1370 users online (242 members and 1128 guests)  


The Killing Season - Websleuths

Websleuths News

View Poll Results: Do you support a national collection of everyone's DNA?

Voters
28. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, I support a national database of everyone's DNA.

    11 39.29%
  • No, I don't support a national database of everyone's DNA.

    17 60.71%

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 23
  1. #1

    National DNA repository?

    Does this case make you want to support a national collection of everyone's DNA?

    One reason for yes: A lot of questions would be answered if we knew who's DNA was on the JonBenet. We would likely be able to figure out how the DNA got there.

    One reason for No: Could the wrong person be prosecuted because their DNA is present?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    1,338
    A national repository of DNA would help LE as far as the murderers that have never been caught, therefore there DNA is not on file. It might would help deter some crimes, but doubtful.

    If your innocent why worry about giving a DNA sample. Of course, it would take years to enter everyone's DNA in the computer's. There will be people that say this is big brother taking another right of privacy away from the people, but I think it would do more good than harm.
    ~ Friends are kisses blown to us by angels. ~

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    12,914
    I support it, but I am wary of abuses.
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    LI, NY
    Posts
    3,268
    No way! Innocent people are still entitled to their privacy. After you are convicted of a serious felony, you give up the right to keep your dna profile out of the government's hands.

    This sounds like a lucrative opportunity for the health industry AND for defense lawyers..... it's terrible for citizens in a free country.



    http://www.courttv.com/trials/leiterman/071905_ctv.html

    In 2002, cold case investigators sent several pieces of evidence, including the stockings and the blood drop, to the state police crime lab in Lansing, the largest and most state-of-the-art of the department's seven labs.

    Scientists there isolated a DNA profile in the blood drop and ran it through a database of felons, who under state law are required to give a DNA sample. To the initial joy of investigators, the scientists matched the blood to John Ruelas, a convicted murderer from Detroit who was already serving a life sentence for killing his mother.

    As detectives looked closer, they realized Ruelas could not be Mixer's assailant. He was 40 years old, making him just 4 years old at the time of the murder.

    ---



    http://www.nacdl.org/public.nsf/0/62...257124006f9177


    Tarnish On The 'Gold Standard': Recent Problems In Forensic DNA Testing

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,563
    Sounds good in theory, but...
    "A study of the Arizona CODIS database carried out in 2005 showed that approximately 1 in every 228 profiles in the database matched another profile in the database at nine or more loci, that approximately 1 in every 1,489 profiles matched at 10 loci, 1 in 16,374 profiles matched at 11 loci, and 1 in 32,747 matched at 12 loci.
    How big a population does it take to produce so many matches that appear to contradict so dramatically the astronomical, theoretical figures given by the naive application of the product rule? The Arizona database contained at the time a mere 65,493 entries. Scary isn't it?"
    http://www.maa.org/devlin/devlin_10_06.html

    also

    http://www.maa.org/devlin/devlin_09_06.html
    “It saddens me that 20 years after my sister Nicole’s murder, we are still seeing the same crimes, just different names, over and over again.”
    - Denise Brown (sister of Nicole Brown Simpson)

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    LI, NY
    Posts
    3,268
    Quote Originally Posted by cynic View Post
    Sounds good in theory, but...
    "A study of the Arizona CODIS database carried out in 2005 showed that approximately 1 in every 228 profiles in the database matched another profile in the database at nine or more loci, that approximately 1 in every 1,489 profiles matched at 10 loci, 1 in 16,374 profiles matched at 11 loci, and 1 in 32,747 matched at 12 loci.
    How big a population does it take to produce so many matches that appear to contradict so dramatically the astronomical, theoretical figures given by the naive application of the product rule? The Arizona database contained at the time a mere 65,493 entries. Scary isn't it?"
    http://www.maa.org/devlin/devlin_10_06.html

    also

    http://www.maa.org/devlin/devlin_09_06.html
    Yikes!!!

    Like I said... this would be good business for lawyers.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,554
    I'm not sure,since there are still so many flaws in it...but what I would like to see is this : (and I don't think there'd be any violation of privacy rights,just better safety)..some way to track children (not sure how that would work,but I believe it could be done),per gps,or whatever it takes...so that when a child goes missing,he/she can be immediately tracked and located.If we can do this with cars,why not ppl?? even my 2 shelter cats have chips in their backs that can be scanned for their info.
    something to ponder:

    When the corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and the mortal have put on immortality, then shall we be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

    O death, where [is] thy sting? O grave, where [is] thy victory?

    The sting of death [is] sin; and the strength of sin [is] the law.
    But thanks [be] to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
    1 Corinthians 15:54-57

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,041
    Quote Originally Posted by Blondieskatz View Post
    A national repository of DNA would help LE as far as the murderers that have never been caught, therefore there DNA is not on file. It might would help deter some crimes, but doubtful.

    If your innocent why worry about giving a DNA sample. Of course, it would take years to enter everyone's DNA in the computer's. There will be people that say this is big brother taking another right of privacy away from the people, but I think it would do more good than harm.
    I've written this post before but I can't find it.

    I would object strenuously to being required to register my DNA, even to the point of leaving the country and renouncing my citizenship (I hold citizenship in three countries due to the circumstances of my birth). They can get my DNA from my cold, dead cheek.

    No, I haven't committed any crimes. Nor am I planning to commit any crimes.

    What I am concerned about is just who will have access to that info? The government has proven that it is not capable of securing information it holds, on either the local, state or federal level. There have been myriad media reports about loss of people's personal information.

    Right now, DNA is registered by recording something like 20 markers. Very, very soon, it is going to be possible to read every base pair in every chromosome, which will make the chance of duplicates nearly impossible. If we allow DNA registration now, you can't tell me that when it becomes possible to read the base pair pattern that it will not be done.

    And then what? More and more, they're discovering diseases and conditions that are a combination of genetic predisposition and environment. For instance, it is strongly suspected that Type I (used to be called juvenile) diabetes has an environmental component, probably exposure to the flu virus. MS may have a genetic basis. Huntington's disease, proven to be due to having the wrong genes. Anyone who has possession to your DNA code will have possession of a huge amount of information about you.

    For instance, what if you have the genes for Huntington's disease? Onset is anywhere from late 30s to late 50s (the more copies of the defective gene you have, the earlier the onset). People who have this disease are completely normal until onset. Then they experience involuntary movements, loss of control of their limbs, cognitive problems until finally they die.

    But until they suffer the onset of the disease, they still need to pay bills, just like all of us. Don't you think that insurance companies would love to have that sort of info about people? Yeah, it's illegal but you can't tell me they won't find covert ways to use that info. How about employers? If an employer is interviewing someone who is 35 years old and has 75+ copies of the defective gene, will they be willing to hire that person knowing they are likely to suffer onset within 5 years?

    How about colleges? If the admissions department finds out that you carry the gene variant that predisposes you to developing PTSD if you suffer a traumatic experience, are they going to think that it would be better to give that spot to someone with similar accomplishments but who is not at higher risk of developing a disabling mental illness.

    I don't trust the government to keep this information private. I don't trust anyone not to use the information if they can get hold of it.

    Did you know that your credit card information (name, cc number, exp date and CVV number) used to be worth $25 on the black market? Now it's only worth fifty cents. It has gotten so easy for hackers to steal your CC information that the price is laughable.

    How much do you think your medical or life insurance company might be willing to pay to find out just what your DNA has to say about your health and possible lifespan?

    That doesn't even begin to touch on things like mistaken identifications. Doesn't even have to be anything sinister like someone planting your blood at the scene of a crime. What if the data entry operator who enters your DNA and information into a computer makes a transposition error? Easy enough to do, no malice needed, it would just be an innocent mistake. Of course, once that mistake turned up your name attached to DNA from a crime scene, it's probably going to take a fairly large chunk of your life and possibly your money to defend yourself.

    And my last objection? I am innocent of committing any crimes and I do not want to be treated like a criminal.

    Sure, maintain a DNA register of convicted offenders. That does not bother me at all. Once someone has been convicted, they forfeit a good many rights and it is a just thing. It is not fair to make innocent people forfeit any rights or run any risks for crimes that they will probably never commit.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,041
    Quote Originally Posted by JMO8778 View Post
    I'm not sure,since there are still so many flaws in it...but what I would like to see is this : (and I don't think there'd be any violation of privacy rights,just better safety)..some way to track children (not sure how that would work,but I believe it could be done),per gps,or whatever it takes...so that when a child goes missing,he/she can be immediately tracked and located.If we can do this with cars,why not ppl?? even my 2 shelter cats have chips in their backs that can be scanned for their info.
    Those chips won't help track children. The type of microchip that your two cats have can only be read from a maximum of a fraction of an inch away. If they put the scanner down even a half inch away from the chip, it won't read.

    Microchips are essentially a wire antenna that has a number on it encased in a special glass capsule. The scanner emits a radio frequency that excites the little teeny wire antenna and gives it the power to broadcast the number it carries for a teeny tiny radius, then the scanner can read that broadcast.

    The biggest hurdle with microchips right now is that reading them at a distance requires giving them so much power they heat up. I can only imagine how much power a chip capable of broadcasting all the way up to a satellite would have to have. And how hot that chip would be! Yeowch!

    Additionally, I would be extremely concerned about yet another database containing my information in government hands. The government has a terrible record for protecting the records it holds on every level. Giving them yet another chance to lose my data to criminals is not something I can support.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,391
    Quote Originally Posted by JMO8778 View Post
    I'm not sure,since there are still so many flaws in it...but what I would like to see is this : (and I don't think there'd be any violation of privacy rights,just better safety)..some way to track children (not sure how that would work,but I believe it could be done),per gps,or whatever it takes...so that when a child goes missing,he/she can be immediately tracked and located.If we can do this with cars,why not ppl?? even my 2 shelter cats have chips in their backs that can be scanned for their info.
    I do not want a chip in my back then my freedom means nothing and I have never commited a crime they BIG BROTHER would know when I am using the ladies room, literally my every move. That to me is very Orwellian. Children grow into adults and travel with adults that mean them no harm. Parents!! No we need something to protect and Identify our children and loved ones. But not at the price of loosing every freedom. May be a crime deterent could be GPS every convicted criminal? Or sex offender and if the chiip were ever to be removed it would incapacitate the felon till it was replaced. I dont even like the sound of that I so highly vaue my freedoms my life is so restrictive now..... Maybe some day someone will come up with the perfect solution. Till they do ..... Ill pass. Hugs to you for brainstorming. We need to come up with something I do agree with that to protect our children.


  11. #11
    I'd be in favor of just maintaining a DNA database of convicts, and maybe a secondary database of people arrested for certain crimes (rape, child molestation). Not everyone, no.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,391
    Quote Originally Posted by Peculiar Petunia View Post
    I'd be in favor of just maintaining a DNA database of convicts, and maybe a secondary database of people arrested for certain crimes (rape, child molestation). Not everyone, no.
    Good thoughts.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,041
    Quote Originally Posted by Peculiar Petunia View Post
    I'd be in favor of just maintaining a DNA database of convicts, and maybe a secondary database of people arrested for certain crimes (rape, child molestation). Not everyone, no.
    I have no problem with maintaining a database for convicted criminals--by their actions, they have forfeited a good many rights.

    I do have strong reservations about maintaining a database for anyone who has been arrested. An arrest is not a conviction and the arrested person should not forfeit any more rights than they are already required to. After the spate of exonerations, I think it's clear that the police and courts can make mistakes. Why take the most effective check on police power (the courts) out of the loop?

    Crime is a serious problem but trading everyone's freedom for security will only hurt the majority without a significant increase in safety. I'm not willing to trade my rights away for such a tenuous promise.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,878
    I'd be oppossed to it. As far as I know there is currently no fingerprint requirement, so how can we jump to a DNA requirement?
    I'm just playing detective here. I have no idea who killed JonBenet. It's just an opinion.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Tempe, AZ
    Posts
    4,217
    Quote Originally Posted by Grainne Dhu View Post
    I've written this post before but I can't find it.

    I would object strenuously to being required to register my DNA, even to the point of leaving the country and renouncing my citizenship (I hold citizenship in three countries due to the circumstances of my birth). They can get my DNA from my cold, dead cheek.

    No, I haven't committed any crimes. Nor am I planning to commit any crimes.

    What I am concerned about is just who will have access to that info? The government has proven that it is not capable of securing information it holds, on either the local, state or federal level. There have been myriad media reports about loss of people's personal information.

    Right now, DNA is registered by recording something like 20 markers. Very, very soon, it is going to be possible to read every base pair in every chromosome, which will make the chance of duplicates nearly impossible. If we allow DNA registration now, you can't tell me that when it becomes possible to read the base pair pattern that it will not be done.

    And then what? More and more, they're discovering diseases and conditions that are a combination of genetic predisposition and environment. For instance, it is strongly suspected that Type I (used to be called juvenile) diabetes has an environmental component, probably exposure to the flu virus. MS may have a genetic basis. Huntington's disease, proven to be due to having the wrong genes. Anyone who has possession to your DNA code will have possession of a huge amount of information about you.

    For instance, what if you have the genes for Huntington's disease? Onset is anywhere from late 30s to late 50s (the more copies of the defective gene you have, the earlier the onset). People who have this disease are completely normal until onset. Then they experience involuntary movements, loss of control of their limbs, cognitive problems until finally they die.

    But until they suffer the onset of the disease, they still need to pay bills, just like all of us. Don't you think that insurance companies would love to have that sort of info about people? Yeah, it's illegal but you can't tell me they won't find covert ways to use that info. How about employers? If an employer is interviewing someone who is 35 years old and has 75+ copies of the defective gene, will they be willing to hire that person knowing they are likely to suffer onset within 5 years?

    How about colleges? If the admissions department finds out that you carry the gene variant that predisposes you to developing PTSD if you suffer a traumatic experience, are they going to think that it would be better to give that spot to someone with similar accomplishments but who is not at higher risk of developing a disabling mental illness.

    I don't trust the government to keep this information private. I don't trust anyone not to use the information if they can get hold of it.

    Did you know that your credit card information (name, cc number, exp date and CVV number) used to be worth $25 on the black market? Now it's only worth fifty cents. It has gotten so easy for hackers to steal your CC information that the price is laughable.

    How much do you think your medical or life insurance company might be willing to pay to find out just what your DNA has to say about your health and possible lifespan?

    That doesn't even begin to touch on things like mistaken identifications. Doesn't even have to be anything sinister like someone planting your blood at the scene of a crime. What if the data entry operator who enters your DNA and information into a computer makes a transposition error? Easy enough to do, no malice needed, it would just be an innocent mistake. Of course, once that mistake turned up your name attached to DNA from a crime scene, it's probably going to take a fairly large chunk of your life and possibly your money to defend yourself.

    And my last objection? I am innocent of committing any crimes and I do not want to be treated like a criminal.

    Sure, maintain a DNA register of convicted offenders. That does not bother me at all. Once someone has been convicted, they forfeit a good many rights and it is a just thing. It is not fair to make innocent people forfeit any rights or run any risks for crimes that they will probably never commit.
    Great Post. Makes sense. I agree.
    The Hokey Pokey Clinic - A good place to turn yourself around:

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. National Enquirer
    By Casshew in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-15-2005, 11:06 PM