Regular readers know I've expressed concerns about some privacy issues. I don't see this as one to worry about:
But with as many as 16,000 additional Indiana felons expected during the next year to provide DNA samples -- a swab is rubbed inside the offender's mouth -- some question whether the benefit of comprehensive testing outweighs individuals' rights."I'm not sure simply being convicted of any felony ought to subject you to . . . that kind of intrusion," said Paula Sites, assistant executive director of the Indiana Public Defender Council.
How does DNA differ from fingerprints, which have been collected from those arrested (and not just felons) for a long time? If felons have some kind of right not to have an identifier on record, it was violated a long time ago. As the story notes, DNA can exonerate as well as implicate, to which some guys who used to be on death row can testify.
