Guilty until fourth amendment shows up

Wash. legislator to introduce DNA testing bill

TACOMA, Wash. -- Rep. Mark Miloscia, D-Federal Way, says he plans to introduce a bill in the 2009 Legislature that will put the state on the same page with the federal government on the subject of DNA testing.

Your right to be secure in your person and your papers includes your DNA. The police may take "non-intimate" body samples from you. These include samples of hair, fingernail or toenail scrapings, and some external body swabs.

However, you cannot refuse to be fingerprinted because it is considered non intimate. Unfortunately we have a long line of prescient set out before now that eviscerates your ability to refuse fingerprinting.

Additionally because of Terry v. Ohio you can be frisked without arrest.

Fingerprints and frisking literally exist on the edge of personal and public space. Personally I argue that subpoena /should/ be required as in order to do either, but that is another subject entirely.

Obtaining DNA is about as intimate as you can get, thus requiring a subpoena to protect against unreasonable search and seizure by the fourth amendment.

Additionally it sets a prescient that can be used to further eviscerate our fourth amendment rights to privacy.

In an age where you are more likely to be jailed then you are to have a crime committed against you (thank you, drug war), this is another nail in the coffin of civil liberties. The creation of a database of citizen's DNA who haven't actually been convicted of crimes opens a door to far greater abuses.

Take for instance that now you can be required to give your fingerprints to the state if you lost your id, putting your thumb print on file for the state/federal government....

Those who fight against Real ID should be the same ones who are queasy right now.

Rule by corporations is called a what, a Plutocracy? Corportocracy? Corrupt?

Bush attempts to nullify an entire branch of government

They state this better than I can. It kinda makes me ill.

Olbermann states it well: in Europe they vigorously regulate everything and ensure that things are safe before they hit the market. Here, we don't regulate them before hand so much as sue after they're defective: i.e. in Europe you have to prove that it's safe, in America you have to prove that it's not.

Since we do /not/ have strict regulations before something goes out (better than some countries, however Regan reduced the size of the FDA by 2/3s), the way that we have a check on corporations is through the ability to pursuit legal action.

Before you start whining about frivolous lawsuits, remember that this is the third check on our government. This country is unique in that a lone person on the streets may stand before the courts and their government and say "Hey, that's not right," and the courts can look at their case and say "Yeah, you're right, that's /not/ right."

You, citizen, have power. It's not a perfect system, but there are a heck of a lot worse.