Proposition 69 is a DNA deal with the devil. If this initiative
passes in November, it will require police and sheriff’s
departments in California to collect DNA samples from anyone
arrested for any felony. The information would be stored in local
and statewide computer databases and used to identify possible
suspects of other crimes.
Proposition 69 is a DNA deal with the devil. If this initiative passes in November, it will require police and sheriff’s departments in California to collect DNA samples from anyone arrested for any felony. The information would be stored in local and statewide computer databases and used to identify possible suspects of other crimes.
It sounds good on paper. I must admit I was tempted when I first read the argument in favor of Proposition 69 in the Voter Information Guide.
The initiative’s creators promise a brave new world where – through the wonders of “DNA fingerprinting” technology – police easily catch the bad guys, solve cold cases, and protect the innocent. And the price tag – the backers say – is a mere $20 million in annual costs collected in penalties the criminals cough up themselves.
But then I started reading the fine print. Proposition 69, it turns out, has some rather diabolical hidden costs.
The measure is so poorly written that, if passed, it will turn thousands of Californians not found guilty of any legal violation into permanent criminal suspects. With only a few exceptions, the DNA samples of innocent people would forever remain in the files of a huge government database.
The fact is, an estimated 50,000 Californians every year are charged with felony crimes but found not guilty. These cases are dropped. Under Prop 69, the DNA information these citizens would be forced to give police would be permanently stored in an ever-growing database.
Individuals found not guilty would be forced to face the legal labyrinth and financial costs of getting a judge to remove their DNA information from the criminal database. And the way Proposition 69 was written, the judge’s decision is unappealable. That’s a dangerous violation of Constitutional rights.
Prop 69 also creates a system where our liberty is put in jeopardy by human error. According to an opposing rebuttal in the Voter Guide, in Nevada, an innocent 26-year-old man spent a year in jail and faced a life sentence in prison simply because crime lab technicians “switched his DNA with that of the true rapist.” With passage of this statute, bet on California’s law enforcement agencies getting hit by hefty lawsuits because of mistakes made handling samples.
There’s another undisclosed price tag. Local police and sheriff departments will be required to train their staff and upgrade their databases. That’s going to cost Hollister, Gilroy, Morgan Hill and other South Valley tax payers a ton of money — millions of dollars better used for education and crime prevention programs.
The state’s current criminal database would also have to be severely overhauled to deal with the massive flood of DNA information.
Another problem with Prop 69 is a lack of safeguards protecting citizens with abuse by law enforcement officers. It makes it too tempting for police to arrest someone on trumped-up charges just to get a DNA sample.
Some folks argue a DNA sample is no different an identifier than a fingerprint. In truth, there’s a massive difference. Fingerprints don’t contain the broad amount of genetic information that a strand of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) does. A fingerprint is an innocuous identifier compared with the treasure of personal information contained in our genes.
Supporters say 34 states now take DNA samples from people arrested for felonies. But only Louisiana collects samples from all felony suspects as Prop 69 would allow. And, unlike California’s initiative, DNA registries in other states makes it relatively easy to remove innocent people’s records from criminal DNA databases.
Although I don’t support Prop 69, I believe DNA databases are important for preventing and solving crime. But an election day initiative is no place to create this type of all-or-nothing legislation.
Prop 69 violates two bedrock principles upon which our country was built. One is the respect of an individual’s privacy. A government-controlled computer system of genetic data creates a dangerous temptation for privacy abuses from unscrupulous officials.
The proposition also violates our legal system’s foundation presumption that a person is considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
Proposition 69 is a Faustian contract that will erode our Constitutional rights. In exchange for a promise of crime reduction, it gives the government and law enforcement far too much power over our genetic essence.
