The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Gun Dog Broker
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25

Thread: First they came for

  1. #11
    Senior Member badbullgator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    somewhere between Boca Grande and Nova Scotia
    Posts
    6,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HPL View Post
    Identical twins will have identical DNA, but otherwise, no. I am not as appalled at the taking of the DNA as I am by the ability to keep it once exonerated. I feel the same way about fingerprints and was very unhappy when they started taking a thumbprint for the driver's license. What is the purpose there? It's the main reason I have never applied for a CCP.
    Mitocondrial DNA will differ between identical twins, and mirror twinning among other things will also lead to notable differences.
    See above, fingerprints are far different and this is not about convicted criminals that already forfeit many rights. Ths is about taking the most in terms of amount, and very personal information from a person without reason. Your DNA is not going to change during a trial so there is really no reason to give the government this power over us. Frankly it is not their business.
    Views and opinions expressed herein by Badbullgator do not necessarily represent the policies or position of RTF. RTF and all of it's subsidiaries can not be held liable for the off centered humor and politically incorrect comments of the author.
    Corey Burke

  2. #12
    Senior Member txrancher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    NE Texas & NC coast
    Posts
    275

    Default

    So by taking a DNA swab upon arrest will that allow it to be used as evidence at a rape trial? This ruling will have substantial impacts concerning the rules of evidence from now on. Not saying criminals should go free but not willing to see our rights taken away one by one. I don't think I will ever like being ruled by a socialist government.
    I ignore stupidity unless you bring it to my attention!
    Crystal Coast Labradors

    CCL Return To Sender
    N Sana Te

  3. #13
    Senior Member badbullgator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    somewhere between Boca Grande and Nova Scotia
    Posts
    6,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by charly_t View Post
    I'm not going to pretend to know something that I don't know but is there a possibilty that two ( or more ) people can have the same DNA. How much in depth testing on the DNA will be done to convict. I match one lady on one of my lists. She is not a close relative. In fact we have found no common ancestor. Futher testing ( more in depth ) may reveal that we do not match. DNA is not as advanced as some would have us believe that it is.
    I think that this ruling is way premature.
    I am think you are confused. 99% of DNA is similar or common among humans. The 1% or so that is not is a huge number of genes and the possibility of two having the same DNA does exist but it is 1 x10E13 (1 in 10,000,000,000,000). In reality there are probably no two living people that have the same DNA. Differences in mitochondrial DNA probably exist and do various mutation within individule genes that would distinguish individules. Current DNA fingerprinting has its limitations and the possibility of two people having a match using this technology is probably closer to 1x10E9 (1 in 1,000,000,000). The fewer markers you look at the higher the probility of having a match. I am assuming you list is an ancestory service that looks specifically at ethnic decent and common traits among those groups once a region has been established. While the number of markers they look for seems large it is but a small portion of them
    Views and opinions expressed herein by Badbullgator do not necessarily represent the policies or position of RTF. RTF and all of it's subsidiaries can not be held liable for the off centered humor and politically incorrect comments of the author.
    Corey Burke

  4. #14
    Senior Member badbullgator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    somewhere between Boca Grande and Nova Scotia
    Posts
    6,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by txrancher View Post
    So by taking a DNA swab upon arrest will that allow it to be used as evidence at a rape trial? This ruling will have substantial impacts concerning the rules of evidence from now on. Not saying criminals should go free but not willing to see our rights taken away one by one. I don't think I will ever like being ruled by a socialist government.

    Focus this has NOTHING TO DO WITH CRIMINALS! Innocent until proven guilty. That is the distraction they are selling. How could anyone object to taking DNA from rape suspects or other criminals? The key is what they are going to do is not being done to criminals.
    He who gives up freedom for safety has neither.
    Views and opinions expressed herein by Badbullgator do not necessarily represent the policies or position of RTF. RTF and all of it's subsidiaries can not be held liable for the off centered humor and politically incorrect comments of the author.
    Corey Burke

  5. #15
    Senior Member HPL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Coastal Bend of Texas
    Posts
    2,474

    Default

    I will try to say this a bit more clearly this time: although the taking upon arrest (as is done with fingerprints) might seem reasonable, the real problem is that they will then enter the results in a database which they will keep IN PERPETUITY!! If they had to destroy all records once one was exonerated, I would have much less problem with it (I didn't say no problem). On the law and order franchise on TV they are always asking everyone to volunteer DNA elimination samples. Fraid I'd have to demure.
    Any doctrine that weakens personal responsibility for judgment and for action helps create the attitudes that welcome and support the totalitarian state.
    (John Dewey)

    Associate yourself with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation; for 'tis better to be alone than in bad company.
    (George Washington)

    Gig'em Aggies!! BTCO'77HOO t.u.!!

    www.HughLieck.photoshelter.com

  6. #16
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,168

    Default

    I can agree with some of the points brought up by HPL and badbullgator ... I also agree that upon conviction it can be acceptable to compel the taking of the DNA. In such a case, that DNA from a convicted criminal could, indeed, then be used to exonerate someone wrongfully convicted ... and that would be a good thing.

    I can also agree with bbg that DNA could be used for some ulterior motives with govt-run healthcare. In such cases, it could be condemning the "innocent" (one has no control over the DNA they were "dealt") to a premature death.

    Not quite sure that I'm as worried about cloning ... can't imagine anyone would want to clone me
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    N.E. Oklahoma
    Posts
    1,765

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by helencalif View Post
    I am curious about your statement that you match one lady, but she is not a close relative, and that you have found no common ancestor. I am assuming this is DNA testing for genealogical purposes. You then say that further testing may reveal that you do not match.

    It sounds like you had a very limited DNA test. Please explain.

    Or, is it possible that she is a close relative and that you do have a common ancestor? There have been many who have taken DNA testing for genealogical purposes and discovered some surprises in their lineage -- daddy not daddy, momma not momma, and/or neither were their natural parents. Administrators of DNA testing for surname groups often have to counsel those who have had such surprises. Most typically is Y-DNA testing (males) that turn up surprises -- their daddy was not their natural father, grandpa not their grandpa etc.
    My husband was DNA tested (the full testing). I held my breath because I feared there might be an error in my research which went back 12 generations to his 1635 immigrant. Whew, he matched all of the other males who have been fully DNA tested back to that immigrant.

    Helen
    I can not explain it because I flat do not understand any of it. The lady who has the match with me was in another state and we appear to have no family in common. It was an early DNA test some years back. I have had a more recent one done by another company and I have not compared that one with her ( I have no idea if she would even be interested in another test etc. ). This was MtDNA only. The last one was more in depth. No male line tested but that probably would not match of course. I just wonder if there is a possibility of a total match sometimes. I realize it would be rare for both male and female DNA to match in two people. Lottery rare. vbg. With the government doing this will it be done correctly.
    charly

    There ought to be one day -- just one -- when there is open season on Congressmen.
    ~Will Rogers~

  8. #18
    Senior Member Ken Bora's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Burlington, Vermont
    Posts
    11,065

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gerry Clinchy View Post
    ... can't imagine anyone would want to clone me
    it's not like your clones will be walkin' round washing your truck. But growin' organs in some factory.
    need a kidney, need a heart. CyberGrow will have your part!!!
    "So what is big is not always the Trout nor the Deer but the chance, the being there. And what is full is not necessarily the creel nor the freezer, but the memory." ~ Aldo Leopold

    "The Greatest Obstacle to Discovery is not Ignorance -- It is the Illusion of Knowledge" ~ Daniel Boorstin

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Oakdale,ct.
    Posts
    2,588

    Default

    Soylent green!!!!!!!!!
    there's no good reason to fatten up a retriever.

  10. #20
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,168

    Default

    http://townhall.com/columnists/jacob...3011/page/full
    Upon reading Scalia's reason for MD's law being unconstitutional, I have to agree with him, and those who object to DNA collection. While I could be in favor of King being held accountable for a rape, that was my emotional reaction that obfuscated the Constitutional principle prohibiting unreasonable search and seizure.

    This author is wrong, however, Scalia has not "gone liberal" ... he is consistent in using the Constitution to protect individual rights. The author of this article, I believe, is incorrect. The headline should read, "Liberals support Scalia in Court Decision."
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •