View Single Post
  #5  
Old 06-09-2013, 09:15 AM
dellinger63's Avatar
dellinger63 dellinger63 is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 10,072
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig View Post
they both have to do with the fourth amendment. if you read scalia's dissent, which i figure you have not, you'll see the case he laid out, and the arguments he made. it all has to do with searches to create suspicion, vs a warranted search due to suspicion/probable cause.
I will stick with the majority of the Supreme court on this one. Maybe it's because I see a difference between an individual under arrest for a felony and an individual going about his day, armed with a cell phone. Meanwhile I don't see much difference between a fingerprint and DNA swab.

You keep ignoring the fact arrestees and convicts have had their prints matched to murders/rapes/bank robberies for eons with no suspicion or probable cause as you see it. The matching of King to the rape could have come from a print left at the scene, instead it came from DNA.
Reply With Quote