Has Anyone Else Completely Lost Faith In The Government?

How is it any different then giving them your finger prints? Makes sense if the DNA does not match they know they have the wrong guy if it matches then you get what's coming.

Because the 5th Amendment only protects you from being forced to give incriminating testimony. You cannot be forced to answer questions.

Your DNA, however, is governed by search and seizure protections of the 4th Amendment. (Search & Seizure).

Not commenting on the validity of the division. Just saying how it is/has been viewed by the SC.

I understand what you are saying, but here is the 5th amendment
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.[1]

What could be more of being a witness against yourself then using your own genetics against you.

I don't know the original intent, but just on the face of it, having your dna used against you would seem to be self incrimination. But - apparently not.

How is it any different then giving them your finger prints? Makes sense if the DNA does not match they know they have the wrong guy if it matches then you get what's coming.

Didn't say I agree with giving up fingerprints before you are found guilty. It still seems like a self-incrimination to me.

Also, the actual case he was arrested for 1st and 2nd degree assault, and the DNA swab linked him to a previous rape. This guy is obviously a scumbag, but it concerns me that your DNA can be taken easily, entered into a database, etc.

Wait, why is this thread back on the main page?

Yeah, as much as I like the debating thread, it was better (I think) when it didn't show on the home page.

Yeah, as much as I like the debating thread, it was better (I think) when it didn't show on the home page.

Agreed! Get the debate thread off the main page! Grrrrr...

They also take your blood and breath to catch drunking drivers.

They also take your blood and breath to catch drunking drivers.

Only if you agree, right?

They also take your blood and breath to catch drunking drivers.

You consent to those conditions when you get your license.

So around the same time the goverment was bashing buisnesses for having expensive trips we find out the IRS was doing the same thing.

Already heavily criticized for targeting conservative groups, the Internal Revenue Service absorbed another blow Tuesday as new details emerged about senior officials enjoying luxury hotel rooms, free drinks and free food at a $4.1 million training conference. It was one of many expensive gatherings the agency held for employees over a three-year period.

One top official stayed five nights in a room that regularly goes for $3,500 a night. Another official, Faris Fink, stayed four nights in a room that regularly goes for $1,499.

Fink was later promoted to head the IRS division that staged the 2010 conference in Anaheim, Calif., a position he still holds. He also has the distinction of playing Mr. Spock in a cheesy but slickly-produced "Star Trek" video that IRS employees filmed for the conference.

A total of 132 IRS officials received room upgrades at the conference, according to a report by J. Russell George, the Treasury Department inspector general for tax administration. The tax agency paid a flat daily fee of $135 per hotel room, the report said, but the upgrades were part of a package deal that added to the overall cost of the conference.