By looking at people close to the victim, people nearby at the time of the crime, people matching witness’ descriptions. You know, police work.
No, because how do we know it’s someone from the neighborhood?
With a lot less success.
You mean police can tell if somebody’s innocent just by looking at them?
They also fingerprint everybody who applies for a national security clearance. I got fingerprinted when I went to work at a National Laboratory some twenty years ago.
Heh…the military has not only my fingerprints, but also my footprints and dental records. The footprint was because I was on flight status. Apparently, if a fighter crashes, sometimes the only piece big enough to attempt identification is a foot protected by flight boots.
Also, many states (at least ca. 1989 they did), fingerprint applicants for teaching licenses.
I guess they’ve got my dental records too. I hadn’t thought about that. I wonder if they saved my piss.
If the victim’s family asked me, I probably would out of guilt.
If the police asked, I would ask for a warrant - though I like the idea of first asking all cops to submit!
As for fingerprints - I am in the following databases:
California thumb print for DL
SEC for a broker’s license
USMC from service years
California police for a background check for a youth activity
California police for working for the University of California
Also, the state bar association has my fingerprints, collected as part of the admission process.
The military also has my DNA. They started collecting this right before I got out to ensure that bodies recovered in future wars could be identified conclusively.
I wouldn’t; I’d be incredibly offended that they thought I needed to prove my innocence. How else could it come across other than “We think you could be a dangerous criminal, how 'bout proving you’re not?”
What?
I think you’re missing my point. During a DNA dragnet, the large majority of the people asked for a sample wouldn’t be asked if it wasn’t for the dragnet operation. They simply happen to to live in a certain neighborhood, or match a basic profile, there’s no real reason to suspect them of the crime. Yet, by the vary nature of such an operation, those who refuse would appear suspicious.
Really, as long as the tests are voluntary, wouldn’t police be more interested in those who won’t take it, than those that do?
Ah - I was thinking of some public plea at a community meeting, not that they would be going door-to-door.
Actually, I didn’t really think about the scenario, but just was trying to guess what would get me to go over the line and voluntarily submit instead of asking for a warrant.
Interestingly, I have a professor who is a former prosecuting attorney and is married to a cop, and she doesn’t believe the cops are our buddies and we just cooperate with them and everything will be okay, either. It’s a pretty naive view to take.
No. It really doesn’t gain them anything, all it does is rule people (who were already going to be ruled out anyway) out.
If they had enough to actually suspect me, they’d be able to get a warrant. Otherwise, they need to do actual police legwork to get the info they need.
It also, as was said above, opens me up to more scrutiny for this and future crimes, something which provides no benefit to me.
So, no benefit to society, no benefit to me, no legal imperative, so no is my answer.
You know that Windows Genuine Advantage tool that windows update tries to install on your computer.
You know, the thing that provides absolutely zero benefit to you, but has a small chance of malfunctioning and taking away your ability to use your own computer?
I don’t let it install itself.
Quite frankly, that’s all the more reason for me to refuse. I’m not sure how I’d handle a situation in which I was asked for my DNA. But if we let people (police type and otherwise) get the impression that only those with something to hide will refuse, it sets up a situation I’m not comfortable with.
Give me a reason other than it is somehow easier to figure out who is guilty by using a DNA dragnet rather than other sorts of police work, and maybe I’ll submit.
But if the real motivation is to narrow down the pool of suspects based on who will submit to DNA testing? I’m refusing to submit. My DNA is none of your business.
That’s my point exactly.
How could it possibly be to your benefit? If they have enough evidence to arrest you or get a warrant for it, they wouldn’t have to ask. So they don’t have that evidence. There are only two possible outcomes of offering the sample: either the DNA would not match, in which case they don’t have enough evidence to arrest/convict you, or it would, and you would just have given them the evidence they needed. The first case is equivalent to you not giving them DNA, so how could this possibly help you?
Why might there be a match? Maybe their testing procedures aren’t perfect. Maybe the software they use to compare DNA has a bug in it. Maybe you’ve got a long-lost identical twin. It doesn’t matter. It might happen, and it can only turn out worse for you.