Johnny S. Clarke & Lisa Straub- young Ohio couple murdered

[van64]

Just a note about DNA. The latest statistics reflect that approximately 40%of births in the US occur outside of marriage. In almost all births outside of marriage, the assistance of the law is sought to either obtain government assistance to cover the costs of birthing expenses and living expenses and/or child support.

All such cases where government assistance by support or legal process is sought now require the taking of DNA from the mother, the child and the reputed father, even when the latter admits paternity (he sometimes turns out to be wrong!) and when more than one man is named, all the men are joined and required to submit to DNA. Usually by a simple buckle swab to the inside of the cheek.

Therefore, the DNA bank is growing larger by the day, and will soon likely include at least one person in the familial line for each member of the population.

In addition, if you have ever had any blood or tissue sample sent to a laboratory, a significant percentage are retained under slide. Which is just good medical practice, especially for example to follow the progress of so-called pre-cancer cells.

I do not consider any of this to be a so-called "invasion of privacy" simply because in each instance there is a triggering event which constitutes a legitimate waiver of the privilege, and it is leading and will continue to lead to many societal benefits, including the solving of cold case crimes, more convictions of persons rightfully accused of crime, more rapid convictions, less "pleading down" because of evidentiary problems, more innocent people being released from prisons or exonerated quicker in new cases, etc.

Thanks to DNA, many murderers now plead to first degree murder charges just to avoid the death penalty, in cases where the DA previously was willing to accept a plea to 2^nd degree or even manslaughter.

I am not connected with law enforcement and never have been. But I have a healthy interest in society and the laws.

The use of DNA to convict or exonerate is fine. The nanny state collecting it on people who don't have the intellectual capacity to understand their rights is another matter.

You sound like a collectivist believing in some "greater good" usurping the unalienable rights of the individual. I consider myself at war with that mentality. That's the mentality that exists in places like the UK. It is completely contrary to every principal that our founders held dear.

I do not consider any of this to be a so-called "invasion of privacy" simply because in each instance there is a triggering event which constitutes a legitimate waiver of the privilege...

Unalienable rights are not "privileges" doled out by the state. The state of Texas was caught surreptitiously collecting the DNA of newborns and they have been forced to destroy it. Parents thought the blood spots were just to check for diseases and did not consent to this big brother cataloguing of human beings as though they were the property of the state - or big pharma. Giving up ones unique life blueprint should be done by choice, not stealth.

Very, very well said!