May 22, 2009
The Gov. signed this bill into law.
Violent misdemeanors. Sure.
How long before the non-DNA databanked are a minority in the US?
DNA for Dollars
The state’s inventory of DNA samples could increase under a bill on its way to the governor’s desk.
Senate Bill 1102, which passed the House and Senate, would require DNA sampling from people convicted of certain misdemeanor crimes. The bill also would require DNA samples from people who have been arrested on suspicion they committed a crime and are found to be in the country illegally.
Supporters of the bill say the move would help solve violent crimes, while opponents say taking DNA samples from people convicted of minor crimes is an invasion of privacy.
“I think we’ve gone way too far on taking DNA samples,” Oklahoma County Public Defender Bob Ravitz said. “I think convicted rapists and people convicted of sex crimes should have their DNA tested. A misdemeanor is not serious enough to justify putting someone in the database and spending the money to take their DNA.”
“I’ve seen just how extraordinarily helpful DNA is in solving a crime,” Nichols said. “The effect is not always that it puts someone in prison. There have been cases where DNA has proven people’s innocence, as well.”
Nichols was the author of previous legislation to require all convicted felons to submit to DNA testing. DNA testing eventually gave investigators information to solve the 1996 murder of University of Oklahoma ballerina Jewel “Juli” Busken.
If a person is convicted of the following misdemeanors, he or she must provide a DNA sample under the
proposed measure. The sample will be kept in a
→Assault and battery
→Possession of controlled substance, schedule IV
→Outraging public decency
→Eluding a police officer
→Pointing a firearm
→Unlawfully carrying firearm
→Illegal transportation of firearm
→Discharging a firearm
→Threatening an act of violence
→Breaking and entering
→Causing injury while driving under the
Source: Senate Bill 1102
Where are we Heading?
The question was posed in committee to the authors of both SB 1102 and HB 2571, essentially asking “Where does this end? Are we going to put everyone in the database?” The questioners presented this inquiry with some degree of sarcasm, but in truth, that is exactly where we are heading.
“DNA, fingerprints, photos, vehicle registrations, and all other types of data could be linked together in relational databases, so that if I have a DNA profile, I can immediately know your driving record, your military record, a financial profile”
“Those are looking ahead as databases are merged”