Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JinnKai
You're sentenced after being convicted. I too support taking DNA from convicted felons. It's not like fingerprints to me.
Only those convicted of felonies should have the DNA taken. We take their right to vote and their right to own a firearm away, and I don't take issue with those. Taking DNA is just a "modern day" adaption of the concept that once you've committed a felony - a grievous crime, usually involving violence - you're revoked your right to certain things. This just adds the "right to keep your DNA private" privilege to the list of things revoked.
|
while I'm 110% sure that the nanny staters/statists are going to get this implemented, all in the name of better law enforcement and safety, we must be very careful and demanding that the DNA sample can only be taken for very specific types of crimes, not just 'all felonies'.
not all felonies are grievous crimes, for example in Illinois a second conviction of driving on a revoked or suspended license is a felony. This is not a violent crime in any way shape or form and an order to obtain a DNA for file permanently sentence serves zero purpose since some felonies can be totally non-violent and non-offensive to others.