Five states already require a DNA sample, along with fingerprints, to be taken at the time of an arrest in a felony case, so House Bill 2554 isn’t exactly out of the lawmaking mainstream. Still, the bill kind of gives us the creeps, maybe because of its “trust us” component, as reported by Associated Press: “The sample would be removed from the KBI system if charges are dropped or the person is acquitted.” Maybe this is a harmless next step in law enforcement. In any case, the bill cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee Monday and already has passed the House, and it’s an election year, so routine swabbing is probably coming to a jail near you.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/24
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/24
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- Phantom on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- Phantom on Open thread 11/24
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
21 Comments
Looks like the picnic is going to have decent weather tomorrow! Is there anybody coming that hasn’t informed me yet? Any one not coming that said they would?
Let me know, so I’ll knnow how many cows to butcher.
Also, I’ve recieved an email from the editors, they can’t attend this one. However, they have offered to sponsor the next one! Seems that Thursdays are their ‘crunch day’ for the Sunday paper.
Hank
Actually this bill is less intrusive than taking your fingerprints. What’s the big deal?
Hank
Less intrusive than fingerprints? Hank, I’ve got to know how sticking a swab in someones mouth to take cells from the cheek and then pulling the DNA out so that you have a complete life profile of someone is less intrusive than ink on the fingers!
Dear J,
Ever been fingerprinted?
I have been fingerprinted so many times I can’t count. First time when I was booked by mistake in high school. Then when I joined the Navy. Then when my clearance was upgraded. A DUI in ‘76. When I applied for a job in Granbury, TX. When I was hired by GE in Idaho. On and on and on.
DNA is merely another form of ‘fingerprinting’ (without the mess!) Giving up a DNA sample would not bother me a bit. Fingerprints are messy.
Hank
If it’s a felony case, what’s the “Creepy” problem? Seems like a good idea to me.
Hank,I’ll be out with Ben.
Hank – they have new fingerprint gizmos where you put your fingers on a glass plate and they scan it. No ink.
See ya tomorrow!
;^)
Not in the last dirt-water jail I was in!
Hank
I’m all for DNA testing if it’s done properly. In the recent past, 2 DNA labs have been found to have been sloppy with evidence (the one in Austin a few months ago). That said, DNA testing is good science. Bring it on.
Hank, Walker is supposed to hit town about 2pm tomorrow, so we’ll be there. Tell us again which shelter.
Hank – we’ll have to compare notes tomorrow night!
;^)
I wonder if people 50 years from now will laugh at us for even thinking there was something wrong with DNA samples…
The difference is that your fingerprints can’t be used to deny you insurance or blackmail someone, and so aren’t particularly valuable as a commodity. You can bet that someone will be offering hard cash for your genetic information, for whatever purposes, and someone in the law enforcement community will be more than happy to market it!
Actually Jed,
Your paranoia is unfounded. They don’t map your whole genome, they just use a few spikes for identification. Your complete DNA information comes under HIPPA. Your info is safe.
Hank
I believe the microsatellites (repeating sequences that vary from person to person) that they map are from the “junk” portion of the DNA. It doesn’t code for anything that we know of.
I would agree that it’s not any worse than fingerprinting when used in this manner (law enforcement).
The only thing I’m worried about in regards to DNA is the results of genetic testing being passed on to insurance companies. That’s for another day, though.
The picnic is tomorrow?
I never thought about the date. I just figured it for a weekend.
School night for us so I will have to see.
As to swabbing DNA, I don’t like it. The current administration has made more and more of our formerly private records available to various outlets. DNA profiling could be a black mark that could follow a person for life.
Hank,
CF say hi from Austin, TX.
In all likelihood, I won’t be able to make it. Took me eight hours and forty minutes to get here from Wichita (ugly road work at the OK/TX state line), and I don’t anticpate an early start. If I can, I will. But if the editors are already talking about a next one, and if it doesn’t conflict, I’ll plan on it.
TTFN
I’m leaving at noon to be there by five, if the wind doesnt blow me off the road!!
Happy Birthday DarwinsDisciple!!
KFG,Thanks. I am still planning on showing up at the picnic and will be bringing a cake.
I believe the weather will be okay. Too bad, more can’t come.
Hank indicates above that the WE staff wrote him an email begging off. That was considerate of them.
All, bring cash to help reimburse Hank for the shelter costs.
DD, we should mention here that Hank was a most gracious host, a GREAT burger griller, and he refused our offers of cash.
I had a great time, and DD, I am glad you spent at least part of your birthday with us!
Just a thought:
DNA is already required of convicted felons. If the sample is destroyed if charges are dropped or the defendant is acquitted, why not wait until the conviction is had? Can you think of a good reason to add this law to what we do now? I can’t.