Breaking: Supreme Court OK’s taking DNA upon arrest

[muriel_volestrangler]

150. You do not make any sense whatsoever

"Someone could pull hair out of it and get you arrested for murder or many other crimes. "

How? Only if they knew you had committed a crime at which you left DNA, but there was no other proof of it, would this work. They'd have to give your hair to the police, and say "this will match the DNA of the criminal who did X". But this would have nothing to do with the case, which is when the police arrest you for something else, and then take your DNA and see if it matches that found at crime scenes of unsolved cases.

"And a cop that didn't like you can now very easily destroy your life forever. "

Again, your life will be 'destroyed' if you've committed a serious crime for which they collected DNA, and this is how they match it to you. It would depend on what crimes you think they're taking crime scene evidence for, perhaps - are you worried about them picking up discarded joints at random or something?

"Think about all the ways an innocent person could be set up, and subsequently arrested, jailed, charged, and tried. "

No, that's the point; it doesn't affect innocent people. The question is how much privacy should a person be entitled to, even if they are guilty of something. The 4th Amendment is about 'unreasonable' searches. The question is whether it's "unreasonable" to take an identifying pattern of someone when arrested for one thing, and then compare it with all the other crimes that have been committed, even when you don't yet have reason to connect that person to those crimes.

"Even if the innocent person gets off, the psychological, emotional, and financial, etc, damage to that persons life would be terrifyingly devastating. "

Gets off what? They've been arrested for one crime; the processing of that is not dependent on this general DNA sample. If the sample doesn't match any unsolved crimes, then nothing will come of that. There is no 'damage' to them; they won't know anything about it. If it does match a crime, then they're not innocent.

"And the fascists now have a brand new toy that they can use to silence and neutralize the critics and activist enemies of fascism. "

Are you talking about DNA at all? This sentence just doesn't make any sense in the context of the discussion we're having.