Pennsylvania Bill To Expand DNA Collection Of Citizens


 

Currently in Pennsylvania DNA samples are only taken from people who are guilty of extremely heinous crimes, such as rape or homicide. But, under this new bill people convicted of many lesser crimes, such as recording in a movie theater, will also have their DNA sampled.

The Pennsylvania chapter of the ACLU oppose the bill, saying that it is only an example of big government getting even bigger. According to them, everyone should feel safe in their own body, even if they are arrested. But, civil liberties aren’t the only concern of the bill. According to watchdog.org:

 

The ACLU believes the legislation, if enacted, would quadruple the workload for the state police DNA lab.

 

“The state police don’t have the resources to process quickly the DNA samples they get now. Flooding that system with DNA samples that we have no reason to expect will ever help us solve a crime is just short-sighted,” Roper said.

 

Pennsylvania started collecting DNA samples for select felonies in 1996 and has one DNA lab. The database houses about 330,000 samples. About 5,000 — or 1.5 percent —  of the samples have been used to identify a suspect and solve a crime, said Maria Finn, press secretary for Pennsylvania State Police.

 

Expanding the DNA collection law would “increase workload greatly” for a lab that’s already limited in capacity, Finn said. State police would need more workers and a larger facility, she said.

 

To ease the transition, Pileggi noted that new collection provisions would be phased in over time, starting with criminal homicide, then felony sex offenses and then other crimes.

 

According to a fiscal analysis of the bill, state police expect 500 additional DNA samples would be collected in the first year after the legislation is enacted, and the cost could be absorbed with current financial resources.

 

But the second phase of the legislation would result in collecting and processing  5,000 more DNA samples, costing $586,500 for personnel, supplies and equipment, according to the analysis.

 

That analysis was silent on the cost of third phase of implementation but noted federal grants could cover the expenses.

 

Finn says Gov. Tom Wolf’s administration is opposed to the legislation, which has passed the Senate in various forms three times but has stalled in the House.

What do you think? Is this new bill an example of statist overreach or is it a necessary step to ensure the safety of Pennsylvania’s citizens?

Source: Watchdog



Share

3 Comments

Leave a Reply

Pin It on Pinterest