime that the semen didn't identify.

4. The criminal could have been smart enough to not leave his d.n.a all over her.

[MortifiedPenguins]

At 4/11/07 06:27 PM, stafffighter wrote:

At 4/11/07 06:17 PM, Korriken wrote:

At 4/11/07 06:05 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

A few holes in that theory.

And there's always the chance of a Police setup.

[Brick-top]

Well it sounds like a good idea but if this does happen the sample cannot be used if the person(s) are involved in a crime without a warrent and it would be best to get it straight from the person themself. So identifying bodies does sound wierd but I think its a good idea. Also it can open up potential identification for other purposes other than identifying bodies and potential criminals.

[Memorize]

This probly wouldn't happen. Why? Because moronic liberals are paranoid.

[Brick-top]

At 4/11/07 06:49 PM, Memorize wrote: This probly wouldn't happen. Why? Because moronic liberals are paranoid.

"OMG OMG Someone has my blood! Im going to catch aids!!!! Somone is going to pee in it!"
"Get to the liberal cave and talk about global warming"
"Thank you Hilary-man"

[stafffighter]

At 4/11/07 06:59 PM, Brick-top wrote:

"OMG OMG Someone has my blood! Im going to catch aids!!!! Somone is going to pee in it!"
"Get to the liberal cave and talk about global warming"
"Thank you Hilary-man"

You're a dumb ass. Thanks for taking credibility away from the smart conservatives.

Something else occured to me about the missing children. How would the d.n.a eventually find them? Are we counting on kidnappers taking them for regular check ups where blood would be sampled? If they were found of course this would work in identifing them but it's not a means to do the finding.

[Brick-top]

At 4/11/07 07:05 PM, stafffighter wrote:

At 4/11/07 06:59 PM, Brick-top wrote:

"OMG OMG Someone has my blood! Im going to catch aids!!!! Somone is going to pee in it!"
"Get to the liberal cave and talk about global warming"
"Thank you Hilary-man"

You're a dumb ass. Thanks for taking credibility away from the smart conservatives.

I'm not a conservative. And you know nothing of my intelligence so shut up.

Something else occured to me about the missing children. How would the d.n.a eventually find them? Are we counting on kidnappers taking them for regular check ups where blood would be sampled? If they were found of course this would work in identifing them but it's not a means to do the finding.

Your dead and rotting in a ditch. Your fingerprints have decomposed, and your facial features are practically nothing. How do I find out its you?

[Memorize]

At 4/11/07 07:05 PM, stafffighter wrote:

If they were found of course this would work in identifing them but it's not a means to do the finding.

It would also help in the capture and arrest of first offenders.

[stafffighter]

At 4/11/07 07:17 PM, Memorize wrote:

At 4/11/07 07:05 PM, stafffighter wrote:

If they were found of course this would work in identifing them but it's not a means to do the finding.

It would also help in the capture and arrest of first offenders.

But what if it's one of them smart criminals who takes precautions?

[Memorize]

At 4/11/07 07:19 PM, stafffighter wrote:

But what if it's one of them smart criminals who takes precautions?

Then we would be unable to find them either way now wouldn't we.

[DrBrainTrust]

Personally, I don't think that a DNA database would be much more different than infants getting their footprint taken at birth, or workers at certain jobs getting their fingerprints taken. I can't think of anything that the law enforcement agency can do with a DNA profile that they can't already do with the identification methods we have now, but maybe I'm not that creative.

[stafffighter]

At 4/11/07 07:24 PM, Memorize wrote:

At 4/11/07 07:19 PM, stafffighter wrote:

But what if it's one of them smart criminals who takes precautions?

Then we would be unable to find them either way now wouldn't we.

So your thought is that d.n.a database would only be effective if criminals are dumb?

[Memorize]

At 4/11/07 07:26 PM, stafffighter wrote:

So your thought is that d.n.a database would only be effective if criminals are dumb?

Well, you have 2 options.

1. We don't do it. Both smart and dumb criminals get off.
2. We do it. Dumb criminals are caught, smart are not.

So, what's wrong with a little progress?

[stafffighter]

At 4/11/07 07:42 PM, Memorize wrote:
Well, you have 2 options.

1. We don't do it. Both smart and dumb criminals get off.
2. We do it. Dumb criminals are caught, smart are not.

So, what's wrong with a little progress?

You are aware criminals are already being caught right?

[Memorize]

At 4/11/07 07:52 PM, stafffighter wrote:

You are aware criminals are already being caught right?

First offense criminals are what i'm talking about.

Instead of having to wait for him/her to comitt another crime so they have something to compare DNA to, they could just use the DNA from the first crime scene.

[stafffighter]

At 4/11/07 07:53 PM, Memorize wrote:

First offense criminals are what i'm talking about.

Instead of having to wait for him/her to comitt another crime so they have something to compare DNA to, they could just use the DNA from the first crime scene.

Or if the criminal is dumb/unlucky, which is the only event in which there would be d.n.a evidence, they could be caught through existing investigative methods.

[Memorize]

At 4/11/07 07:57 PM, stafffighter wrote:

Or if the criminal is dumb/unlucky, which is the only event in which there would be d.n.a evidence, they could be caught through existing investigative methods.

Good enough.

It gives at least a little progress (depending on those looking at it) of catching criminals who might do it again. Especially rapists. There's no negative, so I don't know why you're making such a fuss about it.

[stafffighter]

At 4/11/07 08:06 PM, Memorize wrote:

It gives at least a little progress (depending on those looking at it) of catching criminals who might do it again. Especially rapists. There's no negative, so I don't know why you're making such a fuss about it.

Well first of all unless you intend for all the people who've already been born to have their d.n.a submitted, which beleive me you'll have trouble doing, at the best you have an incredibly complex and expensive measure that'll take until one of the babies grows up to be a dumb criminal to pay off.

[Gunter45]

Sounds like it would be open to enormous abuse. Like people have mentioned, it doesn't seem like it would have much use in finding kidnapped children. That smells a little fishy to me, it seems like that they're banking on getting it passed for the sake of the children even though they fully intend to do something completely different with the database.

[Memorize]

At 4/11/07 08:14 PM, stafffighter wrote:

Well first of all unless you intend for all the people who've already been born to have their d.n.a submitted, which beleive me you'll have trouble doing,

Just like you to not look at a long term solution. How typical.

[stafffighter]

At 4/11/07 08:20 PM, Memorize wrote:

Just like you to not look at a long term solution. How typical.

A long term solution which would only be useful in cases where was sufficient evidence for traditional investigation?

[LazyDrunk]

At 4/11/07 08:20 PM, Memorize wrote:

At 4/11/07 08:14 PM, stafffighter wrote:

Well first of all unless you intend for all the people who've already been born to have their d.n.a submitted, which beleive me you'll have trouble doing,

Just like you to not look at a long term solution. How typical.

The long term solution?

As you type that, I envision you envisioning some paradigm of utopian perfectionism, where we each get to make our own name tags, sing songs about plants and helpful animals, and the only thing you need to have is your Born In America DNA number.

Sounds great in the long term, doesn't, Memorize?

[Korriken]

At 4/11/07 07:19 PM, stafffighter wrote:

But what if it's one of them smart criminals who takes precautions?

"but what if" seems to be a huge drive against everything these days. well, if they took every precaution and left behind NOTHING, then the dna database wouldn't come into play. I'm not sure how this would have anything to do with not having it. if someone managed to get someone else's semen and planted it deep inside of another person... that's a different story. Not to mention, how in the hell are you gonna collect someone else's semen and manage to pull that one off.