The Federal Bureau of Investigations plans to expand the size of its DNA database 17-fold, to include profiles of perpetrators of “lesser and suspected crimes.” The prospect of saving the DNA of people who haven’t even been proven guilty has many up in arms, citing violations of constitutional rights.
But is this really such an egregious encroachment on the privacy and civil liberties of blameless citizens? The database would be used solely to solve crimes (but of course, this is assuming that you trust the F.B.I. to use the information as it says it will, which is another matter entirely). An innocent, law-abiding citizen can feel confident that his or her DNA will not show up as a “crime scene sample,” so his or her DNA profile will never be used for anything. Isn’t it worth sacrificing a tiny bit of privacy to help the investigation of horrific crimes go more quickly and smoothly? Isn’t expediting the identification and capture of dangerous criminals a worthwhile goal? Wouldn’t this prevent further harm to others, as well as allow crime victims and their families to begin to heal as soon as possible?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/19/us/19DNA.html?_r=1&hp
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Sara,
I completely agree that this DNA database should be expanded so that we can use it to the best of its capabilities. I think that we DNA sequencing is an extremely useful resource for our legal system and can help to solve numerous crimes. We should definitely not hesitate to expand upon this database in order to better serve our justice system.
Yet, it does concern me that the specific profiles of perpetrators of smaller crimes will appear on this site. It is unfortunate that someone who has committed a small crime like a robbery or car theft would have their DNA permanently displayed on this site and will be labeled as guilty. However, I am sure that this DNA database is not the only place where one can look up past crimes and those who have been convicted of these crimes. So, why are we considering this unfairness in relation to the DNA database, while continuing to support other criminal and sex offender databases and publicly air court cases and verdicts on television and other forms of media. I do not think that this is a valid argument to halt the expansion of the database that would label those guilty of crimes as what they truly are; guilty of a crime.
However, I recognize the controversy in identifying the DNA of those who are not yet officially convicted of crimes but rather are merely suspected of committing a crime. This does not necessarily comply with our justice system’s motto of “innocent before proven guilty”. It is to say that we are putting these people in the spotlight of having committed a crime when they have not yet been convicted. So, doing this would effectively violate one or more of the person’s constitutional rights. But, in accordance with my previous point, I also feel that we already do such a thing in our current justice system. When someone is accused of a major crime, the newcastors do not hold anything back from the public once they receive information about the situation. I don’t believe that the media does much to protect the privacy of those accused of a serious crime or a crime that has affected many people. So, if people really want to prevent this DNA database from expanding and potentially violating the privacy of criminals and suspected perpetrators, we need to first demonstrate that we value the privacy of these members of society.
Post a Comment