The Government Will Now Compel Your Spit To “Bear Witness Against” You

By | June 6, 2013

 Swab DNA Now

The United States Supreme Court has taken away your Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate and “bear witness” against yourself. The government has been given the right to “compel” your DNA to “indict” you without a “Grand Jury”—even if the arrest is a minor charge!

If you think violent criminals receiving more protection than victims is insane, that’s nothing compared to what the high court has done to citizens—again.

The Supreme Court’s latest 5-4 ruling on Maryland v King, or as I prefer to label the ruling: “Abusive Encroachment of Power by the Government Over the People,” has further violated innocent, law-abiding citizens by giving police power to contravene the Fifth, as well as the Fourth, Ninth and Fourteenth by swabbing the mouths of every arrested American—no matter the reason—for DNA samples that will enter national databank records.

1984

According to Justice Kennedy–never trust anyone with that last name– the ruling allows police to swab violent criminal’s mouths, i.e. rapists and murders such as Alonzo Jay King of Maryland, who’s DNA matched that of a rape victim.

King is a violent criminal, but the court ruling does not protect the public from violent thugs like King.

Not according to Justice Kennedy:

The advent of DNA technology is one of the most significant scientific advancements of our era. The full potential for use of genetic markers in medicine and science is still being explored, but the utility of DNA identification in the criminal justice system is already undisputed. Since the first use of forensic DNA analysis to catch a rapist and murderer in England in 1986…law enforcement, the defense bar, and the courts have acknowledged DNA testing’s ‘unparalleled ability both to exonerate the wrongly convicted and to identify the guilty.’ It has the potential to significantly improve both the criminal justice system and police investigative practices.

 

Yes, DNA testing has saved the lives of falsely accused and matched DNA to victims. But technology used in violent criminal cases must never invade the lives of private citizens without just cause. Monday’s ruling will flow further into states, giving police power to swab the mouths of all arrested citizens, on any charge, including non-violent crimes.

Justice Kennedy’s statement about DNA collecting is a sham. Yet Kennedy insists:

The Act also limits the information added to a DNA database and how it may be used. Specifically, “[o]nly DNA records that directly relate to the identification of individuals shall be collected and stored.” No purpose other than identification is permissible: “A person may not willfully test a DNA sample for information that does not relate to the identification of indi-viduals as specified in this subtitle.” Tests for familial matches are also prohibited.  (“A person may not perform a search of the statewide DNA data base for the purpose of identification of an offender in connection with a crime for which the offender may be a biological relative of the individual from whom the DNA sample was acquired”). The officers involved in taking and analyzing respondent’s DNA sample complied with the Act in all respects.

 

With all due respect your Honor, once DNA is placed into national databanks, the government will assume the right to do as it wishes with our identification. And Kennedy admits:  “All 50 States require the collection of DNA from felony convicts,” so this latest ruling is just another way to monitor citizens.

Person of Interest

Americans no longer have privacy.


Police state

To make the violation sound respectful, Kennedy claims swabbing won’t violate the Fourth, because it’s not as invasive as a blood test: “A buccal swab is a far more gentle process than a venipuncture to draw blood. It involves but a light touch on the inside of the cheek.”

That’s akin to a dentist telling patients that having every tooth extracted will prevent the possibility of one ever having to endure painful gum disease.

Justice Kennedy audaciously claims DNA swabbing is equal to “fingerprinting and photographing, a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.”

Swab Squad

Excuse me Justice, but no it’s not. When I was born, I was foot and finger printed, as are all Americans. My birth certificate records those prints. My mother adores “those sweet little feet” on that certificate. My driver’s license has my photograph—I dare any cop to show that photo to the public and the country will witness a swabbing like it’s never seen! When I came of age, I acquired a Social Security Card. I have school records (I wish I could pull an Obama with my math records!) from kindergarten through college—with more unattractive photos, depending on the year and stage of life— tracking my whereabouts for decades.

The only swabbing record is at my OBGYN, a place the government never wants to enter unless is desires to experience the full-force pain of labor!

So give me a break Justice Kennedy! I’m recorded, processed, filed, photographed, licensed, and documented. How much more does the government need; my blood? No, it wants my DNA if I’m ever arrested for something absurd.

I’m only a threat to my fellow fashion occultists when the hoard of us maneuver into clothing and shoe tug-of-war combat aggression at designer sample sales in New York City. We fashionaholics swab the floor with each other over high end one-of-a-kind luxury pieces of clothing. No cop has ever had the guts to get in the middle of that!

Seriously, it’s bad enough public schools now scan children’s irises without parental consent to monitor school children.

Iris and cameras

How far will America go with Soviet-style tactics against free born citizens?

Scalia answered that question:  

The Court disguises the vast (and scary) scope of its holding by promising a limitation it cannot deliver…The Court repeatedly says that DNA testing, and entry into a national DNA registry, will not befall thee and me, dear reader, but only those arrested for ‘serious offense[s]…’ At the end of the day, logic will out. When there comes before us the taking of DNA from an arrestee for a traffic violation, the Court will predictably (and quite rightly) say, ‘We can find no significant difference between this case and King.’ Make no mistake about it: As an entirely predictable consequence of today’s decision, your DNA can be taken and entered into a national DNA database if you are ever arrested, rightly or wrongly, and for whatever reason…Today’s judgment will, to be sure, have the beneficial effect of solving more crimes; then again, so would the taking of DNA samples from anyone who flies on an airplane (surely the Transportation Security Administration needs to know the ‘identity’ of the flying public), applies for a driver’s license, or attends a public school. Perhaps the construction of such a genetic panopticon is wise. But I doubt that the proud men who wrote the charter of our liberties would have been so eager to open their mouths for royal inspection. I therefore dissent, and hope that today’s incursion upon the Fourth Amendment, like an earlier one will someday be repudiated.

 

This court ruling completely violates the Bill of Rights. The moment any individual’s mouth is swabbed, they lose their rights to the Fifth. Refusal to speak is useless when police can compel your DNA to speak against you, no matter what you do or don’t do, for the rest of your life!

Justice Scalia notes: “Americans despised the British use of so-called ‘general warrants,’” so Americans framed the Constitution with a Bill of Rights to protect us against unreasonable arrests.

We the People

Let’s face facts Americans: Swabbing the mouths of all arrested citizens turns America into a “Logan’s Run” society of monitored people.

irs flag

Welcome to America’s version of the KGB. Now please, open your mouth and spit.

Conservative Daily News allows a great deal of latitude in the topics contributors choose and their approaches to the content. We believe that citizens have a voice - one that should be heard above the mass media. Readers will likely not agree with every contributor or every post, but find reasons to think about the topic and respond with comments. We value differing opinions as well as those that agree. Opinions of contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of CDN, Anomalous Media or staff. Click here if you'd like to write for CDN.
Put This Story in your Circles and Share with your Friends