Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Can Police Keep Biometric Data on Individual without a criminal conviction?
The WSJ asked this question: "Like fingerprints, should DNA samples be taken from people who are arrested for felonies before they’ve been convicted?"
I do not think than anyone (let alone police agencies) be allowed to keep any biometric Data on non-convicted individuals, especially not DNA or medical data.
With that stated: What court rulings all Law enforcement to keep fingerprints, photos, DNA, medical records forever on individuals that they capricious and arbitrarily arrested? Can an acquitted individual demand destruction of all illegally or unlawfully obtained identification data immediately after dismissal of charges or acquittal?
Should employers, who take a photo for their badges, be required to return all photo of employee on resignation of the employee or dismissal? Should not the employee have the right to know to whom these data have shared by the employing firm? Why or Why Not?
Privacy is vital to a health free society!
What is the State's justification for seek to retain these data on individuals?
Oops, the word ought to have been Healthy.
If you think data is not shared and not released, you are fooling yourselves. If you think that collecting data on people has a role in "crime-solving" then you have no idea of the concept of self-incrimination or how it was built into our British legal tradition. And how much privacy has been eroded in the UK. In the UK, the police can and do take DNA test from all people in a town of a crime. Hitler use medical data to kill of Down's Syndrome children, and Germany by the 1930 was the most liberal, most "democratic" and most "enlightened society in Europe. So abuse of power can happen here. Old Ben F. was correct: "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
WRG: One does not freely give up fingerprints when drafted into the Army. If it is well settled Law, in the US, why is there a debate over DNA and where is the citation? The question was, how can a free society condone spying on its citizenry from birth. No where did I sign a blanket release in perpetuity when I had a background check. It may have been JEHoover's desire to have a big brother file on everyone, but that is not my concept of a free society.
7 Answers
- ?Lv 410 years agoFavorite Answer
Karen, I agree with you on the need to regain or at least retain what little privacy we still have in this nation.
However, I do think the J. Edgar Hoover blackmail Congress into making the FBI the warehouse of all collected fingerprints. He also pressured the DoD to use the SSN as military ID's along with Universities to use the SSN as student Identification numbers.
Sadly the boat has sailed on not being tracked by the FBI. There are moves to have all cars equipped with GPS and recording devices that could be used to monitor speed, behavior, and could have MADD desired sensors to detect any alcohol within the vehicle. I sadly can even foresee when the car would report your speed violations to the police each time you go over the limit. Imagine having 20 tickets on your e-mail for just one drive home from work. 10 for speeding over 3 mph above limits. 4 for failure to signal lane change on freeway. 3 for not stopping your car on a freeway when the kid in the back undid his seat belt on his booster seat to get his dropped ball. 3 because the computer just wants to show you who is boss. Cities would love this revenue.
I am against DNA being kept. DNA can be reproduced and then planted if police truly want to get you. Trust NO ONE.
- WRGLv 710 years ago
What the hell is a "health free society"?
While DNA can be used for medical information there is no current police use for it. And I wouldn't have a problem with a law that states that medical information can not be extracted from DNA tests taken for identification purposes.
The keeping of fingerprints is long settled law. And the prints available to police don't just come from arrests they also come from elective and non-elective background checks and military and government service.
The use of DNA will reduce not increase the number of false arrests and convictions.
As far as what you do with your employer as far as photos and other data that is between yourself and your employer. No one is forcing you to work for an employer that keeps information on their employees.
- Anonymous5 years ago
They are doing their job... as they should. I agree that 84 illegals is kind of weak compared with the total of illegals in this country. 84 out of 12 million is really not even scratching the surface. More must be done. Hopefully there are many more raids that we do not hear about!
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 10 years ago
that depends on the country..
but in general..
YES. but only for 5years. but may not be shared, with out premission.
if the individual has no criminal record.. at all.
(UK LAW)
Privacy ?? Privacy Is DEAD. like the roadkill you hit on the way to this question..
we here in the UK, will have ALL our internet activity monitored in 2012. by law.
the leading UK ISP's are testing there tracking methods allready.
and BT, has allready implimentented the system. in london. in july, but only for test purposes.
- Katy MLv 710 years ago
The data is not shared, it's just used to match to DNA found at crime scenes or on victims. That's the justification--solving crimes.
- Anonymous10 years ago
Honey, you better get in the loop. We lost our "rights" a long time ago. And there's no turning back the clock.