Skip to main content

Crime and DNA typing - yes or no?

With the arrest of a man for quadruple homicides in Washington DC this week, having been found first by his DNA signature leading to a name,and then tracking his cell phone traffic*, we are confronted with the issue of whether all citizens should have on file a DNA record.  One's DNA signature is absolutely unique.

Of course, when there is an issue, there is a controversy.  Should we or shouldn't we have such records?  The one group claims individual rights while the other claims the greater good.  Samo, samo.

In this note we argue in favor of DNA typing.  Here are some reasons.

a. Clearly when a perp leaves DNA floating about, he/she becomes more easily identifiable.  Just as in the early days of finger printing.  Now no self-respecting perp leaves those about anymore. 
b. Having a DNA signature will allow medical researchers in the decades ahead to make dramatic correlations between the DNA and various diseases and other medical conditions.  This could lead to remarkable cures that could offered long before the onset. This would involve massive data mining, now a solid subject in our own day.
c. There is a precedent.  Iceland now requires this of all citizens and has for some years.
d. It would assist in preventing identity theft. For important transactions, a DNA check becomes possible.  Transcending counterfeiting fingerprints, this adds an almost insurmountable wall to security.

Downside: There is little fear of errant DNA identification at this point.  But it did occur to me the possibility of a perp leaving DNA evidence scattered about  simply to lead the authorities in another direction.  It is probably easy to get DNA traces of another person.  I am absolutely certain we will see a TV crime show exploiting this - and probably very soon.  Of course, this will scare the dickens out of everybody.

I am not suggesting 300,000,000 people rush off and get (saliva) swabbed under a government directive, the only intervention needed for the DNA typing.  My gosh, the government has trouble maintaining even small records, much less keeping them secure.

* The perpetrator was caught using these dual technologies he could not be scarcely aware of.  Another reason to study at school.  Basically, this fellow was caught because he is ignorant.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels.  One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four.  Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of  information  of any kind become a kind of  truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not.   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03

Your Brain Within Your Brain

  Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget.   Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

  Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view