Proposed Bill Would Force Arizonians To Pay $250 To Have Their DNA Added To a Database (gizmodo.com) 357
technology_dude writes: One by one, thresholds are being crossed where the collection and storage of personal data is accepted as routine. Being recorded by cameras at business locations, in public transportation, in schools, churches, and every other place imaginable. Recent headlines include "Singapore Airlines having cameras built into the seat back of personal entertainment systems," and "Arizona considering a bill to force some public workers to give up DNA samples (and even pay for it)." It seems to be a daily occurrence where we have crossed another line in how far we will go to accept massive surveillance as normal. Do we even have a line the sand that we would defend? Do we even see anything wrong with it? Absolute power corrupts absolutely and we continue to give knowledge of our personal lives (power) to others. If we continue down the same path, I suppose we deserve what we get? I want to shout "Stop the train, I want off!" but I fear my plea would be ignored. So who out there is more optimistic than I and can recommend some reading that will give me hope? Bill 1475 was introduced by Republican State Senator David Livingston and would require teachers, police officers, child day care workers, and many others to submit their DNA samples along with fingerprints to be stored in a database maintained by the Department of Public Safety. "While the database would be prohibited from storing criminal or medical records alongside the DNA samples, it would require the samples be accompanied by the person's name, Social Security number, date of birth and last known address," reports Gizmodo. "The living will be required to pay [a $250 processing fee] for this invasion of their privacy, but any dead body that comes through a county medical examiner's office would also be fair game to be entered into the database."
If they want my DNA . . . (Score:5, Funny)
. . . they'll have to get it the old fashioned way.
They can kiss my hairy ass, and swab their lips afterwards.
We have a positive match of your DNA to a murder crime scene from 1910. This was before you were born, but it could have been an accident with a contraceptive in a time machine.
Re: If they want my DNA . . . (Score:2)
Causality confuses some.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you going to be just as brave when the law is passed and you're potentially facing a large fine or a prison sentence?
I thought not.
Is this that fabled american spirit? Balk at authority and do exactly what they say because you're afraid of the consequences? Be a good little citizen now and move on.
Re: (Score:2)
And you clearly do not even recognize the error in your own statement.
Think it through.
Re:If they want my DNA . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
The requirement seems to be tied to a job, so it's your job that's on the line not your freedom.
I guess freedom really is just another word for "nothing left to lose".
Re: (Score:2)
Love the reference.
Re: (Score:3)
Let a private company maintain the database.
That seems like a brilliant plan with no obvious downsides.
David (Score:5, Funny)
Bill 1475 was introduced by Republican State Senator David Livingston
I presumed it'd be a Republican to do this.
Re:David (Score:5, Insightful)
Bill 1475 was introduced by Republican State Senator David Livingston
I presumed it'd be a Republican to do this.
Re:David (Score:5, Informative)
You are more accurate than you know. From the article, it looks like he "represents" those who pay him:
Re:David (Score:4, Interesting)
Even better. Arizona real estate law, and I bet contract law, specifies that revisions are expected to be honored in preference to 'previous' provisions, in contracts, the principle being that a change should be considered the intention. But insurance policies are, indeed, different, as the cover sheet and synopsis are murky bits, with much dispute over whether these are the governing statements of a policy.
The bill to make that explicit was actually a good idea, if it had included the requirement of a disclaimer, required to be in the largest font used on the page other than for titling, stating that everything on the cover sheet and synopsis was nonbinding... Which of course could, for some, raise the suspicion that the insurer was not being entirely truthful in the summary...
Couldn't have THAT, could we?
Re: (Score:2)
The cover sheet and synopsis are supposed to summarize the long form, that is they are effectively written afterwards. Thus, anything in the cover sheet that disagrees with the long form should be considered one of those changes that you suggest should be honored.
Given the density of a long form contract, the cover sheet and summary are also the only part the customer is likely to actually be able to read for comprehension.
A law supporting consumers would explicitly make the cover sheet superior to the long
Re: (Score:2)
You are more accurate than you know. From the article, it looks like he "represents" those who pay him:
Well it was just a guess based on the motivations behind similar pieces of legislation on my side of the pond (regardless of the political leaning of the legislator), apparently things work depressingly similarly in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
This gem will be a gift to the Democrats in Arizona...another pol own goal.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would you assume that? Its not like from 2008 - 216 we didnt see sweeping erosion of our privacy. Vault 7, the snowden files, project Prism, NDAA, need I go on? Prettymuch every political party except libertarian is marching straight toward an Orwellian future.
The whole Drain The Swamp mantra did not start with Donald Trump. He just latched onto it. Its a serious issue. The swamp has no particular party affiliation. It is an unelected mob of puppet masters working behind the scenes to orchestrate an age
Re: (Score:3)
The whole Drain The Swamp mantra did not start with Donald Trump.
No but we all know that Mexicans are rapists. From there it's no big intuitive leap to New Mexicans are rapists. Guilt by association, I'm afraid, means Arizonians must be rapists too. We need your DNA and we should probably build a wall around Arizona while we're at it.
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly, there is a kernel of truth in your rant.
Please don't exceed that truth. It is enough by itself.
Re: (Score:2)
The whole Drain The Swamp mantra did not start with Donald Trump. He just latched onto it. Its a serious issue. The swamp has no particular party affiliation.
Unfortunately, we drained the swamp and turned it into a landfill instead.
Re: (Score:2)
The swamp is far from drained. Maybe an inch or two siphoned off the surface at most. Keep in mind that this has been slowly building up since Eisenhower left office. It scared the crap out of him, he even warned everyone is a publicly televised broadcast. If he even had a clue how big and dangerous it was going to grow, he probably would have taken a bigger stance. At the time he saw mechanations of involving the US in foreign conflicts in order to secure purchases of weapons, technology, and equipment for
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Bullshit.
Trump brought the goddam swamp with him. Mueller's doing the draining.
Re: (Score:2)
you honestly think that there was NO erosion of liberties before 2017? Were you born yesterday? Or just under a rock? its been break-neck speed since the signing of the Patriot Act. You might want to look into which members voted for that. Actually just go find which ones voted against it, its a _much_ shorter list.
Re:David (Score:5, Insightful)
The term "Deep State" is about as meaningless as "snowflake," "libertard," and other stupid motherfucking words that you use as placeholders for knowledge.
Re: David (Score:4, Informative)
You, him, and the R's don't get off that easy. The No True Scotsman argument holds no water. He calls himself a Republican, the Republican party accepts and supports him, and probability theory says at least one registered Republican voted for him; if not two.
Citation: 1856 case of "If it walks like a duck and quacks like a Duck ..."
Re:Jumperatex supports KKK? (Score:5, Interesting)
Says the guy supporting a KKK member as VA gov in Northam A serial rapist as VA Lt. Gov in Fairfax In addition that same Northam told us about how he supports killing live born babies brought to full term and calling it abortion.
Sure, you support the KKK, rapists, and killing babies. Congratulations! You are literally a monster
You sure you want to stand by that last statement? I ask because David Duke and the KKK have literally announced their support for Donald Trump. I'm not saying Trump is a racist; I'm saying other racists think Donald Trump is a racist. So congratulations.
Re:David (Score:5, Insightful)
Funny, I expected it'd be a Democrat. Take their guns, ridicule their religion, tax their sodas, "Think of the children" and all that.
The way I see it:
Democrats want to own all your money and make you be a hippy. Republicans want to own your body and soul. They both want to tell you how to live.
Both parties have nasty flaws, but over-zealous policing has always been the Republican side of the vice bucket.
Re: (Score:3)
I agree and would add that Americans are in control.
If they choose to sleep at the wheel and let government run on autopilot, that's control by proxy.
Re: (Score:3)
On what planet is that? Democrats are nothing but the other party of corrupt right wing assholes, who are frequently to the right of their GOP opponents. Just to pick one example, Kamela Harris's Republican opponent for the position of CA AG ran to her left on marijuana legalization. To pick another, Trump ran to Hillary's left on corruption, trade, and foreign wars. That he's turned out to be largely full of shit on those campaign issues doe
Re: (Score:2)
A very impressive rebuttal. I especially liked the 4th and 7th citations, though I disagreed with the one after that.
Re: (Score:3)
Over-zealous policing of individuals has generally been a Republican Party thing during my lifetime. Policing of business has been a Democratic Party thing. And here's the thing: Businesses have never shown the ability to be responsible when not regulated. Unfortunately.
That said, both parties like to ban various things. Republicans ban drugs of any recreational use as a reflex on the (often correct) grounds they cause societal harm. Weapons also cause more harm than good, but that's somewhat intentional in
Re:David (Score:4, Insightful)
If you attributed this to the intentions of any particular political party, you;re doing it wrong. There is only one State.
Re: (Score:2)
Funny, I expected it'd be a Democrat. Take their guns, ridicule their religion, tax their sodas, "Think of the children" and all that.
It's a bit funny to me that people still think the Democrats want to take poeple's guns. How long have we been hearing this? And yet, it hasn't happened, even when they controlled both houses and the Presidency. Sure, they want to regulate them more strictly. But the 2nd Amendment says they should be regulated, so I'm not sure why that would be controversial.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a bit funny to me that people still think the Democrats want to take poeple's guns. How long have we been hearing this? And yet, it hasn't happened, even when they controlled both houses and the Presidency.
It's funny when their leader says things like this:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/1... [cnbc.com]
The Dems have the same problem with gun control that the Reps have with immigration. A majority of each party wants to take action on their respective issue, but, not having a unanimous consensus, they can't take action without help from the other. Controlling the houses of Congress and the Presidency is not enough. You have to have enough control to shove the bill through. Dems were able to do that with their takeover o
Re:David (Score:4, Insightful)
Repeating a big lie doesn't make it true, it just makes you a more pathetic liar for repeating it. And pathetic you gun nuts are, as you DGAF about police shootings that rend the 2nd Amendment moot. If bearing a firearm in an open carry state is an automatic death sentence (or even not-firearms like the toys or BB guns held by Tamir Rice or John Crawford) then obviously you don't have a right to bear them. If you weren't full of shit, your first priority would be to get those killer cops sent to prison for murder.
Re: (Score:3)
If bearing a firearm in an open carry state is an automatic death sentence
Since it isn't, the rest of your rant is moot. Maybe you're just confused between the word "bearing", which means "carrying", and the words "threatening someone with", which is illegal even in open carry locations. And threatening a cop with one can get you shot (not "will"), which most people seem to understand.
Re: (Score:2)
Nowhere in the article you link does she call for seizing guns in a national emergency. Nowhere. Literally all she said was that gun violence can be considered a national emergency. The bit where you say she called for seizing your guns is entirely your hallucination.
Moreover, it's clear from context she's arguing that Presidents should *not* call for National Emergencies willy-nilly.
Choosing an obvious lie that is easy to disprove is the actions of a sociopath, which apparently you are.
You have some audacity saying this after coming in with a ridiculous lie like "this link shows the House Majority Leader c
Re: (Score:3)
The KKK were the violent political extreme of the Democratic Party. They're racist because the Democratic Party is racist. Regarding rape, i only know about Billy C. There are probably others. Baby killers is obvious; you may disagree with the politics of Pro-life groups, but you can't deny that post-birth humans are persons by law, and that viable third trimester fetuses are babies in everything except their uterine status. The existing Democratic Party also supports the KKK, but not openly. They also support the AntiFa who are the new racist KKK with a different style of masks. Don't believe me? Start doing some research into how many AntiFa thugs who get arrested for assaulting bystanders shout racial slurs at the bystanders, especially Hispanic bystanders.
Hey look! It's some guy that can't tell the different between the 1950's and today! It's like you don't even know that Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon were president. And stop it with your concern trolling about racism. Like you give a fuck.
Re: (Score:2)
I would answer that question. As much as I dislike the Republican Party it is heads and shoulders above the Democrat Party as respects to individual rights.
In 2000 the social conservative and neo-con wing of the Republican Party was at a high point. The neo-cons were not particularly interested in nanny-statism but were for a surveillance state. The neo-cons have fallen in such low favor in the Republican Party that they are close to irrelevant today. And the socons have slowly and q
What are they going to do if people refuse? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:What are they going to do if people refuse? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's well and good, but these people need jobs. They are more likely to give them what they want than be out of the street wondering where their next meal will come from.
People's security is very important to them, and companies know this.
The best way to stop this is via the law, preferably Federal law.
Re: (Score:2)
People's security is very important to them,
Indeed. If the Police/Fire Department are on strike, who's going to protect the Governor against a random thug or a little spark? It would be a shame if anything were to happen, right?
Re: (Score:2)
They'll just hire new people. Steve Scalise got his ass shot off and yet still found it within himself to promote more guns. Never underestimate a pol's moral depravity.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
By 'he', you mean Bernie?
And by 'rights', you mean, among others, to be left alone to earn income without significant restriction other than true criminality, and to keep most of it,other than to pay lawful taxes?
Or what?
Re: (Score:2)
It's well and good, but these people need jobs. They are more likely to give them what they want than be out of the street wondering where their next meal will come from.
People's security is very important to them, and companies know this.
The best way to stop this is via the law, preferably Federal law.
Class. Action. Suit.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if we're going all out, that fucking Republican has a job in Arizona, doesn't he?
Re: (Score:2)
> "The living will be required to pay [a $250 processing fee] for this invasion of their privacy, butany dead body that comes through a county medical examiner's office would also be fair game to be entered into the database."
So, if one refuses to pay $250, they kill him, and then they send the body to the medical examiner's office.
Re: (Score:2)
They fire them, but in a different way than you think. > "The living will be required to pay [a $250 processing fee] for this invasion of their privacy, butany dead body that comes through a county medical examiner's office would also be fair game to be entered into the database." So, if one refuses to pay $250, they kill him, and then they send the body to the medical examiner's office.
I see how you got your /. name; you clearly are a visionary. Seriously, while I doubt staff overall might take such actions their unions would probably intercede on their behalf, along with groups such as the ACLU. One would thnk cops would liek such a database but when all the cops I know sound like ACLU lawyers when they feel their rights are violated, and offer advice such as "never talk to a cop if he asks what you did; all they want to do is get you to confess." and have their union rep on speed dial.
Re: (Score:2)
also min wage workers can't be forced to pay that (Score:2)
also min wage workers can't be forced to pay that fee and the work place will have to pay it.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh? That's not in the bill.
police unions might do some good for once (Score:2)
I don't know about AZ specifically, but cops in some jurisdictions have crazy shit written into their contracts. Like having 24 hours to get their story straight before being questioned for a possible crime they committed. So if this fascist shit sandwich makes it through committee and into a signed bill, maybe the Fraternal Order of the Gestapo can use their power for good, for once, and fight it until it's repealed.
"Freedom" (Score:5, Insightful)
It seems the more and more the meaning of the word "Freedom" and "Land of the Free" is becoming more and more watered down.
And I'm not sure I'm surprised, to be honest. It seems that the USA, for everything that it does have, has forgotten about its people.
There are many countries in the world where this sort of thing just wouldn't happen. Some have laws to protect their citizens (Europe being one -- no was would the GDPR allow this to happen, for example), and some just wouldn't have it within their culture.
I do fear for the USA sometimes. Things are constantly happening there are making it one of the least free countries in the world. It's a trend that I don't see stopping. You might have missed the deadline of 1984, but I fear that's where you are all heading.
And it's a bit scary looking at it from here.
Re: (Score:2)
The bill hasn't passed and is unlikely to pass. It's about as important as one of Trump's tweets and is going just about as far.
Re: (Score:2)
I was under the impression that London had more CCTV cameras then just about every city combined. Of course I read that article in the MSM, so it could be entirely fucking bogus. But no you’re kidding yourself if you think that you’re protected from small quiet erosions of liberty. That’s exactly how they do it. It’s the same playbook over and over and over again
Think about the children
Its to protect us
We only want to spy on the really bad people
The shit goes way back. US
The Machine (Score:5, Interesting)
London is also trying to roll out facial recognition, tied into a database that tracks movements. They are basically trying to build The Machine from Person Of Interest, that tracks everyone using cameras and cell phones to predict crimes. The difference being, in Person of Interest, the designer made it so you couldn't "direct" the Machine - it only spat out the ID of potential terrorists. London's technology is totally unencumbered by such fail-safes.
Re: (Score:2)
The US already has this, but since it's a car-based culture it uses automatic license plate recognition rather than facial recognition. The police have these cameras EVERYWHERE. They then give the data to private corporations and buy it back as a "service" so they don't have to deal with any pesky data retention restrictions or FOIA requests. Big brother is here, and even though he has a record of where anyone who has a car traveled he always wants more. Think of the children! Law enforcement needs a b
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There is a book that’s now at a print that you should find and read called radio warfare. Before reading that book I was not aware that during World War II George Orwell worked in psychological operations or PsyOps. They quickly realized it was a lot easier to run propaganda against their own people than it was the enemy. The book 1984 was not a fictional imagination of a dark future, it was the only way to get the word out about a roadmap. Slowly, patiently, like a snowball gaining momentum, tha
Re: (Score:3)
If the military is against you, your handful of small arms won't save you. If the military is with you, your handful of small arms won't be needed. In either case the person most likely to be killed by, or due to, your small arms is you.
Now if you want to talk about "a good guy with a gun" vs "a bad guy with a gun",
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with you and here's the scariest part:
The American people are still driving the truck.
The way to shut this motherfucker up is to make goddam sure he doesn't survive the next election cycle.
It's not that Americans don't matter, it's that they just don't care.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The (actual) Nazis were greatly helped by data collection in the time before they came to power. They had databases available to them which showed them where the Jews lived.
Re: (Score:2)
"IMO the way the US insulate it from the rest of the world culture,"
WHAT? The rest of the world craves and imitates US culture in so many ways.
We're just on the way to adopting the worst of the rest of the world's governance and law.
Re: (Score:2)
Really China? The same country which is in process of introducing the "social credit" system that aims of making sure you are ideologically in lockstep with the CCP or else you end up being denied the right to travel, work, etc? That China?
True, America would never have no-fly lists, sex offender lists, lists of felons, lists of those arrested at one time, lists of people not allowed to own firearms and such. Nor things like compulsory drug testing for those that haven't been put on a list yet.
One big difference is in a communist state, the state employs you and blacklists, while in a capitalist state, private companies do it.
More big government (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Really? Always? Have you not read even ONE news story covering the Green New Deal?
Re: (Score:2)
So you are actually trying to convince us that it was the Libertarians supporting the bank bailouts? It was the Libertarians supporting Barney Frank to push untenable mortgages in his SJW crusade? It was the Libertarians pushing the Frank-Dodd bill?
Somehow, I don't think that you really understand how things work.
Re: (Score:2)
Republicans like to talk about ayn rand until they're blue in the face.
Ok then. Let's talk about "Atlas Shrugged" for a moment.
Who was it in those hotel lobbies conspiring to take over industry and with whom did they conspire? What tool did they use to take over industries? To what end did they take over industries? What were the protaganists view of government regulation? The antagonist? Which characters would Dubya and his crony banker buddies line up with?
What are taxes for if you have to pay for this? (Score:2)
Reading Recommendation (Score:2)
Gattica (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Gattaca. Only contains the letters GCTA.
Does the list include Senators ? (Score:5, Insightful)
If they want this then they should lead by example and be the first to have their DNA added to this database.
Line (Score:2)
>" It seems to be a daily occurrence where we have crossed another line in how far we will go to accept massive surveillance as normal."
Forced mass collection of DNA is REALLY crossing a lot of lines. I can't believe anyone would even propose such a bill.
Re: (Score:2)
Mass collection? This is only the collection of DNA of public employees, and not all of them. You don't want to pay to have your DNA collected, don't work for the government....
A common problem it seems. (Score:5, Insightful)
Ah - (Score:2)
$ 5k ?
probably way too low....
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. You don't get anything. In fact, you need to pay so that they can store all of your personal information and DNA on a "totally secure" server.
Re: (Score:2)
...and many others .... (Score:5, Informative)
I fear this is a response to a recent incident of abuse at an extended care center here in Arizona. An incident so abhorrent I will not describe it here. So we have an ambulance chaser making such a noble proposal...
And the overreach:
In Arizona, this will include real estate salespersons and brokers, among others. The current list of those required, in Arizona, to obtain a fingerprint clearance card:
ABDE-Dental Hygienist Licensure
ABDE-Dentist Licensure
ABDE-Denturist Certification
ADFI-Appraisal Management/Controlling person
ADFI-Appraisal Management/Registration
ADFI-Appraiser-License or Certificate
ADOT Traffic School Licensure
ADOT-Driver Training School Licensure
AZ Board of Fingerprinting-Members & Staff
AZ Charter School Board-Member/Applicant
AZ Dept. of Ed-Attend Vocational Program; Age 22 or older
AZ Dept. of Ed-Child Nutrition Programs
AZ Dept. of Ed-Surrogate Parents
AZ Dept. Real Estate-Licensure
AZ Game and Fish
AZ Schools for the Deaf & Blind-Superintendent
BPT - Physical Therapist & Assistants Licensure
BTR-Alarm Agent Certification
BTR-Controlling Person Certification
DCS - Child Welfare/Adoption Agency Employee
DCS-Adoption
DCS-Employee or IT Employee or IT Employees of Contractors or Subcontractors
DCS-Field Employee
DCS-Foster Home Licensure
Department of Juvenile Corrections-Licensee or Contract Provider
DES-CCR&R Registered Home
DES-Certified Child Care Provider & Non-Certified Relative Provider
DES-DAAS-Division of Aging & Adult Svcs.
DES-DDD - Developmental Home Licensure
DES-DDD/HCBS-Home & Community Based Svcs.
DES-Domestic Violence/Homeless Shelter
DES-Employee
DES-IT Position
DES-Employee or Contractor with access to Federal Tax Information
DES-JOBS Program
DES-WIOA-Workforce Innovation & Opportunity Act
DHS-Arizona State Hospital
DHS-Child Care Employees & Volunteers
DHS-Child Care Facility Licensure
DHS-Child Care Group Home; Certification, Employees or Volunteers
DHS-Children’s Behavioral Health Programs Employees and Volunteers
DHS-Nursing Care Administrators & Assisted Living Facility Managers
DHS-Residential or Nursing Care Institutions; Home Health Agencies – Employees and Volunteers
Health Science Student & Clinical Assistant
Juvenile Probation-Supreme Court, County Attorney or other Contract Provider Employee or Volunteer
State Board of Pharmacy-3rd Party Logistic Providers Representative
State Board of Pharmacy-Licensure
State Board of Education (Teacher or Other Certification)
Tutor or Teacher Preparation Programs
Charter School Instructor
School Bus Driver
Public and/or Charter School Non-certificated personnel
Public and/or Charter School Contractor, Subcontractor or Vendor and their Employees
Of note; appraisers, IT subcontractors and their employees, alarm agents.
The bill specifies collection from (with my notes in parentheses):
1. A PERSON WHO IS REQUIRED BY LAW TO SUBMIT FINGERPRINTS FOR PURPOSES OF IDENTIFICATION AS PART OF AN APPLICATION FOR LICENSURE, CERTIFICATION OR A PERMIT OR RENEWAL OF A LICENSE, CERTIFICATE OR PERMIT IF THE PERSON HAS NOT PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED DNA ID. (see the list above)
2. A PERSON WHOSE EMPLOYMENT OR POSITION REQUIRES FINGERPRINTING FOR PURPOSES OF IDENTIFICATION. (apparently requiring collection if an employer requires fingerprinting, overreach)
3. A PERSON WHO IS EMPLOYED BY OR VOLUNTEERING WITH A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY. (redundant)
4. A PERSON WHO, FOR ANY OTHER REASON, IS REQUIRED BY LAW TO SUBMIT FINGERPRINTS FOR PURPOSES OF IDENTIFICATION. (redundant)
5. A DECEASED PERSON, WHOSE DNA ID SHALL BE COLLECTED BY THE MEDICAL EXAMINER OR THE MEDICAL EXAMINER'S DESIGNEE AND SUBMITTED PURSUANT TO PROTOCOLS DEVELOPED BY THE DEPARTMENT. A DECEASED PERSON'S DNA ID MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT WITHIN TWENTY-FOUR HOURS AFTER COLLECTION.
6. A PERSON WHO IS ORDERED BY
If you haven't done anything wrong... (Score:2)
Does this really matter? (Score:5, Insightful)
We're to the point these days where we can usually use available DNA databases to narrow down suspects to a small family. If we have an unknown DNA sample, we can sequence it, match it against the genealogy DNA databases out there (usually GEDCOM). We'll find that the unknown DNA matches both the Doe family and the Roe families, leaving us to find the individuals resulting from a marriage between the two families. After that, it's just a matter of some simple deduction (e.g. Jane Doe and Richard Roe had four children, one was male while the suspect's DNA was female, another was living in Alaska at the time, but the third and fourth one was in the area at the time of the murder), some police work to retrieve a sample of DNA (e.g. tail them, wait for them to get a coffee and then fish the empty coffee cup out of the trash), and it's done.
The cat's out of the bag at this point. Assume GEDCOM and the other genealogy databases go defunct. Okay, great, you've just delayed the problem for a few years before some federal contractor builds in the ability to match DNA samples to relatives who have been incarcerated or DNA collected at a crime scene. (The US locks up a lot of people. Countless others (including murder victims) have their DNA collected by the police for the purpose of elimination.)
I think the question we should be asking is what limits should we put on this power? And how do we work on training police and prosecutors in this new era? What instructions do we give to a jury? Because when you can match anyone's DNA that you find at a crime scene, it's going to lead to more random coincidences and mistakes. (A famous one would be the "serial killer" whose DNA was found at multiple crime scenes - but it turned out the "killer" was a factory worker at the place that makes the swabs being used.)
Do you really bend over so willingly? (Score:2)
The NSA already taps calls and tracks cell phone location, so it's no big deal if they force everyone to buy an Amazon Echo to record every word spoken in your own home!!!
Since submitter is so concerned about privacy..... (Score:2)
It seems to be a daily occurrence where we have crossed another line in how far we will go to accept massive surveillance as normal. Do we even have a line the sand that we would defend? Do we even see anything wrong with it? Absolute power corrupts absolutely and we continue to give knowledge of our personal lives (power) to others. If we continue down the same path, I suppose we deserve what we get? I want to shout "Stop the train, I want off!" but I fear my plea would be ignored.
----
Subby l
Finally we can be protected (Score:2)
How can they get away with charging for it (Score:2)
In another state they tried to do simple fingerprinting of existing IT employees and got smacked down [timesunion.com], and it was at employer's expense. Are Arizona's public employee unions made of toilet paper?
Cops make sense, but no one else does (Score:2)
Yes, parents are paranoid about teachers and day care workers, but their is no reasonable excuse to DNA test them. They do not commit more crimes than other professions nor do they have an easier time hiding from an investigation.
But police officers are very very hard to charge, let alone convict of a crime. In addition, they routinely contaminate crime scenes with their DNA, so they should have it taken if only to prevent the forensics teams from thinking that a random drop of cop blood came from the crim
I'd pack up and move (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, yes, lets start settling our political disputes with guns. Maybe your neighbors don't agree with you and decide your neighborhood would be better off without you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Stop asking these questions. (Score:2)
Re:Knowing Arizona as much as I do (Score:4, Insightful)
It may not fly, but I rather suspect it will trudge forward through the muck and mire.
Re: (Score:2)
I notice who's missing from that list:
State employees (state legislature, etc)
Postal workers
Judges
Re: (Score:2)
This bill isn't going to fly.
Of course not. Sounds too much like illegal search and seizure.
Re: (Score:2)
Need to pass a data privacy liability act too (Score:5, Insightful)
Before they pass this they need to pass a data privacy liability act. It should state the penalty for every occurence of a data record being lost to hackers because of inadequte security on the data base. FOr example, $1 million for loss of a DNA record, $500K for loss of a financial record, $250K for loss of a social security number. $100K for loss of a purchase history record and so on.
Additionally the penalty would apply not just to the person that collected the data in the first place but separately to any other parties it was entrusted to who lost it. So shared data would be subject to double the penalty. This would prevent avoiding responsibility by delegation.
If they did that then I'd not be quite as fearful of this. It could still be abused by the gov't itself but this would reasonably limit the scope
Re: (Score:3)
Reverse that, OK?
My DNA, obviously, is important to these bastards. Let them pay ME .
It's my IP. Either I created it or it's an "act of God."
I declare it part of my estate, as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Please go the hell away.
Re: (Score:2)
It always was, baby, it always was.
Re: (Score:2)