SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
DNA Databases in the U.S. and China Are Tools of Racial Oppression
Two major world powers, the United States and China, have both collected an enormous number of DNA samples from their citizens, the premise being that these samples will help solve crimes that might have otherwise gone unsolved. While DNA evidence can often be crucial when it comes to determining who committed a crime, researchers argue these DNA databases also pose a major threat to human rights.
In the U.S., the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has a DNA database called the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) that currently contains over 14 million DNA profiles. This database has a disproportionately high number of profiles of black men, because black Americans are arrested five times as much as white Americans. You don't even have to be convicted of a crime for law enforcement to take and store your DNA; you simply have to have been arrested as a suspect.
[...] As for China, a report that was published by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute in mid-June claims that China is operating the "world's largest police-run DNA database" as part of its powerful surveillance state. Chinese authorities have collected DNA samples from possibly as many as 70 million men since 2017, and the total database is believed to contain as many as 140 million profiles. The country hopes to collect DNA from all of its male citizens, as it argues men are most likely to commit crimes.
DNA is reportedly often collected during what are represented as free physicals, and it's also being collected from children at schools. There are reports of Chinese citizens being threatened with punishment by government officials if they refuse to give a DNA sample. Much of the DNA that's been collected has been from Uighur Muslims that have been oppressed by the Chinese government and infamously forced into concentration camps in the Xinjiang province.
Related:
EFF to Supreme Court: The Fourth Amendment Covers DNA Collection
EFF Sues Justice Dept. Over FBI's Rapid DNA Plans
Kuwait Creating Mandatory DNA Database of All Citizens, Residents--and Visitors
San Diego Police Department Accused of Unlawful DNA Collection From Minors
Massive DNA Collection Campaign in Xinjiang, China
Study Predicts Appearance From Genome Sequence Data
GEDmatch: "What If It Was Called Police Genealogy?"
Bavarian Law Broadens Police Surveillance and DNA Profiling Powers
DNA Collected from Golden State Killer Suspect's Car, Leading to Arrest
Another Alleged Murderer Shaken Out of the Family Tree
Indiana Murder Suspect Found by Using Genealogical Website
Public Ancestry Data Can be Used to Narrow Down the Identity Behind an Anonymous DNA Sample
Rapid DNA Analysis Machines Coming to Police Departments
FamilyTreeDNA Deputizes Itself, Starts Pitching DNA Matching Services To Law Enforcement
Genealogy Sites Have Helped Identify Suspects. Now They've Helped Convict One
U.S. to Collect DNA of All Undocumented Migrants
US Court Let Police Search GEDmatch's Entire DNA Database Despite Protections
China Uses DNA to Map Faces, With Help From the West
Cousin Took a DNA Test? Courts Could Use it to Argue You are More Likely to Commit Crimes
Ancestry Says Police Requested Access To Its DNA Database
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2020, @05:21AM
This is nuanced, more so than either side acknowledges. The Confederacy existed for the purpose of supporting and perpetuating slavery, the right of a white person to own black people as property. This is not defensible.
George Washington and Thomas Jefferson owned slaves. Jefferson publicly criticized slavery as being terribly wrong, yet he lacked the conviction to even refuse to personally partake in the evil. This is also not defensible.
For a particular monument, we need to consider its purpose. This is where it gets complicated. We don't memorialize Washington or Jefferson because of their support for slavery. We memorialize them in spite of their support for slavery. Jefferson's ownership of slaves is a "hideous blot" on his character. The same can be said of Washington. We should acknowledge that Washington and Jefferson willingly participated in morally evil acts, that they are deeply flawed. But we should recognize their contributions, too, in rebelling against British rule and establishing the governing framework of the United States.
Many monuments of people like Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis do not exist to acknowledge positive contributions from these people in spite of their role in the Confederacy. Neither do they stand to be grim reminders of a past we should never repeat, which is why some concentration camps like Dachau are preserved in Germany. Instead, many of these monuments were erected to portray the Confederacy positively, to encourage people to sympathize their their cause, which was the enslavement of black people by white people. Monuments supporting the Confederacy do not belong on public property. This is wrong.
Nancy Pelosi ordered the removal of four portraits of former Speakers of the House from the Capital because they served in the Confederacy. This is also wrong. Those portraits are not displayed to support the Confederacy. Removing those portraits really is whitewashing history. We should conspicuously acknowledge that these four men served in the Confederacy, which was wrong. But we should not remove their portraits from being displayed along with those of all the Speakers of the House. Doing so is to deny history, which is a mistake.
History is messy. People are messy. We need to be thoughtful in our decisions to remove or not remove monuments.