
![]() |
No, my counter argument is that you haven't given a single scenario not involving paranoid anarchist BS.
People made the exact same arguments about fingerprinting and photographic records and Bertillonage.
They were wrong. Just like you are wrong.
Seriously. What possible benefit would your mythical sinister government agency gain from determining that your mother had a mutated breast cancer gene that would come anywhere near justifying the hundreds of thousands of dollars running all those tests would cost?

Bitter Thorn |

No, my counter argument is that you haven't given a single scenario not involving paranoid anarchist BS.
People made the exact same arguments about fingerprinting and photographic records and Bertillonage.
They were wrong. Just like you are wrong.
Seriously. What possible benefit would your mythical sinister government agency gain from determining that your mother had a mutated breast cancer gene that would come anywhere near justifying the hundreds of thousands of dollars running all those tests would cost?
I find your faith in government's righteousness and efficiency to be amazing.
There is really no point in engaging someone who thinks that my observation of the fact that governments some times abuse their powers makes me mentally ill.
If you can't imagine any way that the government could ever misuse the vast amount of information contained in DNA that strikes me a a huge failure of imagination.
I don't have to anticipate every way the government could abuse personal information about someone for them to have a right to be secure in there person papers and effects. The burden is supposed to be on the government to actually get a warrant for things like medical records. It's pretty easy to get a search warrant, but evidently that's too much to ask. You seem to see it differently, and you seem to trust the government not to waste money or abuse power. I'm skeptical of power especially law enforcement power.
You seem to think that people in the government wouldn't waste tax payer money. I think that notion is at odds with the facts, but that makes me delusional in your view.
Your blind faith in government power is incomprehensible to me.

Bitter Thorn |

I don't think this is something that can be debated very well. Its dna. Its not easy to replicate or conveniently place upon something- even if such things were possible, its FAR easier to do with fingerprints.. Unless you are going to crusade against fingerprinting as a violation of privacy, there's not much to discuss.
I suppose that would be true if there were no difference in the amount of information in finger prints and DNA, but that's hardly the case.

![]() |
I find your faith in government's righteousness and efficiency to be amazing.
I find you suspicion of it ridiculous. I deal with local and state government all the time. They're not always the most efficient or nimble, but they're not sinister conspirators. They also operate on limited budgets. My state police does not have the money to transition from ink cards to scanner based fingerprint systems. Where are they going to get the money to do more then run an ID sequence?
It's not faith, it's experience.
There is really no point in engaging someone who thinks that my observation of the fact that governments some times abuse their powers makes me mentally ill.
You still haven't given me reasonable a scenario how it's more open to abuse than fingerprints.
Also, I never said you were crazy. I said your arguments sound crazy.
If you can't imagine any way that the government could ever misuse the vast amount of information contained in DNA that strikes me a a huge failure of imagination.
Oh, I can imagine dozens off them.
Problem is they all sound like plots to bad thriller or espionage stories. Or something Alex Jones would be ranting about.
I don't have to anticipate every way the government could abuse personal information about someone for them to have a right to be secure in there person papers and effects. The burden is supposed to be on the government to actually get a warrant for things like medical records. It's pretty easy to get a search warrant, but evidently that's too much to ask. You seem to see it differently, and you seem to trust the government not to waste money or abuse power. I'm skeptical of power especially law enforcement power.
And this follows well established precedent. When you're arrested the police don't need a warrant to search your pockets or wallet or take all sorts of biometric records down about you, including now a DNA sample.
You seem to think that people in the government wouldn't waste tax payer money. I think that notion is at odds with the facts, but that makes me delusional in your view.
No, I think you are completely out of touch with what government finances look like at the levels we're discussing for 99% of the population. Seriously. What benefit does a police department or even the FBI gain from running massive amounts of expensive genetic tests on every routine intake sample? Explain to me why it would be done. Also, explain to me how it wouldn't get noticed when the budget is audited?
Your blind faith in government power is incomprehensible to me.
Probably because I actually know what goes on in local and state governments because I deal with them semi-regularly. Abuses happen, but they happen because of individuals. I don't have faith in my government to be anything more then what it is.

Freehold DM |

Freehold DM wrote:I don't think this is something that can be debated very well. Its dna. Its not easy to replicate or conveniently place upon something- even if such things were possible, its FAR easier to do with fingerprints.. Unless you are going to crusade against fingerprinting as a violation of privacy, there's not much to discuss.I suppose that would be true if there were no difference in the amount of information in finger prints and DNA, but that's hardly the case.
actually there really isn't that much more. Prints are already pretty damning, dna isn't going to make you less guilty. It CAN exonerate you though, which is my point.

![]() |
Bitter Thorn wrote:actually there really isn't that much more. Prints are already pretty damning, dna isn't going to make you less guilty. It CAN exonerate you though, which is my point.Freehold DM wrote:I don't think this is something that can be debated very well. Its dna. Its not easy to replicate or conveniently place upon something- even if such things were possible, its FAR easier to do with fingerprints.. Unless you are going to crusade against fingerprinting as a violation of privacy, there's not much to discuss.I suppose that would be true if there were no difference in the amount of information in finger prints and DNA, but that's hardly the case.
He's arguing that the police are going to run hundreds of thousands of dollars of genetic sequencing and analysis on every sample taken from every arrested individual.
As opposed to what the law in question and certainly every other law enabling it will do which is allow a sample to be taken and sequenced for simple identification purposes (which I admit I can't think of the proper term) and then stick the results in a file like they do with fingerprints and mug shots.

Bitter Thorn |

Freehold DM wrote:Bitter Thorn wrote:actually there really isn't that much more. Prints are already pretty damning, dna isn't going to make you less guilty. It CAN exonerate you though, which is my point.Freehold DM wrote:I don't think this is something that can be debated very well. Its dna. Its not easy to replicate or conveniently place upon something- even if such things were possible, its FAR easier to do with fingerprints.. Unless you are going to crusade against fingerprinting as a violation of privacy, there's not much to discuss.I suppose that would be true if there were no difference in the amount of information in finger prints and DNA, but that's hardly the case.He's arguing that the police are going to run hundreds of thousands of dollars of genetic sequencing and analysis on every sample taken from every arrested individual.
As opposed to what the law in question and certainly every other law enabling it will do which is allow a sample to be taken and sequenced for simple identification purposes (which I admit I can't think of the proper term) and then stick the results in a file like they do with fingerprints and mug shots.
That's a lie.
I said this was subject to abuse. I don't see where I argued "that the police are going to run hundreds of thousands of dollars of genetic sequencing and analysis on every sample taken from every arrested individual."
Perhaps you could show me where I said that.
Abuse of power is rarely universal. Police don't brutalize everyone they come into contact with. That doesn't mean that police brutality is not a problem.

Bitter Thorn |

It's also not as though genetic testing all costs hundreds of thousands of dollars.
DNA Test for Rare Disorders Becomes More Routine as Prices Plunge

thejeff |
Lightminder wrote:This address isn't working for me.http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/04/17/quebec-soccer-assoc iation-forbids-turbans.html
Fearful Bias plus legislative power equals human rights abuse.
Of course, it's not really a "government folly" issue, since I don't think the Quebec Soccer Association is a part of government.

Bitter Thorn |

Bitter Thorn wrote:Lightminder wrote:This address isn't working for me.http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/04/17/quebec-soccer-assoc iation-forbids-turbans.html
Fearful Bias plus legislative power equals human rights abuse.
Of course, it's not really a "government folly" issue, since I don't think the Quebec Soccer Association is a part of government.
Thanks.
What's the rationale for the ruling? Do they claim this is a safety issue? If so is there any supporting evidence?
I also assume the QSA has no government authority, but this strikes me as a wrong headed decision.

Freehold DM |

Freehold DM wrote:Bitter Thorn wrote:actually there really isn't that much more. Prints are already pretty damning, dna isn't going to make you less guilty. It CAN exonerate you though, which is my point.Freehold DM wrote:I don't think this is something that can be debated very well. Its dna. Its not easy to replicate or conveniently place upon something- even if such things were possible, its FAR easier to do with fingerprints.. Unless you are going to crusade against fingerprinting as a violation of privacy, there's not much to discuss.I suppose that would be true if there were no difference in the amount of information in finger prints and DNA, but that's hardly the case.He's arguing that the police are going to run hundreds of thousands of dollars of genetic sequencing and analysis on every sample taken from every arrested individual.
As opposed to what the law in question and certainly every other law enabling it will do which is allow a sample to be taken and sequenced for simple identification purposes (which I admit I can't think of the proper term) and then stick the results in a file like they do with fingerprints and mug shots.
I don't think he is saying that per se, just pointing out How it can be abused. But I argue that there isn't much more abuse that can occur that can't already be done cheaper and easier with prints.

Comrade Anklebiter |

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/04/17/quebec-soccer-assoc iation-forbids-turbans.html
Fearful Bias plus legislative power equals human rights abuse.
Citizen Lightminder, here is how you link--
[url=web address}Say something funny or cool[/url}
--except that those }s are ]s.
Give a man a fish/teach a man to fish, Comrade Jeff.

Comrade Anklebiter |

Of course, it's not really a "government folly" issue, since I don't think the Quebec Soccer Association is a part of government.
Thanks.
What's the rationale for the ruling? Do they claim this is a safety issue? If so is there any supporting evidence?
I also assume the QSA has no government authority, but this strikes me as a wrong headed decision.
[Puts hand over eyes]
I'm guessing, Quebecois bigots following the lead of their Francophone bigot-brothers and banning Muslim and Sikh headgear in the name of secularism!

Freehold DM |

Bitter Thorn wrote:Of course, it's not really a "government folly" issue, since I don't think the Quebec Soccer Association is a part of government.
Thanks.
What's the rationale for the ruling? Do they claim this is a safety issue? If so is there any supporting evidence?
I also assume the QSA has no government authority, but this strikes me as a wrong headed decision.
[Puts hand over eyes]
I'm guessing, Quebecois bigots following the lead of their Francophone bigot-brothers and banning Muslim and Sikh headgear in the name of secularism!
unfortunately, despite the open minded nature of most Canadians, Quebec can be a hard place to get along due to some bigotry in unexpected places, primarily due to the francophone nature of the place.

Comrade Anklebiter |

I had a well-travelled, out-of-town black friend who used to visit me in Boston. He once told me that there wasn't any other city in America that he could visit and know he would invariably be called a "n+!$~#" at least once before he left.
I'm sure the Quebecois are just as not nice as everybody else, but I don't think I'd go reaching for Francophonism as an explanation.

Freehold DM |

I had a well-travelled, out-of-town black friend who used to visit me in Boston. He once told me that there wasn't any other city in America that he could visit and know he would invariably be called a "n~$#*%" at least once before he left.
I'm sure the Quebecois are just as not nice as everybody else, but I don't think I'd go reaching for Francophonism as an explanation.
are you talking about Boston or Quebec re: being called n%!&+~? I'm confused.
I am basing My statement on my good friends experiences as an American expatriate living in quebec. She is mixed-black white herself, and has had an interesting experience there. She still loves the place thOugh, so that's saying something. But the francophones there can go out of their way to make the anglos uncomfortable sometimes.

Bitter Thorn |

Woops, I meant in Boston.
My only point being: the US (and, Canada, too, actually) are full of anglophonic bigots, don't need to go pickin' on the Frenchies for their parlez-vous.
I'm not sure one has anything to do with the other. I'm quite ignorant about soccer and such, but didn't France criminalize some religious expressions like burkas?
In any case, I don't know if the QSA is banning this on cultural or safety grounds, but I fail to see how a turban is a safety issue in soccer. If this is a case of citing safety as an excuse for bigotry this really rubs me the wrong way.

Comrade Anklebiter |

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:I'm not sure one has anything to do with the other. I'm quite ignorant about soccer and such, but didn't France criminalize some religious expressions like burkas?Woops, I meant in Boston.
My only point being: the US (and, Canada, too, actually) are full of anglophonic bigots, don't need to go pickin' on the Frenchies for their parlez-vous.
That was what I was alluding to.

Bitter Thorn |

Privacy group calls NSA Verizon surveillance illegal
Group asks Congress to "immediately hold oversight hearings" to probe whether the Justice Department and a secret court followed federal privacy laws.

Bitter Thorn |

Penn. Zoning Board Orders Dad to Tear Down Tree House
June 7, 2013
SELINSGROVE, Pa. - It looks like a little girl Pennsylvania won’t be getting the tree house she wants for her 11th birthday.

Freehold DM |

Penn. Zoning Board Orders Dad to Tear Down Tree HouseJune 7, 2013
SELINSGROVE, Pa. - It looks like a little girl Pennsylvania won’t be getting the tree house she wants for her 11th birthday.
I dunno if this belongs here per se...I thought zoning boards had little to do with the actual government? Someone inform me.

Bitter Thorn |

Bitter Thorn wrote:Penn. Zoning Board Orders Dad to Tear Down Tree HouseI dunno if this belongs here per se...I thought zoning boards had little to do with the actual government? Someone inform me.June 7, 2013
SELINSGROVE, Pa. - It looks like a little girl Pennsylvania won’t be getting the tree house she wants for her 11th birthday.
In my experience zoning boards are elected or appointed, and they often have broad powers relating to creating and interpreting zoning laws and regulations. This seems to vary significantly by region.

Freehold DM |

Anonymous Activist Who Championed Rape Victim Raided by FBI SWAT team
Hm. Damn interesting. Thank you BT.

Bitter Thorn |

Comrade Anklebiter |

Edward Snowden identified as source of NSA leaks
This guy is so epically boned.
I just posted this in another thread, but BT still beat me to it!

Bitter Thorn |

James Bovard: A Brief History of IRS Political Targeting
One survey found that 75% of IRS respondents felt entitled to deceive or lie to Congress.

Bitter Thorn |

Bitter Thorn wrote:Edward Snowden identified as source of NSA leaks
This guy is so epically boned.
I just posted this in another thread, but BT still beat me to it!
Dad's taking a nap so I'm catching up on news.

Vo Giap, Ambassador of Bachuan |

Edward Snowden identified as source of NSA leaks
This guy is so epically boned.
Well, if he's hanging out in Hong Kong--which the Cato and Fraser Institutes rank as the third freest place on earth (above you Yankee paper tigers, I might add)--then he might have a chance.

Bitter Thorn |

New Jersey Considering Law to Allow Warrantless Search of Cellphones After Crash
"To me, is it any different from an open bottle of liquor?" he said. "It may be an issue. But keep in mind that operating a vehicle is a privilege, not a right."

Bitter Thorn |

Bitter Thorn wrote:Well, if he's hanging out in Hong Kong--which the Cato and Fraser Institutes rank as the third freest place on earth (above you Yankee paper tigers, I might add)--then he might have a chance.Edward Snowden identified as source of NSA leaks
This guy is so epically boned.
I'd be curious to understand their metrics better.

Bitter Thorn |

New Jersey Detective Charged With Murder In Connection to Road Rage Shooting
Speaking of NJ law enforcers.....

Bitter Thorn |

NSA May Have More Ability To Process the Data it Taps Than Previously Admitted
Boundless Informant: the NSA's secret tool to track global surveillance data
Revealed: The NSA's powerful tool for cataloguing global surveillance data – including figures on US collection