re: Rape Kits Being Used to Identify Women As Suspects In Criminal Cases

quote:

---

Mocking me because of your lack of openness to considering a different viewpoint/perspective other than your own. And it's not even that we disagree about the conclusion of the argument, it's we're not even talking about the same argument because you've already strawmanned my argument into what you think I'm saying. It's exhausting, dude. I'm out.

---

I'm not trying to strawman your argument, I'm trying to squeeze something out of it that could even remotely justify this type of policy.

All your talk of "lesser" or "greater" crimes and trying to flip the equality script on me and trying to paint obvious conclusions as mere assumptions is coming nowhere close to making it ok to search/seize without cause. Because that is exactly what collecting the victim's DNA from a rape kit is.

You're trying to say that it's all ok just because maybe we would catch a murderer every now and then. We don't have to talk about gender or equality or any of that shite if you don't want to. It just boils down to the fact that rape and murder are at the top, and all other crimes, the vast majority committed, are "lesser". But this policy only discourages the reporting of rapes specifically, so statistics dictates that the majority of the time a rape goes unreported due to a prior crime committed, it will be "lesser".

quote:

---

This is what I was talking about with you assuming the entire board is the same conservative.

---

Why are you assuming that I'm arguing against conservatives at all? This is one of my most right-leaning positions, and I would think most conservatives would be in agreement with me here. This is privacy and constitutional rights vs. big government, and I'm siding with privacy and the constitution every time. DNA should only be collected from someone if they are suspected of a crime. The victim's DNA should not be stored at all, much less run through a database to see what pops up.

quote:

---

Why are you assuming that I'm arguing against conservatives at all? This is one of my most right-leaning positions, and I would think most conservatives would be in agreement with me here. This is privacy and constitutional rights vs. big government, and I'm siding with privacy and the constitution every time. DNA should only be collected from someone if they are suspected of a crime. The victim's DNA should not be stored at all, much less run through a database to see what pops up.

---

You're not arguing against conservative philosophy, you're arguing against a strawman caricature of this board's conservatives, which would be coonass trash with a pro-police, tough-on-crime position. That's always who you have in mind when you click "reply", because that makes it easiest to mock, but I'm not that guy, so you're wasting my time and yours and everyone else's reading this. Well, maybe not yours if you're really getting off on this. But you've followed it up by again re-iterating a position I've told you repeatedly isn't even part of the question.

quote:

---

You're not arguing against conservative philosophy, you're arguing against a strawman caricature of this board's conservatives, which would be coonass trash with a pro-police, tough-on-crime position. That's always who you have in mind when you click "reply", because that makes it easiest to mock, but I'm not that guy, so you're wasting my time and yours and everyone else's reading this. Well, maybe not yours if you're really getting off on this. But you've followed it up by again re-iterating a position I've told you repeatedly isn't even part of the question.

---

I've distilled my position down to its essence, privacy and constitutional rights. No strawmen, no mockery, no attacks whatsoever. And in response you have kept on about all that stuff rather than explain your position. Which, as far as I can tell after reading your posts again, boils down to you only see this as a dilemma that only hypocritical criminals have to worry about? Please correct me if I'm wrong.

If the women have to give some sort of consent for this, then there’s no issue. Otherwise, this is no different than conspiracy theories that the government uses dna from ancestry sites to solve crimes.

It's really inevitable. At some point everyone's DNA is going to be in a database. As technology improves, we're all going to be in some centralized government datacenter.

quote:

---

You want rapes to go unreported? Because this is how you do it.

---

This. The bad outweighs the good on this

quote:

---

The women who are incriminating themselves with DNA from their rape kits made a choice when they committed an illegal act. This is a consequence of that choice. They now get to make another choice, do they have the rape kit done and risk their own capture or let their rapist remain free.

---

The issue is that choice, incentivized by law enforcement practices, can only result in more people being raped and not fewer.

quote:

---

Actions have consequences

---

Same goes for government actions.

quote:

---

t's really inevitable. At some point everyone's DNA is going to be in a database. As technology improves, we're all going to be in some centralized government datacenter.

---

How does someone find out if their DNA is in a database? Shouldn't citizens know when their name is added to a database.

Secret list are wrong.