|
I'm with SATS, but then again, I'm Canadian. This sort of debate, will lively and civil, as usual seems to have broken down into the "Well, I don't commit crime so I guess it's okay." versus "I don't commit crime either, but over my dead body, I don't trust Them (whoever They are)."
The following stats aren't accurate, just ballparking here, I admit it.
Isn't there some sort of 80-20 rule when it comes to lawbreakers. Sort of a 80% of the crimes are committed by 20% of the people.
Actually, isn't it even less of people committing the majority?
I'd like it if, after one is convicted, then your DNA is entered on a database and run against outstanding crimes when DNA was found. Then again, your hair could have fallen out on the bus (with DNA on it's tip) and landed on a serial killer. That's why I think one shouldn't be convicted on DNA alone.
Great thing you guys have there, that Constitution. Serious, one of the best documents ever written.
The framers were brilliant. So brilliant, in fact, that I'm sure many of them (certainly Jefferson) would be dismayed at the number of guns in everyone's hands, what said guns can do, etc....
I don't think it was meant to be a dead document. It probably needs an overhaul for the 21st century.
I just don't anyone you got that I would trust with a grocery list.
All that being said, I think it's a natural progression from fingerprints to DNA. Far, far better science wise.
__________________
Propaganda is to a democracy what the bludgeon is to a totalitarian state.
-Noam Chomsky
Love is a verb, not a noun.
-My Mom
The function of genius is to furnish cretins with ideas twenty years later.
-Louis Aragon, "La Porte-plume," Traite du style, 1928
|