Quote:
Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk
Mandatory means the procedure to get the DNA after a felony is committed will be done...period. I have no issue with that, the person who committed the felony earned that. A warrant is a piece of paper stating X law enforcement office can and will arrest person X noted on the warrant when found. The DNA sample helps identify and or rule out without a shadow of a doubt anyone that might be a person of interest in any given crime. DNA samples have helped getting convictions. This type of evidence has also helped in clearing many suspects. Some who have been incarcerated for a long time.
Don't ask me what tangent Skybird went off on....  |
I would say your argument has some valid points but you are only looking at one aspect of it. You assume that the officer is not arresting the wrong person. If I happen to be at the wrong place at the wrong time and happen to fit the right (or wrong depending upon your perspective) description, then I get arrested and a DNA sample taken from me. While said sample may in fact prove my innocence, so could a number of other methods of investigation. You have to take into account that police officers are people just like you and me and therefor are not infallible. And now what is to become of this sample? I am an innocent man and there is no need for the government on any level to have a sample of my DNA.
Could this make things easier for the Judicial Branch? Yes. It could potentially lead to quicker and more accurate convictions. But on the same token, if the evidence is really there why not take the time to get a warrant to obtain the sample? DNA alone cannot and should not convict someone, all it proves is that I touched the handle at the Qwik-E-Mart, or had sex with Mary Jane over there.