Skip to comments.Governor proposes changes to DNA sampling during arrests, convictions
Posted on 05/21/2013 6:56:02 AM PDT by Sopater
EAU CLAIRE, Wis. (WEAU) -- It is a change that could affect all of us literally down to the core. This week the legislature will take up a plan by the governor that would require anyone arrested for a felony or convicted of a misdemeanor to give a DNA sample.
"Present time anyone who is convicted of a felony is required to provide a DNA sample," said Harry Hertel.
Hertel, an attorney with Hertel Law SC, sees a problem with the proposal. Mainly he says it requires good people who may have made a mistake to give up something very personal.
"The difficulty is that a misdemeanor could include disorderly conduct which could include saying a swear word in public," he said.
The governor has laid out $6 million dollars for it in the budget. Much of it he says would be paid for by the $250 surcharge on felony offenders and a new $200 surcharge on misdemeanor offenders. Ultimately, Hertel says if that person cannot pay, it would go to taxpayers.
"Again if someone is arrested for a felony and not convicted, who's gonna pay for the sample?" Hertel said.
In an e-mail, Governor Walker's office told us today: "DNA is the modern-day fingerprint, and Governor Walker made this proposal to give law enforcement the ability to cross check information, identify suspects, and get offenders off the streets."
And so that brings us to the question that ultimately will be weighed, whether this serves a greater good or steps on a person's privacy.
"Sometimes these are the things that have to be done to keep our society safe," said Cassie Underwood.
"If it's a non-violent thing I don't think that's necessary but if it's a violent thing I think it would be necessary," said Shane Coffield.
"I worry about too much government intervention and that's the ultimate you know," said Fred Stephens.
A big question to tackle at the center of all of us.
I think the problem is that we only have one half of the equation. If a person is not convicted, then it should be a major felony for law enforcement to release disclose or use their DNA sample in any way other than in a future investigation. Put some real teeth (jail time) into such a law and maybe law enforcement can have its tools and we can keep our privacy.
Might as well chip em as well.
No, thank you. Innocent until proven guilty. It is an unacceptable intrusion to put DNA into a database based on a possibly erroneous or politically motivated arrest. We know that the government is not on our side - why give them an expanded database for their political prosecutions and persecutions?
I like chipping them and taking a DNA sample after conviction. Until conviction, they should be able to refuse a DNA sample on Fifth Amendment grounds.
They take you property before conviction, and good luck getting it back if you are acquitted.
Liberal philosophy at its worst.
Walker proposes DNA sampling
FReep Mail me if you want on, or off, this Wisconsin interest ping list.
Throw them in jail too - convicted or not! Don’t just take a spit or blood sample, take the whole damned body!
If you’re arrested, you must have done something wrong.
Why waste money on a trail. Hang’em high.
On the flip side - resist arrest to your death, or you’re done for anyway.
I also wonder how this is different from taking fingerprints and mug shots at the time of arrest.
If you’re released and never charged, your fingerprints and mug shot are not destroyed, they’re kept on file.
I don’t object to fingerprints because they are merely a form if identification. They can’t generally be abused.
DNA is different. DNA is your genetic code. The state should not be able to demand access to your genetic code. The genetic substances are your proprietary property.
If the government takes your genetic code, then something is found to be special about your genetic code, the government could then supply that genetic code for replication, manipulation, and manufacturing.
Se have seen how government abuses power. This is a power I’m not willing to grant the government.
None of us should.
I am extemely disappointed that Gov. Walker would take us down this slippery slope. Next step will be collecting it at birth so “Big Brother” can follow us through to death.
Democrat or Republican, all they want is more government and less freedom for the citizens.
Lets fingerprint and take DNA samples of all of the current elected officials in state government. Who knows what crimes they have committed or may commit in the future. Why should they be treated differently? There is a good probability that some or most of them have at sometime broken the law! So what if they have not been convicted of a crime? We need to know!
Who in society could be the most dangerous to the public good? The average Joe or Jane with no influence on public policy or someone who we have elected as PUBLIC SERVANTS?
It all goes to database access. If somebody gets hold of your fingerprints, they'll never know if you're predisposed to certain disorders, cancers, etc. Your mugshot can't be used to determine if you're adopted or your parent's natural children.