Early next year, the court is supposed to hear a case on the constitutionality of letting police departments collect DNA samples from people they arrest although I don't know if that's for all crimes. For example, presently NJ allows DNA collection for people convicted of all crimes that carry a prison sentence of six months or more and people arrested for serious crimes like murder and sexual offenses.

On a gut level, my libertarian sensibilities says this seems like something they would do in a totalitarian state but taking fingerprints has long been an accepted tool of law enforcement and the simple swabbing of the inside of your cheek is a lot less intrusive than a full body cavity search. Keeping in mind that DNA evidence has successfully gotten innocent people out of prison and off of death row, is this a necessary tool to keep the law abiding safe form criminals or another erosion of our right to privacy? Thoughts?

Alan Smithee wrote:

Early next year, the court is supposed to hear a case on the constitutionality of letting police departments collect DNA samples from people they arrest although I don't know if that's for all crimes. For example, presently NJ allows DNA collection for people convicted of all crimes that carry a prison sentence of six months or more and people arrested for serious crimes like murder and sexual offenses.

On a gut level, my libertarian sensibilities says this seems like something they would do in a totalitarian state but taking fingerprints has long been an accepted tool of law enforcement and the simple swabbing of the inside of your cheek is a lot less intrusive than a full body cavity search. Keeping in mind that DNA evidence has successfully gotten innocent people out of prison and off of death row, is this a necessary tool to keep the law abiding safe form criminals or another erosion of our right to privacy? Thoughts?

I think only if they're involved in violent crimes should it be taken, since after all DNA is usually only used to clear people OF violent crimes like rape and murder.

Supernova wrote:

I think only if they're involved in violent crimes should it be taken, since after all DNA is usually only used to clear people OF violent crimes like rape and murder.