![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
DNA is not just a form of identity, it is your identity. It only becomes evidence when it's associated with a crime. Similar to your drivers license being a form of ID unless say it was dropped at the scene of the crime.
King's 4th amendment rights were violated as much as a driver pulled over on a traffic stop being asked for ID and then run through NCIC. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
the traffic stop is done after probable cause, witnessed by the officer who pulls you over. the info is run to verify id.
and if used for identity, why was the dna run thru the unidentified unnamed database? how can it be used to prove identity if done that way?
__________________
Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all. Abraham Lincoln |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
DNA is in itself an identity and a swab is its drivers license. Just as a cop has a right to ask for a DL to find out whether there are any warrants/holds so does the jailer to check for warrants/holds. And if the DNA data base was truly unidentified/unnamed how did it lead back to King? Somewhere his name was identified by the numbered sample despite Scalia's claims regarding the data base. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
the dna in the database matched his after they put it in the system. it didn't match by name, but by dna. if they haven't got a name, they number it. and a cop can't ask for dl, name, anything unless he has a reasonable need to know, such as if he thinks a crime has been committed. he can't ask for that stuff just to then run a name and search for crimes. he must first suspect the crime. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAlRDGUx-B8
__________________
Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all. Abraham Lincoln |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|