Michael Ramirez by Michael Ramirez

Michael Ramirez

Comments (19) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. furnituremaker

    furnituremaker said, about 1 year ago

    As long as you don’t do anything against the law, what’s the problem with a swab?

  2. edclectic

    edclectic said, about 1 year ago

    I’ll be happy to offer a stool sample.

  3. wmconelly

    wmconelly said, about 1 year ago

    And this is different than taking fingerprints, photos and airport body scans exactly HOW?

  4. jack75287

    jack75287 said, about 1 year ago

    Sorry I don’t see how this is a privacy issue as long as the person is taken at a real crime scene. I am not talking about when a search warrant is normal, I am talking about a shoots fired and a real threat is occurring.

    If you are called to a home where shooting occurs cops don’t need a search warrant then, they need probable cause. Then they look at the area and if no one is hurt but bullet holes are in the wall they are going to make a search anyway. If there is a dead body they sure going to take that guy’s DNA.

  5. Rad-ish

    Rad-ish GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    @wmconelly

    A DNA sample is much more revealing than a fingerprint.

  6. Rad-ish

    Rad-ish GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    Thanks to the Republican stacked Supreme Court.

  7. D PB

    D PB said, about 1 year ago

    It is really quite enlightening, those of you that see no problem with this are surprisingly ignorant. If you see no issue with this, why shouldn’t the government just collect DNA from every new born from now on, that will significantly cut down on future investigative time? Want to get your drivers license renewed, we’ll take a cheek swab with that.

    The issue is the presumption of guilt on arrest, there are two many instances of ineptitude, laziness, and a rush to judgement, with the person that had been arrested ultimately innocent of any wrongdoing. As well as the continued collapse of the 5th amendment to the Constitution.

    You should take some time and do a little light reading, I would suggest Go Directly to Jail: The Criminalizatio​n of Almost Everythingby Gene Healy and Three Felonies A Day: How the Feds Target the Innocentby Harvey A. Silverglate.

  8. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    DUII suspects can be subject to breathalizer, or blood samples based on PC without warrant (different strokes for different states on standard practices). A cheek swab IS far less invasive than a blood sample, and about the same as breathlizer. Fingerprints are of course long standard “evidence” and database information taken upon arrest, NOTE, NOT conviction!


    “Privacy” invasion by corporate entities, like tracking your computer habits, credit card purchases, and other “personal information” is a lot more pervasive than government is allowed to do. For example, government can only keep gun purchase background check data for 24 hours, while gun manufacturers keep the permanent records on who has what. Think about it, “righties”.

  9. dzw3030

    dzw3030 said, about 1 year ago

    @wmconelly

    Insurance Companies can use the data to examine your possible, future, health liabilities and adjust your rates. If you think they won’t claim a “possibility” isn’t a pre-existing condition, you’ve let your blanket slip off your head. Employers could use the data as well to screen applicants. Government is incapable of keeping data private.

  10. d_legendary1 Demands Dr.C and Martens Release

    d_legendary1 Demands Dr.C and Martens Release said, about 1 year ago

    The biggest thing about his case is that I am actually agreeing with Scalia (of all people) over this case (he dessented for those who don’t know). He said, “The point of DNA testing as it is actually practiced is to solve cold cases, not to identify the suspect in custody.” That means that if you were a protester (Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street alike) arrested for disorderly conduct, you’d be getting you DNA taken at the police station.

  11. I Play One On TV

    I Play One On TV said, about 1 year ago

    @wmconelly

    “And this is different than taking fingerprints, photos and airport body scans exactly HOW?”

    Please see my response to Mr. Gorrell’s cartoon today. Thank you.

  12. MaximilianG

    MaximilianG GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    …I am also OK with a stool sample ….nothing to fear , but fear itself ….

  13. disgustedtaxpayer

    disgustedtaxpayer said, about 1 year ago

    furnituremaker said, about 6 hours ago

    “As long as you don’t do anything against the law, what’s the problem with a swab?”
    -
    Is it not possible that a lab dna swab could be used to frame an innocent person?
    -
    But How can the USA Supreme Court rule such a thing?
    Our rights protect us from conviction of crime without due process of trial and our defense and a public court jury deciding guilt or innocence. There are thousands of false arrests, and legitimate arrests of innocent people that are proved not guilty…..the constitution says no one can be forced to testify against oneself, and DNA is an evidence testimony.
    -
    We are speedily losing our most sacred personal rights under this dictatorial regime, IMO, aided and abetted by some strange USSC rulings, such as Obamacare is a “tax”….
    -
    IRS is building data banks of American’s phone calls, soon they’ll have every medical record of every citizen on file, and when they have our DNA it will be worse than Nazi Germany or the USSR at their worst.

  14. emptc12

    emptc12 said, about 1 year ago

    With new technology related to gene therapy, society might not become as bad as that portrayed in the 1997 movie, “Gattaca,” which is the worst case scenario.
    .
    But so much can be told from your personal genome that your destiny could be out of your control if the government decides some of your genetic inheritance is undesirable.
    .
    Personally, I think such things will eventually be routine and for the good, but not for a few generations.

  15. Molon Labe

    Molon Labe said, about 1 year ago

    @Rad-ish

    Radish, once again you side with the criminal and immoral against law and morality. Have you ever considered the possibility that doing so will adversely affect your afterlife?

    Seems like you make a perfect reverse morality barometer.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (4).