Supreme Court: DNA Samples Can Be Taken From Arrestees Without Warrant (1 Viewer)

[Det. Brees]

WASHINGTON — A sharply divided Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for police to take a DNA swab from anyone they arrest for a serious crime, endorsing a practice now followed by more than half the states as well as the federal government.The justices differed strikingly on how big a step that was.


Supreme Court: DNA Samples Can Be Taken From Arrestees Without Warrant

Im torn on this. Im all for catching criminals but this pushes to far in my opinion.

 

[Laclife]

goverment is the biggest criminals. when do we get to takes DNA samples from them

 

[Sun Wukong]

We live in a post-privacy society. You are not entitled to any privacy. Even your DNA can legally be recorded and banked now.

There are plenty who will defend this. I don't care to get in an argument with them. There's nothing they can say to me that will make me think this is ok.

 

[B-Train]

Lets see all the statist apologists defend this one

 

[coldseat]

I agree with Scalia.

 

[St.Fury]

I don't like this. I wouldn't have an issue with pushing this for convicted felons. But I'm going to have to agree with Scalia on this one.

 

[Norwajun]

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

- Benjamin Franklin

I'm very disappointed in the Supreme Court.

 

[dajmno]

Which way did Clarence Thomas vote? I support the opposite view.

 

[sykobob671]

Did they define what a serious crime was? The word 'felony' is tossed around like it actually
has a defined meaning, but it varies from State to State and crime to crime significantly.

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

so today i found out i agree with both Det Brees and Scalia
the world does not make sense

 

[Jackavelli]

You get your fingerprints taken when arrested

 

[Stealth Matrix]

with all the other privacy violations you hear about rearing their ugly head, this one caught me by surprise. i thought for sure they covered that base already. guess not.

 

[Jeff Miller]

WASHINGTON — A sharply divided Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for police to take a DNA swab from anyone they arrest for a serious crime, endorsing a practice now followed by more than half the states as well as the federal government.The justices differed strikingly on how big a step that was.


Supreme Court: DNA Samples Can Be Taken From Arrestees Without Warrant

Im torn on this. Im all for catching criminals but this pushes to far in my opinion.

is DNA really any different then a fingerprint?

i would gather not, so this decision doesn't really surprise me.

if your arrested your fingerprinted, so i really don't see any different between being fingerprinted and have a dna sample taken.

 

[Jeff Miller]

goverment is the biggest criminals. when do we get to takes DNA samples from them

you are not as equal as they are

 

[Sun Wukong]

is DNA really any different then a fingerprint?

i would gather not, so this decision doesn't really surprise me.

if your arrested your fingerprinted, so i really don't see any different between being fingerprinted and have a dna sample taken.

There's a pretty massive difference between someone having an ink replication of the way your finger looks and someone having a DNA sample. The two aren't remotely comparable.

 

[parlorcitysaint]

During the French Revolution, all it took was for one citizen to denounce another, and they were imprisoned. Of course, more severe penalties were imposed, as well.

It seems that centuries later, we're where the French were then. No conviction necessary. Just a reasonable excuse to make an arrest, and then you're being swabbed.

Any bets on how long before the entire population is "cataloged"?

you are not as equal as they are

True. If we were, then we'd be exempt from the "health care" that's been crammed down our throats.....