It's not a new law. It has been the law in more than half of the states for 20 years.
The difference is now it was challenged and upheld. (Again) As long as they _only_ save the 6 or 9 markers used for ID I have no problem with it. Which the laws in each state require. If they were to expand that to other markers, such as those used for genealogy or diagnosis, that is a different story. I also like that the NAMES are not stored in the central system. Just the GUId of the 6 markers. The name lookup happens at the local arresting/DNA taking entity. And there is a paper trail when requesting a name. ( or so I understand. ) On Tuesday, June 4, 2013, GMoney wrote: > > Been discussing this on another list....and i guess my question is this: > What's different about taking fingerprints and taking DNA? They fingerprint > arrestees....which gives them identifiable information which can be used to > link them to other crimes. How is taking DNA with an equally unobtrusive > method any different? > > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 3:29 AM, LRS Scout <[email protected]<javascript:;>> > wrote: > > > > > No room for abuse there at all..... > > On Jun 3, 2013 11:41 PM, "Cameron Childress" > > <[email protected]<javascript:;>> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2013-06/us-supreme-court-rules-dna-testing-legal-search > > > > > > Annnnnddd...... > > > > > > Discuss. > > > > > > -Cameron > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:364132 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
