It is my understanding that the government now plans to collect DNA from anyone who is arrested by federal law enforcement, and that the samples will be stored in an effort to reduce violence in our society. Moreover, the U.S. government reportedly now intends to take a cheek swab from foreigners we detain, whether they've been charged or not.
While Congress may have authorized Justice to expand DNA outreach, as citizens, and taxpayers, we're entitled to know what your intentions are.
The concept of DNA collection is, in itself, not a heinous thing. Indeed, if science were to be used to combat wrongful conviction instead of setting up a blueprint for pursuing future incarceration, then I would be a strong proponent of taking DNA samples from everyone who is arrested, and storingthe samples.
But, instead, the database in which the DNA will be stored, CODIS, may
one day be a holding cell for vital genetic information, as well as
familial associations which may be used against a defendant in a court
of law.
As one has no more control over one's genetic blueprint than over the
weather, the potential for misuse of this information is staggering.
Further, what entitlement does our government have to collect, and
store, the DNA of foreigners?
Unfortunately, we do not live in the kind of world in which evidence is
used to exculpate people, but one in which it is routinely gathered to
incriminate. After all, the U.S. now has the dubious distinction of
having the highest incarceration rate of any country in the world;
fully 10% of our population is imprisoned.
Clearly, too, the Justice Department and the National Security Agency
aren't fine tuning ways to immunize telecommunication companies who
eavesdrop on ordinary, and innocuous domestic phone calls as a means of
preventing citizens from being ripped off by their credit card, or
mortgage, companies.
So, one is understandably cynical when learning of plans by federal law
enforcement to take swabs of DNA from those merely arrested, not
convicted, of a crime.
Alarming, isn't it, how the concept of privacy, as we once knew it, has
now become to modern America what speaking Latin is in
Italy--antiquated, and irrelevant. The consequence of this
state-sanctioned invasion of privacy is the stuff of Greek tragedy,
without a doubt, and the aftershocks of governmental intrusion continue
to be felt,and will doubtless outlive the tenure of whoever next
occupies the White House.
We have not only descended into a moral maelstrom, but a legal morass.
The current administration has rendered the Constitution, once a great
document, a vestigial organ, and just another victim of conspicuous
consumption.
On your watch, sir, the Eighth Amendment was ravaged with respect to
your reluctance to classify waterboarding as torture, and with the
Supreme Court's recent decision on lethal injection. Is there a
connection? You know, there is. There is a mindset that threatens the
foundation upon which the framers built the Bill of Rights, and you,
sir, have succumbed to it. How can we not expect you to defer to those
who would further compromise the First Amendment by nullifying an
implied right to privacy.
And, for what it's worth, if reducing violence in American society is
what's most desired, then I submit we withdraw all troops from Iraq, as
soon as possible, for what kind of role model do we set for our youth
when we invade, occupy, and plunder a sovereign country?
If, and when, the machinery of state may come to be used in such a way
that it ensures economic equity, and to obviate social, and political
disenfranchisement, DNA samples may be used to protect innocent men and
women from rotting away behind bars, or falling prey to lethal
injection.
Until then, we must proceed with caution, and do with the DNA samples
of those under arrest what was done with millions of White House
e-mails in the lead-up to the war in Iraq - namely, destroy them.
Whatever is left of our notion of freedom may depend on it.