{"id":428101,"date":"2010-03-13T04:35:10","date_gmt":"2010-03-13T08:35:10","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.prisonplanet.com\/?p=36691"},"modified":"2010-03-13T04:35:10","modified_gmt":"2010-03-13T08:35:10","slug":"obama-supports-a-national-dna-database","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/428101","title":{"rendered":"Obama Supports a National DNA Database"},"content":{"rendered":"

Kurt Nimmo<\/a><\/strong>
\nInfowars.com
\nMarch<\/a> 13, 2010<\/p>\n

Obama<\/a> has come out in favor of forcing people arrested to submit DNA to a national database.<\/p>\n

\u201cPresident Barack Obama<\/a>\u2019s embrace of a national database to store the DNA of people arrested but not necessarily convicted of a crime<\/a> is heartening to backers of the policy but disappointing to criminal-justice reformers, who view it as an invasion of privacy,\u201d reports Politico<\/a>. \u201cOthers also worry the practice would adversely affect minorities.\u201d<\/p>\n

It would affect all Americans regardless of race, creed, color, nationality, etc. It would also be a violation of the Fourth Amendment.<\/p>\n

Obama<\/a> made his opinion known during an interview with John Walsh, the host of the TV show America\u2019s Most Wanted. Walsh is known for his anti-crime<\/a> activism<\/a>, which he became involved with following the murder of his son in 1981 (see video<\/a> below).<\/p>\n

<\/embed><\/object><\/p>\n

\u201cWe have 18 states who are taking DNA upon arrest,\u201d Walsh said. \u201cIt\u2019s no different than fingerprinting or a booking photo. \u2026 Since those states have been doing it, it has cleared 200 people that are innocent from jail.\u201d<\/p>\n

Obama<\/a> agreed. \u201cIt\u2019s the right thing to do,\u201d he replied. \u201cThis is where the national registry becomes so important, because what you have is individual states \u2014 they may have a database, but if they\u2019re not sharing it with the state next door, you\u2019ve got a guy from Illinois driving over into Indiana, and they\u2019re not talking to each other.\u201d<\/p>\n

Obama<\/a> did not say if he believes a DNA sample should be removed upon acquittal or if charges are dropped.<\/p>\n

A national DNA database is another manifestation of the state posing a threat to our liberties. Mr. Walsh may be interested in keeping tabs on sex offenders and criminals, but the state has other motives \u2014 the tracking and surveillance of citizens.<\/p>\n

A national DNA database would compliment other efforts by the government<\/a> to violate our liberty. In 2005<\/a> it was first revealed that the NSA has been secretly<\/a> intercepting Americans\u2019 phone calls and Internet<\/a> communications (in fact, the NSA has intercepted the personal communications of Americans for decades<\/a>).<\/p>\n

In April of 2009, the FBI joined 15 states that collect DNA samples from those awaiting trial. The FBI currently has a DNA database with 6.7 million profiles and plans to accelerate its growth rate from 80,000 new entries a year to 1.2 million by 2012 \u2014 a 15-fold increase, according to the New York Times<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Since September 11, 2001, under the guise of a phony war<\/a> against government<\/a> manufactured terrorism<\/a>, the FBI has infiltrated and monitored entirely legal political organizations<\/a>, including the Tea Party movement<\/a>.<\/p>\n

On October 31, 2001, then Attorney General John Ashcroft<\/a> issued a regulation that authorized the monitoring of communications between inmates in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons and their attorneys including those who have not been convicted of any crimes.<\/p>\n

The Patriot Act<\/a> nullified large sections of the Bill of Rights. Under the rubric of a global war<\/a> on terrorism<\/a> the executive has been granted sweeping unconstitutional authority to issue executive orders and wage war<\/a> without congressional consent.<\/p>\n

In February, the Justice Department argued in federal court that the FBI and other police agencies don\u2019t need to obtain a search warrant to learn the locations of Americans\u2019 cell phones. \u201cWhen the government<\/a> acquires historical cell location information, it effectively commandeers our cell phones and turns them into electronic trackers that report, without our knowledge or consent, where we have been and how long we have spent there,\u201d Susan Freiwald, a law professor at the University of San Francisco told Declan McCullagh<\/a><\/a> of CNet.<\/p>\n

As reported earlier this week, Sens. Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) have proposed legislation that, if passed, will require all working Americans to carry biometric ID cards<\/a> containing fingerprint records and other personal information. The effort is a cynical attempt to establish a national biometric ID card program under the guise of preventing illegal immigration.<\/p>\n

The effort to create a DNA database is already under way in several states<\/a>. In 2004, Californians overwhelmingly passed a ballot measure requiring DNA testing, usually by a swab inside the cheek, for all felony arrests and some others. And in New York City, Mayor Michael Bloomberg<\/a> has sought to go even further, proposing DNA tests for everyone arrested in the city, even for misdemeanors.<\/p>\n

Criminologist James Fox of Northeastern University in Boston told Politico he would rather see Obama<\/a> deal with ballistic fingerprinting and repeal of the Tiahrt Amendment, which limits gun tracing.<\/p>\n

The the Tiahrt Amendment<\/a> prohibits the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives from releasing information from its firearms trace database to anyone other than a law enforcement agency or prosecutor in connection with a criminal investigation.<\/p>\n

\n

Possibly Related Posts:<\/h3>\n