Against Proposition 69 and the DNA Fingerprint Act Essay -- DNA Databa

Abstract: California’s Proposition 69 and the DNA Fingerprint Act both expand criminal DNA databases far beyond what is necessary to protect citizens and prosecute violent crime. DNA profiling techniques and databases have developed largely over the last fifteen years, and the recent expansions are only a part of an ongoing trend of ‘function creep’ that characterizes database expansion. Proposition 69 and the DNA Fingerprint Act expand DNA databases originally designed to house DNA samples from violent criminals to include samples from anyone arrested for a felony crime. This is unreasonable because many persons arrested for felonies are ever convicted or even tried, but under these expansions their DNA will be stored in a criminal DNA database alongside convicted rapists, murderers, and other felons. California Proposition 69 and the DNA Fingerprint Act: Considerable Expansions in Criminal DNA Databases Proposition 69, passed last November by voters in California, and the DNA Fingerprint Act, passed recently in Congress, both significantly expand DNA databases designed to house and identify DNA samples from dangerous, violent criminals. These recent expansions are only part are only part of a ‘function creep’ phenomenon that has characterized DNA database expansion since states began keeping DNA profiles on record in the 1990s. Not until recently, however, have the expansions crossed the line between legitimate DNA profiling for law enforcement or forensic purposes and an invasion of privacy. Proposition 69 and the DNA Fingerprint Act do not significantly improve the ability of law enforcement agencies to prosecute violent criminals. Instead, they treat many innocent citizens as criminals, storing their res... ...2048/cgi/content/full/352/26/2669 2Simoncelli, Tania. Steinhardt, Barry. California’s Proposition 69: A dangerous precedent for criminal DNA databases. Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics. [Internet]. [cited 2005 Oct 3]. Available from: http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=17768646 3Rothstein, Mark A. Genetic justice. The New England Journal of Medicine. [Internet]. [cited 2005 Nov 6]. Available from: http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/352/26/2667 4Proposition 69: DNA samples, collection, database, funding, initiative statute. California Secretary of State. [Internet]. [cited 2005 Oct 15]. Available from: http://222.ss.ca.gov/elections/bp_nov04/prop_60_entire.pdf Senate reauthorizes violence against women 5 act. Senator Jon Kyl Press Office. [Internet]. [cited 2005 Oct 15]. Available from: http://kyl.senate/gov/record.cfm?id=246925