Comments about ‘Utah Legislature: Senate votes to expand DNA collection from crime suspects’

What are the chances that somebody arrested for a violent crime might have previously committed a crime? The DNA should automatically be destroyed if they are not found guilty.

If we are no longer going to abide by the innocent-until-proven-guilty precept, then let's just take everyone's DNA when they are born. Imagine how many crimes we could solve if we did that.

Not hardly, its evidence to convict. Just as fingerprints are used. Both of these data base files are circumstantial and used to show presence at a scene but should not be used as a tool to convict. I can see maybe doing DNA testing for that reason alone and the sampling should not be entered in to any data base until after a conviction. As for DNA and fingerprinting being crime prevention data, that's a false statement. Both are data for tracking and does not prove or deter a crime.

Therefore DNA sampling should be limited to a voluntary test. The innocent will most likely allow voluntary testing that is more beneficial to prove innocence than guilt.

It should also be unlawful for law enforcement to do any lie detector testing, it has already been struck down by the supreme court as an unreliable procedure. Law enforcement does use this test to publicly slander suspects or family of victims who refuse this test by calling them uncooperative.

Law enforcement was never meant to be easy and the more test they are allowed to do the more narrow minded they get in investigating a crime.

"taking DNA would prevent crime" That's like saying taking away guns will stop murder. If someone is bent on committing a crime it's gonna happen. Is Mr. Smart willing to give up more of his freedom for security. How much shall we give away? Is Mr. Smart willing to pay for a lawyer if someone is found innocent so that they can petition the courts to remove their DNA collection if found innocent? I have never been convicted of such a crime, but I see a danger here with the government taking more and more of our freedom in the name of protection.

The same government that used illegal warrantless wiretapping will give up its DNA collection. Bet anything, even if someone gets a court order, thier DNA will be retained.

I love it how our politicians call national health care socialism but when our police state wants to gather DNA from innocent people, that's just good government.

Anyone who opposes this bill is opposed to law enforcement and in favor of criminals. When someone is arrested, their fingerprints are taken for legitimate law enforcement purposes. DNA is no different: it helps identify the arrested person and can be used to solve previously unsolved cases. The taking of DNA for law enforcement purposes does absolutely nothing to limit the freedom of anybody to do anything--except for limiting the ability to get away with committing crimes.

into jail now, they take your fingerprints. If you are found not guilty, are they required to give the fingerprints back to you? No. They are entered into a national database, where they stay forever.

What is the difference between taking your DNA, or taking your fingerprints? It is still a record of you, and your distinguishing characteristics. Some locales take a scan of your eyes, which is said to be even more accurate than DNA. Should this practice also be challenged?

Anyone can do a little searching and come to realize that the next step will be to implant all of us so that everything we do will be tracked. Imagine, scanning your hand instead of debit card. HOW CONVENIENT! and wrong! STOP SUPPORTING THE MONSTER!

What is to stop the police from taking the DNA you were forced to give up and planting it at a crime scene?

What is there to stop the police from putting DNA evidence into a cold-case file?

The police would never ever be less than honest and should be trusted above all other citizens. If your against this bill your for Crime? What a moronic statement, the kind you would here from the right wing neo-nutcases... your for or against us mentality. This is there work around for the implants that all good citizens will line up and except. Prison State is the goal of the conservatives then we can compete with China's Capitalistic twist on freedom.

Will we have to start having our kids give DNA samples before they enroll in Kindergarten? Why are books like 1984 and a Brave New World coming to mind?
Big Brother is watching you- or at least they will be if Utah's GOP gets its way.

If you don't understand the implications of the difference between retaining fingerprints and DNA, our education system has failed you.

I understand some people are concerned. The ACLU and defense attorneys spread a lot of "mistruths" about DNA. There is absolutely no personal information, medical,psycholgical or even racial information in a DNA profile in CODIS,our national database. There is a case number and a law enforcement agency that submitted the case number. The DNA profile doesn't even have a name attached to it. Once there is a match the law enforcement agency is contacted and they then do another DNA test to make sure it is a valid match; then they start to investigate and build their case. A DNA profile looks like a bar code like that on products in the store! Which would you rather flashed on the evening news or the internet? A bar code or your DNA profile? Clearly a DNA profile is less invasive on your privacy than a mug shot. DNA profiles are only for law enforcement identification purposes. Your finger prints go with an arrest record and employers and others can get a copy of them. Once again, DNA is much more protected and less of an issue than finger prints.