Is a Mandatory DNA Database for All Americans Coming Soon?By Claire Bernish The Kuwaiti government made the groundbreakingalbeit terrifyingdecision to require mass DNA collection following the June 26 bombing of a Shia mosque in Kuwait City that killed 25 and injured over 200. That attack was part one of three the same dayall claimed by ISIL (ISIS, IS)that included a mass shooting at a tourist resort in Tunisia, which left 28 dead and 36 injured, and an explosion at a gas factory near Lyon, France. Passed in early July at a cost of $400 million, the procedures for DNA testing and collection are not yet known, but the project is expected to be complete no later than September 2016. We are in a state of war. Yes, we have busted this terror cell but there are other cells we are going to strike, said Interior Minister Sheikh Mohammad Khaled al-Sabah in a speech before parliament prior to implementation of the law. All 1.3 million citizens and 2.9 million foreign residents as well as visitors will be required to give a DNA sample for the database under the premise of facilitating expediency in criminal investigations. There will be exceptions for those with, as the government termed it, the proper excusethough there was no indication what would constitute such an excuse. We are prepared to do anything to boost security measures in the country, vowed MP Jamal al-Omarsounding reminiscent of President Bushs push to pass the Patriot Act following 9/11. Though Kuwaits new law is raising eyebrows with privacy advocates concerned about such governmental overreach, it should be noted that the U.S. hasnt been as restrained with DNA collection as it once was. In fact, if you think widespread DNA collection couldnt happen here, you are already wrongstate and federal courts recently cracked the lid a little wider on the Pandoras Box of DNA profiling. In 2013 in Maryland v. King, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of warrantless, suspicionless DNA collection for all arrestees under Maryland lawwhether or not they are ever convicted of a crime. King had his DNA collected and profiled following an arrest for assault. After the lab forwarded his genetic profile to the FBI to upload into its DNA database, called CODISstandard procedure after a lab extracts the profileit was compared to genetic evidence collected in all unsolved crimes. As Kings assault charge made its way through the courts, CODIS identified a match in an unsolved rape. He was subsequently charged, convicted, and sentenced to lifeall stemming from an otherwise simple arrest. Considering there are 28 statesup from 15 in 2009as well as the federal government, that collect DNA with every arrest, the King decision is the slippery slope toward ever-expanding warrantless DNA testing that judges throughout the country have predicted is already upon us, as the Electronic Frontier Foundation described in their brief for the King case. It didnt take long for repercussions of the King casethe EFFs slippery slopeto manifest nationally in the worst possible way. Ironically, the most disturbing indication that mandatory national DNA collection is imminent also came from the same state that ostensibly opened the door for it. In State v. Raynor, the Maryland Supreme Court amplified the King ruling exponentially by allowing for warrantless DNA collection when someone hasnt even been arrested for a crime. After voluntarily going to the police station to answer questions about a rape case and refusing to submit to DNA testing on request, Glenn Raynors DNA was taken without his consent from a tissue he left behind on a chair. The fact that a court found this DNA extraction without consent perfectly constitutional, is at least a cause for alarm. Kuwaits mandatory DNA collection is the veritable forgone conclusion in the U.S., given the trend in court decisions and the vastly expanding scope of collection already in place. In just six years, the FBIs DNA database has more than doubled in sizefrom 6.7 million profiles in 2009 to nearly 13.8 million as of May 2015due, in part, to warrantless, suspicionless testing for arrestees. Over 2 million profilesand rapidly countinghave been added to that database stemming purely from arrests. If you value privacy and arent a fan of Big Brother, these technological developments are rather creepyor, more accurately, downright terrifyingwhen you consider the context of the aforementioned court decisions. Law enforcement is pushing heavily toward Rapid DNA Analyzerswhich can complete a profile in 90 minutes or lessthat can be used by a layperson in the field since they are comparable in size to a laser printer. One manufacturer, IntegenX, boasts that Rapid DNA promises to revolutionize the use of DNA by making it a routine identification and investigational tool. In case you skimmed that descriptionyes, they did say identification. Granted, this is in a law enforcement scenariofor now. But given what the FBI announced during a biometrics conference in 2014, there are rather disturbing possible future implications. In order to link its Next Generation Identification (NGI) biometrics database with the CODIS DNA profiles, the FBI is looking to simplifyby assigning a universal identification number. Oh, the possibilities. Given the context of DNA collection for people who havent even been arrested judged constitutional by a high court, the increasing prevalence of Rapid DNA tech, and the assigning of a number to link between the DNA and NGI databaseswhat could possibly go wrong? Is the thought that we could be identified in the not-so-distant future with chilling accuracy in less than an hour and a half by a number really all that bad? Perhaps each aspect mentioned above might not seem terribly important on its own, but taken as a whole they are incredibly serious concerns. Are the jokes about Americans being forcibly tattooed with ID numbers really that far-fetched? Do you trust your government? Claire Bernish writes for theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. Claire Bernish joined Anti-Media as an independent journalist in May of 2015. Her topics of interest include social justice, police brutality, exposing the truth behind propaganda, and general government accountability. Born in North Carolina, she now lives in Ohio. Learn more about Bernish here! Just dont tell Obama about this. Lets kick this idea that government is in charge. So no, a mandatory DNA database is not coming. Or rather, we can say no at any time. You really think so? Have you ever applied for life insurance? I guarantee that blood sample you willingly gave ended up in a DNA data base. Why? Because life insurers need that info to determine mortality statistics so they can set their premiums. And because it isnt illegal for them to collect it and not even tell you. Probably its the same for ANY blood drawn even for routine lab testing. Why? Because they CAN. Because there is no law preventing collection of that info by the lab, and no practical regulation on to whom such data can be transmitted. And yes, the government is in charge of us. Now, whose in charge of the government? Well, thats another story. I read recently that at least one state (I cant remember which) has now approved DNA collection at traffic stops. Their logic is that since you are receiving a summons, you have broken a law and are therefore guilty so they can collect, store, and share your DNA info with everyone else. There is a much bigger picture. I sense some major problems, First I believe it to be an invasion of privacy, per the Fourth Amendment. If everyones DNA is collected, they can be searched any time there is a crime wherein DNA is an evidence factor. Second, in a crime situation, DNA can easily be planted by the unscrupulous, which could (and probably has) invalidate(d) investigations. Criminals, merely taking and planting of others body particles/fluids and secretions such as on a dirty handkerchief, used Kleenex, toothbrush, comb, toilet tissue, soiled underwear, hair samples, etc., could generate a whole new generation of criminal tools to distract investigators. And, I believe DNA should not be routinely collected for all who appear in just any suspected legal situation, but only those being charged with a felony, DUI, drug use, crimes of serious physical violence, or persons actively or verbally involved in the attempted overthrow of our Republic and freedom way of life. Surely the right of the people to be secure in their personsagainst unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated., as clearly stated in the opening statement of our Amendment IV, includes ones DNA. Ditto, for the taking of guns-dont even suggest taking the citizens guns without first successfully taking the guns of the criminals and curbing their rampant crimes-and then again, only if sufficient safeguards are installed and enforced to prevent tyrannywhich is the primary purpose of the 2nd Amendment. Anyone committing a crime will know to corrupt the DNA evidence. There will be a lot of innocent people behind bars. 