Would you give your DNA to police to "help" them solve a crime?

Would you give DNA to police.

  • HELL NO

    Votes: 4 33.3%
  • YES IT WOULD HELP

    Votes: 8 66.7%

  • Total voters
    12
K

Kain99

Guest
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Would you give your DNA to police to "help" them solve a crime?

Originally posted by cmdrfunk
Luckily, our founders decided I could keep you from knowing what sex toys I have in my drawers without a damned good reason and a court order. Of course that all went out the window with the :patriot: Patriot Act if some pseudorandom govt shmuck decides I might burn someone's bushes terroristicly with my oft-malfunctioning dildo.
Well, I searched my copy of the Constitution and I couldn't find the word privacy anywhere in the document.

The main part of the Constitution spells out the few things that government may do or must do, The Bill of Rights spells out what government may not do.

The government can't search or seize your property without due process of law.

It can't keep you in jail indefinitely without a trial.

It can't enact laws abridging the freedom of speech or religion, or infringing on the right to keep and bear arms. etc…

Some may say I am arguing semantics but I don’t think so. Privacy is not a right.
 

mainman

Set Trippin
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Would you give your DNA to police to "help" them solve a crime?

Originally posted by cmdrfunk
Luckily, our founders decided I could keep you from knowing what sex toys I have in my drawers
Have alot of spare room in your drawers do ya? :confused:
 
C

cmdrfunk

Guest
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Would you give your DNA to police to "help" them solve a crim

Originally posted by Kain99
Well, I searched my copy of the Constitution and I couldn't find the word privacy anywhere in the document.

The main part of the Constitution spells out the few things that government may do or must do, The Bill of Rights spells out what government may not do.

The government can't search or seize your property without due process of law.

It can't keep you in jail indefinitely without a trial.

It can't enact laws abridging the freedom of speech or religion, or infringing on the right to keep and bear arms. etc…

Some may say I am arguing semantics but I don’t think so. Privacy is not a right.

The bill of rights definitely is NOT a listing of what the government cannot do. We already had that. Anything the constitution didn't say the government could do is supposed to automatically be something that they can't do. But, first...

The right to privacy is implied: from the privacy to not testify against yourself to the privacy of not quartering troops to the privacy of not having your home or person illegally searched. The Supreme court has upheld this implied "right to privacy" numerous times. e.g. Griswold vs Connecticut (marital privacy) and the infamous and my personal favorite Roe vs Wade (implied right to privacy protects women's choice in abortion).

The Supreme Court has broadly defined privacy as the right of the individual to control the dissemination of information about oneself. Privacy as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution differs in two significant ways from privacy protected by tort law: (1) the types of acts constituting an invasion of privacy are very different, and (2) the type of protection provided to individuals - constitutional privacy protects against governmental intrusion while tort law primarily protects against invasion by private parties. Fourth Amendment privacy rights only apply in those situations where the government is the primary actor, however it encompasses government employees and some government contractors whose activities might be considered as state action. Twenty-four states, including Colorado, through state constitutional provisions or statutes protect the individuals' right to privacy. Some of these constitutional provisions or statutes have been held to create a civil claim for invasion of privacy by private parties, while others have not.

--http://www.publaw.com/privacy.html



As for saying that something isn't a right:

Bill of Rights:

"Article [IX.]

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. "


Just because it's not listed explicitly, doesn't mean it's not a right. If i recall my history books, this amendment was added into the bill of rights because there was a big argument over whether to have a bill of rights in the first place for the very fact that people would take it as listing of our ONLY rights. It's more of a list of examples.


This is getting off topic and was covered in 6th grade, so I'm going back to new material. :flush:
 
K

Kain99

Guest
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Would you give your DNA to police to "help" them solve a

Originally posted by cmdrfunk
This is getting off topic and was covered in 6th grade, so I'm going back to new material. :flush:
Well He!! .. I wasn't trying to be offensive but now that I realize you are a small d!ck jerk with a chip on your shoulder I'll add you to my list! :mad:
 
C

cmdrfunk

Guest
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Would you give your DNA to police to "help" them solv

Originally posted by Kain99
Well He!! .. I wasn't trying to be offensive but now that I realize you are a small d!ck jerk with a chip on your shoulder I'll add you to my list! :mad:


Apparently my self-deprecation skills, though finely honed, are prone to error so I apologize if that appeared as a crack at you.

Despite this egregious error, I must humbly ask the question anyway:

Just how did you know that I had a small penis?
 
K

Kain99

Guest
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Would you give your DNA to police to "help" them

Originally posted by cmdrfunk
Just how did you know that I had a small penis?
It's written all over you! :roflmao:
 

Ken King

A little rusty but not crusty
PREMO Member
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Would you give your DNA to police to "help" them solve a crime?

Originally posted by Kain99
Well, I searched my copy of the Constitution and I couldn't find the word privacy anywhere in the document.

The main part of the Constitution spells out the few things that government may do or must do, The Bill of Rights spells out what government may not do.

The government can't search or seize your property without due process of law.

It can't keep you in jail indefinitely without a trial.

It can't enact laws abridging the freedom of speech or religion, or infringing on the right to keep and bear arms. etc…

Some may say I am arguing semantics but I don’t think so. Privacy is not a right.
So the 4th Amendment that starts with, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, shall not be violated…..”, doesn’t imply the right to privacy?

The cops are on a fishing trip here. Instead of doing their investigative work they want the people (to be read as citizens, you know those protected by these enumerated rights) to prove their innocence without being duly charged. It seems to me that they want to strip us of our rights slowly thinking we won’t miss them when they are gone.

I’ve nothing to hide, but they have no business having my DNA either, at least without cause and a warrant.
 

Sharon

* * * * * * * * *
Staff member
PREMO Member
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Would you give your DNA to police to "help" them solve a

Originally posted by Ken King
So the 4th Amendment that starts with, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, shall not be violated…..”, doesn’t imply the right to privacy?

The cops are on a fishing trip here. Instead of doing their investigative work they want the people (to be read as citizens, you know those protected by these enumerated rights) to prove their innocence without being duly charged. It seems to me that they want to strip us of our rights slowly thinking we won’t miss them when they are gone.

I’ve nothing to hide, but they have no business having my DNA either, at least without cause and a warrant.

Thank you Ken, I'm glad someone else gets it. :clap:
 

Warron

Member
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Would you give your DNA to police to "help" them solve a crime

Originally posted by Ken King
So the 4th Amendment that starts with, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, shall not be violated…..”, doesn’t imply the right to privacy?

The cops are on a fishing trip here. Instead of doing their investigative work they want the people (to be read as citizens, you know those protected by these enumerated rights) to prove their innocence without being duly charged. It seems to me that they want to strip us of our rights slowly thinking we won’t miss them when they are gone.

I’ve nothing to hide, but they have no business having my DNA either, at least without cause and a warrant.


This is pretty much my view on this issue. Also, I don't believe there is any reason to have rights if you are not going to exercise them, so I would require the police to get a warrant and show cause before giving a dna sample or searching my home.

I'm also a major critic of dragnets as a form of investigation.
 
Top