Obama Supports DNA Sampling Upon Arrest

From Wired’s Threat Level:

Josh Gerstein over at Politico sent Threat Level his piece underscoring once again President Barack Obama is not the civil-liberties knight in shining armor many were expecting.Gerstein posts a televised interview of Obama and John Walsh of America’s Most Wanted. The nation’s chief executive extols the virtues of mandatory DNA testing of Americans upon arrest, even absent charges or a conviction. Obama said, “It’s the right thing to do” to “tighten the grip around folks” who commit crime.

When it comes to civil liberties, the Obama administration has come under fire for often mirroring his predecessor’s practices surrounding state secrets, the Patriot Act and domestic spying. There’s also Gitmo, Jay Bybee and John Yoo.

Now there’s DNA sampling. Obama told Walsh he supported the federal government, as well as the 18 states that have varying laws requiring compulsory DNA sampling of individuals upon an arrest for crimes ranging from misdemeanors to felonies. The data is lodged in state and federal databases, and has fostered as many as 200 arrests nationwide, Walsh said.

[Read more at Wired’s Threat Level]

8 Comments on "Obama Supports DNA Sampling Upon Arrest"

  1. *sigh*
    I know everyone talks about moving to Canada, but I'm holding to this goal.

  2. malatesting123 | Mar 11, 2010 at 10:53 pm |

    Seriously….We are so fucking doomed. Not because the government and the corp.'s that own it are doing what they always do. But because people dont give a damn whatsoever, or openly rejoice over our burgeoning police state.

  3. I simply don't trust our government to possess this information and use it properly. My distrust is based on their past actions and the potential for abuse of this technology.

    As it stands now, in any major city in America there are hundreds if not thousands of unprocessed rape kits just sitting on the shelves. DNA evidence which has been collected from actual crime scenes and victims which the police already can't afford (or in some cases can't be bothered) to analyze and compare to a database of known offenders.

    So, we can't even process actual criminal evidence that may solve actual crimes, but we want to go and start collecting DNA from everyone who crosses paths with the police?

    Hmm, I don't think so.

    Further, the government has already been caught stealing DNA samples from newborns and storing them in databases. No informed consent was obtained. The medical professionals involved should be facing criminal charges or at least professional censure. That's been going on since the 1970's and only widely revealed recently.

    Just as bad and contrary to popular belief, DNA evidence can be faked. If you have a sample or merely a database profile to work from, your typical college grad student can reportedly counterfeit DNA evidence. So, letting the govt have a sample ahead of time is simply an unacceptable practice.

  4. Grip_Vaglery | Mar 12, 2010 at 3:28 am |

    Shit the last time I had my dna sampled I had to pay 20 bucks for it. If I can get a couple a white cops to do it for free I'll be in hog heaven.

  5. You know, back in the day, in Latin America (and I suspect it is still the case in Greece, and Haiti, and Chile right now) when a new President took office, he's get paid a visit by an economic hitman from America.

    This “gentleman” would politely inform the new President that if he ever did anything to help the peasants in his country to have a better life — by raising the minimum wage, or passing new environmental regulations that would force American companies to stop poisoning the land, or dare to refuse a military base in his country, or refuse an IMF or WorldBank loan and the austerity policies that would inevitably follow and further impoverish his people, or God forbid, nationalize an industry (especially oil) to make it less expensive — that he'd be overthrown and most likely shot.

    The more Obama continues to follow the fascist “security” policies of the previous Administration, the more I think, “Somebody paid this guy a 'visit.”

    • Judging by his cabinet appointments, the visit must have come very early on. Probably before he took office.

  6. DNA sample is like a very detailed photography. A very unique photography. But they are already taking photos, aren’t they?

  7. DNA sample is like a very detailed photography. A very unique photography. But they are already taking photos, aren't they?

Comments are closed.