Big Brother's gonna make inroads wherever/however he can. The useful tools on the left and right are only expediting it.

Obama Proposes a Federal DNA Database

This is to stop the terrorists. Do you want the terrorists to win?

well of course he does. Wonder if he will start collecting this info at birth? Make it required to get foodstamps or to claim a child on taxes?

Maybe incorporate this bio-info in the national id cards.

Nothing for us govt is too big and too intrusive to get concerned about, right? Everyone on the left was so sure it was only Bush that was going to take away your personal freedoms.

Bush and Obama, two sides of the same rotten apple.

Everyone on the left was so sure it was only Bush that was going to take away your personal freedoms.

I seem to recall many asking whether the Repubs would be comfortable with a Dem utilizing the powers W was sucking into the Executive.

I guess the answer is no.

As expected.

On topic-this is fucked up.

Collecting one's DNA is not anywhere near the same as collecting fingerprints ect.

Oh shit, I guess now they are going to find out I am from the planet Krypton.

I am against this. I think that only people who are convicted should have their DNA sampled. If we start out with sampling DNA from people who are merely arrested, it won't be long until some assholes comes up with the big idea of swabbing people if they are so mush as stopped for speeding. No thank you.

File this article under "If Bush Had Done This, The Libbies Would Have Already Pushed This Thread To 500 By Now"

That cabinet is nearly full, by the way.

Isn't Obama supposed to be some great Constitutional scholar? I question that. Not only did he screw up during the SOTU about a SCOTUS case, but now he favors crap like this. I've heard of grade inflation, but this is ridiculous.

I am still wondering where is that "Change" I voted for? Everyday it seems to me like we got Bush's 3rd term.

10 comments. Two are mine.

Remember when the libbies used to say things like "Pay as you go!" and "Keep your laws off my body!" ?

Ah, the memories. They were so cute.

"Bush and Obama, two sides of the same rotten apple."

I love a properly executed mixed metaphor.

One of my favorites: I don't have a dog in this fire.

Mine is "If at first you don't succeed is worth two in the bush."

Where's Corky, Savis and Danni? There must be a reasonable expanation for this. And Bush did it tooo ain't gonna cut it.

Not the sharpest apple in the cookie drawer...

If it were a snake in the last place I looked.

Good.

Perfect the science here, then sell the technology to other countries.

If you have nothing to hide, there's nothing to worry about. Privacy is so 20th century.

BIG BROTHER is here!!!!!!

This ain't Big Brother...it goes much deeper. This is Fatherland stuff.

A leopard can't change his stripes.

You can't teach an old dog red handed.

Isn't Obama supposed to be some great Constitutional scholar? I question that. Not only did he screw up during the SOTU about a SCOTUS case, but now he favors crap like this. I've heard of grade inflation, but this is ridiculous.

#8 | Posted by mitch

Can't you read the handwriting in the wind?

What are they going to do, send out DNA squads?

Make your Dr. hand it over?

What happened to the European Common law our Constitution is based on? Remember, we are guaranteed security in self, possesions, and reputation?

I can't wait to see the line up of civil rights lawyers to fight this one.

Except for all you pussies who whine about the ACLU all the time. You have to "donate."

Obama Proposes a Federal DNA Database

This is to stop the terrorists. Do you want the terrorists to win?

#2 | Posted by DARTHCHENEY at 2010-03-14 11:09 PM

Anyone else see the irony in darths 2 statements?

I'm hoping darth was just being sarcastic.

I went to the sites. They said Voluntarily retired and inactive. Just because someone who is a nurse thinks that they did something they shouldn't have does not mean they did. There are not malpractice claims, and do you really think that all the repubs would have not check every part of obama to try to find something on him.

on topic taking dna from people not convicted is bullshit.

I'm hoping darth was just being sarcastic.

#24 | Posted by briwo at 2010-03-15 02:09 PM

It's amazing to me how easily some people have done a 180 on civil liberties issues since we got a black, democratic president. Where is the "if you didn't do anything wrong you shouldn't care" crowd?

Where's Corky, Savis and Danni? There must be a reasonable expanation for this. And Bush did it tooo ain't gonna cut it.

#13 | Posted by wisgod at 2010-03-15 01:33 PM

My point exactly. Notice no 'libbies' are defending it, while the pants-pissing Bush supporters that once applauded such measures are falling over themselves to condemn this assault on civil liberties. Who you gonna call? The ACLU? LOL!

Briwo,

They'll cry "flu epidemic" swab the inside of your mouth. They'll kill a few poor people to make sure everyone gets "inoculated".

The government doesn't care about you, or your children, or your rights, or your welfare or your safety.

It simply does not give a fuck about you!

It's interested in its own power. That's the only thing.

Keeping it and expanding it wherever possible.

I oppose this. Just as I do a national ID card. Back off, Big Brother.

It has always been my contention that the right wings nuts are uneducated, close minded and sheepish on any policies concerning freedom and liberty in this country. They backed the Patriot Act which allows the government to spy on anyone they please, but when the government want's to keep track of who gets arrested for felonies, and how often, they scream bloody murder, yet, many states have been doing this for decades. What is even more ironic is that it was noted that Bush already signed a law that does this to every person arrested for a federal crime, and for the exact same reasons that Obama want's states to do this. Does any of his critics think fingerprinting, mug shots and background checks at the time of arrest are also a violation of the defendants rights? If they had done DNA checks in the past there would be a lot less convictions of innocent people. What republicans fear the most is all the trails they left behind as they let greed and lust control their lives and their fortunes.

As for the race card BS, proportionally a lot more blacks and minorities get arrested because they commit a disproportionally large amount of the felonies. You don't see too many white gangs running around shooting up the neighborhood.

think fingerprinting, mug shots and background checks at the time of arrest are also a violation of the defendants rights?

Those are non-invasive. DNA requires blood, a swab in my mouth, or the removal of hair. A fine line, but it is still a line worthy of respect.

Notice no 'libbies' are defending it, while the pants-pissing Bush supporters that once applauded such measures are falling over themselves to condemn this assault on civil liberties.

Isn't this exactly as you'd expect it?

They backed the Patriot Act which allows the government to spy on anyone they please

#29 | Posted by ringmaster at 2010-03-15 02:36 PM

Notice no 'libbies' are defending it

#26 | Posted by DARTHCHENEY at 2010-03-15 02:22 PM

Do I count LOD?

#9 | Posted by kanrei at 2010-03-15 11:18 AM
#18 | Posted by kanrei at 2010-03-15 01:51 PM

They're not tripping over themselves attacking it either. Gotta keep things positive; no criticizing the president.

#33 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2010-03-15 02:43 PM

Really? That's not what I'm seeing.

taking the dna is fine, but keeping it in a national data base is not. some states do have it, and that is there prerogative, the president should not create a national database that will pressure other states into keeping dna evidence on those not convicted.

however, can't they declare it a matter of national security and take it anyway with the patriot act.

I view this as simply an improvement in technology. Technology that is just as important to keeping the inocent free as it is to put the guilty behind bars. I look at it in much the same way that fingerprints have been used for 50 years. If you don't want to participate, don't. All you have to do is stay away from crime and criminals. It's not that hard really.

On the other hand, look for DNA samples to become commonplace in the workplace very soon.

On the other hand, look for DNA samples to become commonplace in the workplace very soon.

#37 | Posted by bogey1355 at 2010-03-15 02:49 PM

All you have to do is stay away from crime and criminals. It's not that hard really.

LOL! Anyone can be arrested, that is the point of this. ANYONE can be detained for 24 hours, booked, charged, and released.

LOL! Anyone can be arrested, that is the point of this. ANYONE can be detained for 24 hours, booked, charged, and released.

#39 | Posted by kanrei at 2010-03-15 02:50 PM

you said that you have to just stay away from crime? good luck doing that in a city. also if it is common place in work, then how does staying away from crime help

#33 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2010-03-15 02:43 PM | Reply | Flag: Whiner.

#42 | Posted by mitch at 2010-03-15 02:55 PM | Reply | Flag: Butt Hurt

I like this idea! Can catch criminals...Or me. I could care less who has my DNA.

I left my DNA in the mouths, butts and hoo-has of many women all around the world.

If the gubment had it, they can identify my remains after the EVIL-DOERS get me....

I could care less who has my DNA.

#44 | Posted by ArmyVet at 2010-03-15 02:56 PM

a vet would already be in the system

War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Power

I'm not sure how I feel about this. As it says in the article DNA has freed 200 innocent people from prison. In that finger prints are already collected I don't see that this is much different although the DNA collected should be kept strictly within the federal database with no chance ever of it being used by insurance companies, employers, or made public. Perhaps I haven't thought through all the ramifications and I will continue to think about it and read about it but for now I'm not against it.

"Arbeit macht frei"

I don't see that this is much different although the DNA collected should be kept strictly within the federal database with no chance ever of it being used by insurance companies, employers, or made public.

you mean exactly like a tapped phone conversation?

DNA collected should be kept strictly within the federal database with no chance ever of it being used by

You say this because you trust Obama. Would you trust Bush with this power? Laws remain in the books long after the person you trust with the power is gone.

you mean exactly like a tapped phone conversation?

Posted by eberly at 2010-03-15 03:06 PM

Don't worry too much. They won't torture you unless you are guilty.

you mean exactly like a tapped phone conversation?

#50 | Posted by eberly at 2010-03-15 03:06 PM

Bushlings are learning now that the powers they support in the hands of people they don't is rather frightening. To those who are blinded by the Obama-glare: ask yourself if you want Palin having this power?

I didn't piss my pants over this stuff when GWB was in off and I'm not now.

#55 | Posted by eberly at 2010-03-15 03:11 PM |

Fair enough. I did and I do.

I was against the big brother crap before Obama was president.

On telecomm immunity for wiretaps...

Fuck the GOP. Not a single 'No' on their side.

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2008-07-10 11:23 AM

Don't worry too much. They won't torture you unless you are guilty.

how many folks were tortured over a tapped phone conversation where a warrant wasn't obtained first?

how many folks were tortured over a tapped phone conversation where a warrant wasn't obtained first?

We will never know.

"how many folks were tortured over a tapped phone conversation where a warrant wasn't obtained first?"

Not sure if they were tortured, but I do know journalists file some stupid lawsuit claming they were victims of warrantless surveillance. I believe an appeals court threw it out.

I believe an appeals court threw it out.

but not before they handed them a diaper and advised them to put them on before shitting their pants next time.

We will never know.

we will also never know how many were tortured because they put catsup on their steak.

how many folks were tortured over a tapped phone conversation where a warrant wasn't obtained first?
420

Eb,
But we do know the government is not collecting a database of people who put ketchup on their steaks nor are any steak eaters being tortured for any other reasons. Weak retort man. You can do better.

Kanrei

I said "catsup" .....not "ketchup".

how is that for weak?

420?

what?

"You say this because you trust Obama. Would you trust Bush with this power?"

Good point. Like I said, I'm not sure how I feel about this. I just think that a person in prison who gets freed due to DNA is also an important consideration.

Also, along that same line, isn't is usually the prosecutors who usually oppose prisoners having DNA tests done and compared with evidence?

I said "catsup" .....not "ketchup".

how is that for weak?

LOL

I gotta go.

good thread.

isn't is usually the prosecutors who usually oppose prisoners having DNA tests done and compared with evidence?

I think for the already convicted, but I am sure they support it as evidence before trial.

I just think that a person in prison who gets freed due to DNA is also an important consideration.

#67 | Posted by danni at 2010-03-15 03:29 PM

I honestly don't have a problem with it either. If I'm innocent of a crime, I want someone to take my DNA so I can prove it.

Of course, that assumes the police won't be planting evidence, but there's nothing preventing that as it is. And DNA is where we're headed anyway if we're going to have anything close to immigration reform that works.

What's amusing is how insouciant liberals are when it's Obama pushing the buttons. Three years ago they would have been out of their minds, telling us about all the evils which are about to befall our great republic.

Of course, that assumes the police won't be planting evidence

BIG assumption.

BIG assumption.

#74 | Posted by kanrei at 2010-03-15 03:35 PM

DNA has been the only thing that has freed people convicted due to police planting evidence or otherwise assuming they caught the right guy and making the evidence fit the charge. To give them access to everyone's DNA is to give them a piggy bank of people to place blame on when a Cold Case is giving them a headache.

it is not taking dna for an immediate crime scene, it is keeping it in a national database. You need a warrant to take someones dna, unless you bring the courts into this to prove that the person is a threat and issue a different kind of warrant to keep and log dna, it should not be implemented.

The Brits have been using a national DNA database for 15 years.... and are still arguing about it.

"The database was established in 1995 by Michael Howard, the last Conservative Home Secretary, but was enthusiastically embraced by his Labour successors. Seven years ago they gave police the power to take mouth swabs from anyone they arrested, with the result that Britain today leads the world on DNA collection by a very long way.

Ministers repeatedly argued that its effectiveness in catching offenders previously beyond the reach of the law outweighed civil liberties objections. Tony Blair even raised suspicions in 2006 that his government had designs on creating a universal DNA register, arguing: "The number on the database should be the maximum number you can get."

Does the information on the database help to fight crime?

According to one recent estimate, less than one per cent of recorded crime is solved using the database.

But the Home Office said successful matches had been obtained in 390,000 crime scenes between April 1998 and September 2008. Last year police achieved 17,614 matches, including investigations into 83 murders and 184 rapes. Ministers say about 10 per cent of matches for serious offences are with people without a criminal record. Ministers can point to a series of "cold case" successes where criminals have been caught because of DNA samples taken years earlier.

James Lloyd, the "shoe rapist" who preyed on women between 1983 and 1986, was jailed for life 20 years later after a sample was taken from his sister over a drink-driving offence suggested the attacker was a close relative. In 2004, brothers Lee and Stephen Ainsby were found guilty of rape and abduction of a 17-year-old girl nine years earlier. Lee Ainsby had been arrested for being drunk and disorderly when a DNA sample was taken from him.

Critics retort that DNA is strictly limited in its effectiveness, with false matches at crime scenes to passers-by and victims, often because the genetic material has deteriorated.

Much more

without a warrant they should not be filing dna. this keeps everyone in check with the separation of powers. taking dna from everyone that comes into the station is definitely an affront of our rights. america places more on freedom than england. dems shouldn't like this as it works against freedom, and repubs who hate european health-care most of their ideas should not suddenly flip on this issue because it fits agenda.

So everyone thought he would be different because of skin color?

Bought and paid for just like all the rest.

The "Best of Intentions" always come with "Unintended Consequences."

I said "catsup" .....not "ketchup".

how is that for weak?

#65 | Posted by eberly at 2010-03-15 03:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

That definitely tops out on the "weak" scale.

Congrats.

re: The "Best of Intentions" always come with "Unintended Consequences."

#81 | Posted by daprof at 2010-03-15 08:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yes. And "Idiots" will "Always be Among Us".

If this passes, it will be only 'people arrested'. Then it will be needed for something else, either a national id card or something similar, then requied like a SSN to get your child claimed on your taxes.

Give them a few years, and the doctors will simply take a sample from every new born and register it with the birth certificate.

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive."

Excellent quote. I had heard it before, but forgotten it. It would have been a perfect retort to those handful of idiots who are "rah, rah, rah, universal health care" who ask, "Why do people vote against what's good for them?"

I'll remember Mr. Lewis' quote next time one of those idiots aske that stupid question

re: The "Best of Intentions" always come with "Unintended Consequences."

#81 | Posted by daprof at 2010-03-15 08:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yes. And "Idiots" will "Always be Among Us".

#83 | Posted by BetelG at 2010-03-16 02:17 AM | Reply | Fl

And often they are elected to public office.

So those of you FOR a national DNA database...give a sample now at your local law enforcement office.

These things almost always seem to end up perverted to other uses. Consider your Social Security Number and the places it now is used besides for keeping track of your contributions to Social Security.

They found a non-invasive way to get your DNA. This will move forward and there is now nothing we can do about it.

Forensic scientists could soon use hand germs to help identify criminals and victims, a study said Monday.

Bush supporters that once applauded such measures are falling over themselves to condemn this assault on civil liberties. Who you gonna call? The ACLU? LOL!

#26 | Posted by DARTHCHENEY

Who supported such things? I certainly never backed anything like this. I never even heard it put forward by Bush.

IMO, the problem isn't with the collection of DNA. There are a good number of reasons for doing so in the case of people arrested for felonies, even prior to convictions, such as identifying material should the individual skip on bail. Fingerprinting is not always a good identifier, as fingerprints can be altered by someone who knows what he's doing, crime scenes can contain no or only partial fingerprints, etc. What I don't like about this is the creation of a national database. To be used for what? To be expanded to what 10 or 20 years from now?

Dorothy Thompson:
When liberty is taken away by force it can be restored by force. When it is relinquished voluntarily by default it can never be recovered.

John Adams:
There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.

Voltaire:
So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men.

Wendell Phillips:
Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.

Good.

Perfect the science here, then sell the technology to other countries.

If you have nothing to hide, there's nothing to worry about. Privacy is so 20th century.

#16 | Posted by Ron_Karate at 2010-03-15 01:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

Nothing to worry about, as long as the guvmint remains ethical, competent, and just.

Uh oh.

Nothing to worry about, as long as the guvmint remains ethical, competent, and just.

Uh oh.

#92 | Posted by MACV1972

When did this happen?lol

Nice quotes Everlong...

WELL of course he does..
he cant decide what you eat and where you work and MAYBE EVEN WHERE YOU GO TO COLLEGE by taking over the loans...and now he wants your dna at birth for his progressive plans to run the country...

what did you expect?

So, Afka, who is 'he'? Do you think Obama is the one who will become the first president for life? I am sure if that was possible Bush would have tried.

It is the technology itself that is driving this issue, not Obama. Up until recently it was too expensive to manage millions or billions of samples. Throughout history governments and police have collected information to identify people. It's the nature of the beast to get more and more sophisticated at doing this. How many people here are objecting to their cell phones tracking their every move? How about the prints and DNA evidence they hand over to the feds every time they file their taxes? The way the laws are written there is nothing stopping the cops from collecting samples from a holding cell you get thrown into and using that information to find more evidence to convict you.

Don't be so naive. Whether you like it or not, it's here to stay until Armageddon. It's not a political thing. Why make it one just because your party is not in power?