Jump to content

You may soon have to give your DNA to the state and pay $250 for the privilege


Recommended Posts

A bill would require anyone who needs fingerprints from the state to give their DNA: Parent school volunteers, teachers, real estate agents, etc. Alyssa Williams, Arizona Republic

Arizona could soon be one of the first states to maintain a massive statewide DNA database. 

And if the proposed legislation passes, many people — from parent school volunteers and teachers to real estate agents and foster parents — will have no choice but to give up their DNA

Under Senate Bill 1475, which Rep. David Livingston, R-Peoria, introduced, DNA must be collected from anyone who has to be fingerprinted by the state for a job, to volunteer in certain positions or for a myriad of other reasons.

The bill would even authorize the medical examiner's office in each county to take DNA from any bodies that come into their possession. 

Want more news like this? Click here to subscribe to azcentral.com. 

The Department of Public Safety would maintain the collected DNA alongside the person's name, Social Security number, date of birth and last known address. 

Any DNA in the database could be accessed and used by law enforcement in a criminal investigation. It could also be shared with other government agencies across the country for licensing, death registration, to identify a missing person or to determine someone's real name.

It could also be provided to someone conducting "legitimate research." 

$250 fee could be collected from a person who submits biological samples, according to the bill. It's not clear who would foot the cost for the dead. 

No other state does this

No other state has anything this expansive in place, according to David Kaye, an associate dean for research at Penn State University who studies genetics and its application in law.

Kaye said the proposed bill is one step away from requiring DNA from anyone who wants a driver's license

Currently in Arizona, DNA is collected from anyone convicted of a felony or of a misdemeanor sex crime. If passed, the bill would expand the current database exponentially. 

The proposed database appears to be focused on making it easier for law enforcement to use DNA in investigations, but Kaye said it's not targeting the right people to make a significant impact when it comes to solving cases.

Collecting DNA from the dead could solve some longstanding cold cases, while having DNA from law enforcement volunteers on file might weed out accidental crime scene contamination. 

"It doesn’t seem like solving crimes is a big priority here," Kaye said. "It’s not focusing on the people most likely to be linked to crimes, it’s just spreading the net more broadly."

There are questions about whether certain requirements of the database are even legal in the first place, Kaye said.

A federal law known as the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act bars employers from using DNA testing as a condition of employment. 

Connections to Hacienda case

The bill comes weeks after Phoenix police used DNA to tie nurse Nathan Sutherland to the alleged rape and impregnation of a patient at Hacienda HealthCare. Police collected DNA from male employees after the woman unexpectedly gave birth in December. 

Nursing-care facility employees — like Sutherland — would have to submit their DNA under the proposed legislation. This could have expedited the Hacienda investigation and would assist with any similar cases in the future. 

It's not clear whether the proposed legislation was crafted in response to this crime.

Livingston has not publicly explained the motivation behind the bill. He didn't respond to multiple calls from The Arizona Republic. 

Opposition to the bill

Liz Recchia, director of government affairs for the West Maricopa Association of Realtors, said the organization is against the bill. She urged readers in an industry blog to "brace themselves" before looking at the bill.

"It isn’t very often a bill at the state Legislature affects so many Arizonan’s civil rights in such an onerous manner," Recchia wrote. 

Dozens of individuals and organizations have registered in opposition to the bill, including the Arizona Police Association, the Arizona Mortgage Lenders Association, the Arizona Association of Realtors and the American Council of Engineering Companies of Arizona.

A DPS spokesman said the department doesn't comment on pending legislation.

SB 1475 is scheduled for a public hearing Wednesday before the Senate Transportation and Public Safety Committee, which Livingston chairs. 

Have a question or concern about public safety in Arizona? Contact public safety reporter Bree Burkitt at bburkitt@republicmedia.com or at 602-444-8515. Follow her on Twitter at @breeburkitt.

Support local journalism. Subscribe to azcentral.com today.

Dig Deeper

Top news headlines

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ActionfigureJoe said:

That has nothing to do with the OP. 

DNA collection is dna collection. all the same thing all wanted for the same reasons by the same govenment agency's you want more of. 

btw AZ charges for every thing law related . I think it is good .

you get pulled over and arrested you are now paying the cops hourly wage the jailers hourly wage even the judge all your food etc . unless found not guilty of course .

the way it should be 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ez ryder said:

DNA collection is dna collection. all the same thing all wanted for the same reasons by the same govenment agency's you want more of. 

btw AZ charges for every thing law related . I think it is good .

you get pulled over and arrested you are now paying the cops hourly wage the jailers hourly wage even the judge all your food etc . unless found not guilty of course .

the way it should be 

There's a vast difference from contributing freely to a DNA collection facility vs compulsory, state order DNA collection. Good god you're fucking cracked in the head. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ActionfigureJoe said:

There's a vast difference from contributing freely to a DNA collection facility vs compulsory, state order DNA collection. Good god you're fucking cracked in the head. 

i get what yiu are saying . i am just saying imho all the people giving dna over to some dna and me bullshit webpage are more likely than not giving there dna to some Fed data base .

and I also see some value in have a data base on people who have certain jobs . 

 

Edited by Ez ryder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ez ryder said:

i get what yiu are saying . i am just saying imho all the people giving dna over to some dna and me bullshit webpage are more likely than not giving there dna to some Fed Barbra base .

and I also see some value in have a data base on people who have certain jobs . 

 

Of course the government can retrieve the DNA from a private website/company with a court order. Any info on a person, including medical records, can be secured with a court order. That's how they recently ID'd a serial killer that had been at large for 40 years. I think it was Ancestry.com

Edited by ActionfigureJoe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ActionfigureJoe said:

Of course the government can retrieve the DNA from a private website/company with a court order. Any info on a person, including medical records, can be secured with a court order. That's how they recently ID'd a serial killer that had been at large for 40 years. I think it was Ancestry.com

I am not 100% sure theses mail order dna places are not some govenment collection  arm 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
37 minutes ago, racer254 said:

I don't agree with this at all, but if you don't like it, don't take a STATE JOB.  Not a hard concept.

 

28 minutes ago, ActionfigureJoe said:

It's not for people with state jobs, dummy. Read it again. I swear that there's brain dead people following me in here today. 

Hahaha...Racer never disappoints. 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Gold Member
1 hour ago, Ez ryder said:

I have ZERO doubt these send in your dna outfits are giving your info to some federal agency . or worse run by a fed agency covert wing 

Yeah that wouldn't surprise me in the slightest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bunch of dumb fucks.  Don't take the position if you don't like the fucking rules.  NOT A HARD CONCEPT.  I can guarantee that I have never been fingerprinted and no one has ever collected my DNA without my permission or knowledge.  If someone has it, they got it without me knowing it.  I don't condone it, but I don't condone required insurance or ACA either.

 

Sen. David Livingston, R-Peoria, the bill sponsor, has introduced an amendment to Senate Bill 1475 that would require DNA only from professionals who care for patients with intellectual disabilities in an intermediate care facility.

 

Edited by racer254
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
7 minutes ago, racer254 said:

Bunch of dumb fucks.  Don't take the position if you don't like the fucking rules.  NOT A HARD CONCEPT.  I can guarantee that I have never been fingerprinted and no one has ever collected my DNA without my permission or knowledge.  If someone has it, they got it without me knowing it.  I don't condone it, but I don't condone required insurance or ACA either.

 

Sen. David Livingston, R-Peoria, the bill sponsor, has introduced an amendment to Senate Bill 1475 that would require DNA only from professionals who care for patients with intellectual disabilities in an intermediate care facility.

 

Sounds like it is in response to that comatose woman getting pregnant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, steve from amherst said:

Sounds like it is in response to that comatose woman getting pregnant.

Yeah, that seems like it.  Certain jobs require drug tests, now some jobs may require a DNA swab.  If we were talking about a gun registry, I bet the OP would be singing a different tune.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Trying to pay the bills, lol



×
×
  • Create New...