• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Court: Police can take DNA swabs from arrestees

Really? So there will never be a potential treatment that requires the DNA of the patient to be known? And you know this how?

If that day comes the treatment can be done, but I must stress it is paramount it be destroyed after use.
 
not sure i support this one; there's a lot more info to be gleaned from DNA. thoughts on this decision?

I've been thinking about this for a while, and I'm actually kind of excited about it. Allll those cold cases about to become hot. I can't help thinking this is a victory for the good guys.
 
I've been thinking about this for a while, and I'm actually kind of excited about it. Allll those cold cases about to become hot. I can't help thinking this is a victory for the good guys.

How in the world is this a victory for the good guys? They are forced to giving up their property to the state on arrest. There is nothing good about the state taking your property against you will, nothing.
 
How in the world is this a victory for the good guys? They are forced to giving up their property to the state on arrest. There is nothing good about the state taking your property against you will, nothing.

Catching and incarcerating criminals is a good thing. Making it easier for law enforcement and tougher on criminals is a good thing. We've used fingerprints as a crime fighting tool for over a hundred years. This is just one more tool. Cold case criminals should be sleeping poorly right about now.
 
Catching and incarcerating criminals is a good thing. Making it easier for law enforcement and tougher on criminals is a good thing. We've used fingerprints as a crime fighting tool for over a hundred years. This is just one more tool. Cold case criminals should be sleeping poorly right about now.

People have owned personal property ever since the human race was created as they own their bodies, so I win the fight over who has been around longer. Furthermore, aggression against people is always bad and it doesn't make a bit of difference if something good comes out of it. It is still ethically wrong to take part in.
 
People have owned personal property ever since their bodies were created, so I win the fight over who has been around longer. Furthermore, aggression against people is always bad and it doesn't make a bit of difference if something good comes out of it. It is still ethically wrong to take part in.

Your fingerprints belong to you, too. Tell me what the difference is? Or maybe, now that you've thought about it, you don't think the coppers ought to be able to collect those either.
 
People have owned personal property ever since the human race was created as they own their bodies, so I win the fight over who has been around longer. Furthermore, aggression against people is always bad and it doesn't make a bit of difference if something good comes out of it. It is still ethically wrong to take part in.

And yet people throw this property away evey minute of every day. Guess it would be better it we collected DNA from the sewage pipe and fingerpirnts from beer bottles!
 
Your fingerprints belong to you, too. Tell me what the difference is? Or maybe, now that you've thought about it, you don't think the coppers ought to be able to collect those either.

I don't think they should be able to do so unless the person consents to having them taken.
 
And yet people throw this property away evey minute of every day. Guess it would be better it we collected DNA from the sewage pipe and fingerpirnts from beer bottles!

I already dealt with the argument of abandonment. The consent of throwing away something or simply touching something is not consent to anything else. There is no such thing as implied consent. There is only consent given and consent not given.
 
Which never happens nor is their any sort of guarantee the government will actually give up such information.
What are you talking about?

23andMe is a commercial entity. I have no idea if any minors have in fact requested their accounts be deleted, I assume they will honor their policies.

Some governments do, in fact, have DNA statutes that require the DNA of innocent individuals to be purged from their databases. There is absolutely no reason we cannot pass such laws as we see fit -- or laws that bar police from acquiring DNA without a warrant prior to conviction.

We also do, in fact, have examples of changes in statutes when a SCOTUS ruling rubs people the wrong way. For example, Kelo v London extended the powers of eminent domain to private developments that, in the view of local officials, met a "public use." Since then, most states have passed laws that drastically restrict exactly those types of uses of eminent domain, in direct reaction to both the ruling and public outcry.

So if you really think this ruling is wrong, it is entirely within your power to change it. That's the great thing about a representative democracy, by the way. ;)


Btw, you of course have ownership towards your own body, just like the child owns theirs. It can be no other other way.
It can and it must, because your status as a person, rights to privacy, and protections from certain government actions are not grounded in property rights.


Of course, all you listen to is the government, so talking to you is like screaming at cement and demanding it to not dry.
No, I'm merely using the law as a convenient reference point. It's a codification and formalization of how we handle rights.

And more importantly, you fail to realize that in many cases the government has to listen to us. We're the ones who decide who goes into office, and we are the who push our legislators to pass or repeal laws.
 
I already dealt with the argument of abandonment. The consent of throwing away something or simply touching something is not consent to anything else.
Yes, it is. The instant you throw something in the trash, it is no longer your property. You are explicitly putting it in the trash because you no longer want it. You are not only removing it from your premises, in most cases you are handing it over to a municipal agency for disposal.

If you do not want the police to acquire your DNA from your trash, it is your responsibility to destroy that material.

And there is absolutely no question that the police, and private citizens, can lift your fingerprints from any object you touch.
 
Back
Top Bottom