Blake Debate
BLAKE
CONTRACT NC
2010
I negate the resolution, Resolved: Compulsory inclusion of non-felons' DNA in any government database is
unjust.
***A2 Privacy Aff***
DNA, as it relates to a DNA database, is defined by Washington Post Staff writer Rick Weiss, in his article titled
Vast DNA Bank Pits Policing vs. Privacy” explains that—quote
Law enforcement officials say they have no interest in reading people's genetic secrets. The U.S. profiling system
focuses on just 13 small regions of the DNA molecule -- regions that do not code for any known biological or
behavioral traits but vary enough to give everyone who is not an identical twin a unique 52-digit number. "It's like a
Social Security number, but not assigned by the government," said Michael Smith, a University of Wisconsin law
professor who favors a national database of every American's genetic ID with certain
The value is justice since justice is the evaluative term of the resolution. Justice is defined as “giving each their
due” by Aristotle. While Justice is often misinterpreted as an unbreakable appeal to abstract fairness, the
inclusion of a governmental actor in the resolution clarifies this abstract principle to its more governmental
nature. Giving each their due is a question of obligations. In this case, there exist reciprocal obligations between
the government and the citizens that together compose a social contract that works to maximize the good for
the citizens.
Hence, the value-criterion is maintenance of the social contract. The precursor to a governmental institution is
the anarchic and exclusively self-interested state of nature. Humans participate in the cooperative endeavor of a
government to maximize the mutual self-interest of all participants. As citizens born into a country we tacitly
consent to the rules that govern its’ citizens conduct and are guaranteed certain privileges as a result. This is the
source of justice for a governmental institution since it explains what the citizens give up to be a member of
society, and what society will provide for them as recourse. Further, if an individual doesn’t agree with the rules
governing the social contract they are a participant of, then they can always opt out as long as they don’t
simultaneously expect the benefits of that contract.
Thus, I contend that it is just for non-felons DNA’ to be included in a governmental database to solve crime and
protect innocence.
Subpoint A is CRIME: As a citizen of a society we pay taxes and abide by laws in exchange for the state
protecting us from others who violate those laws. Hence, it would violate the social contract if people weren’t
protected from crime.
Compulsory inclusion of DNA in a database would minimize crime. A universal DNA database could solve almost
all crime within 25 years. John Cronan of the American Journal of Criminal Law writes:
John P. Cronan, “The Next Frontier of Law Enforcement: A Proposal for Complete DNA Databanks”, American Journal of Criminal
Law, Volume 28, 2000
Therefore, within twenty-five years, the databank would assist in the investigations of the majority of violent crimes. At that
point, investigators would be able to identify the primary suspect in crimes containing DNA evidence within
hours. Moreover, because DNA evidence is so persuasive, these suspects would likely plead guilty or would be
found guilty at trial. As a result, for crimes where DNA evidence is obtained, prosecutors would enjoy an
astounding rate of successful convictions
Cronan’s argument is empirically verified by Michael Smith in his article titled DNA Identification Databases and
the Case for Population-Wide Coverage writes that
-1-
Blake Debate
BLAKE
CONTRACT NC
2010
Compulsory inclusion of DNA in a database would minimize crime. Michael Smith statistically confirms this in his
article titled DNA Identification Databases and the Case for Population-Wide Coverage:
Kaye, DH and Michael Smith. "DNA Identification Databases: Legality, Legitimacy, and the Case for Population-Wide Coverage"
Wisconsin Law Review 413 (2003), lexis
Thus, substantial public safety benefits would likely flow from investment in a population-wide database. We
know that many offenders commit other crimes - sometimes many other crimes - before they are first
convicted. We also know that from 1993 through 1998, when Virginia's convicted-offender database had
less than 30,000 samples, it generated between 0 and 13 hits per year. In 2002, with nearly 190,000 samples,
it averaged over one hit every day. n135 In Great [*452] Britain, where the database reached 1.5 million
profiles in February 2002, British criminal investigators were averaging 1,600 hits per week. n136 Many more
would result from a truly comprehensive, national system combined with more thorough collection and prompt analysis
of crime-scene DNA. When one considers the personal and social costs of the crimes that might be prevented, the
balance might well favor the most inclusive database
If 1.5 million profiles yields 1600 potential convictions a week, imagine how many 307,006,500 (U.S. Census Bureau,
Population Division, July 2009) profiles could generate.
Further, this increased conviction rate would deter potential criminals from committing crimes.
Jennifer Graddy in her article titled The Ethical Protocol for Collecting DNA samples:
Graddy, Jennifer. “The ethical protocol for collecting DNA samples in the criminal justice system.” Journal of the Missouri Bar,
59:226, Sept/Oct 2003.
Prisonersʼ knowledge that their DNA samples are in a database, readily available to identify them, may deter
them from re-offending after their release. A strong argument can be made that a universal DNA database would
deter criminals, who are unlikely to commit crimes knowing that a simple search of a DNA database is nearly
100% accurate in conclusively identifying the offender.
In fact, this deterrent effect has been statistically compounded by the English defense administration. Thomas
MacLellaln writes that:
MacLellan, Thomas. "Improving Public Safety by Expanding the Use of Forensic DNA" NGA Center for Best Practices - Issue Brief
(Feb. 2007), http://www.nga.org/Files/pdf/0702FORENSICDNA.PDF
England, a leader in forensic DNA, relies heavily on DNA samples from non-violent crimes to populate its database. In fact, the goal
of their National DNA Database (NDNAD) is to include the “entire active criminal population.” As such, the authorizing legislation for
NDNAD allows law enforcement to obtain DNA from any individuals arrested or suspected of any recordable offense.16 Half of the
130,000 cases submitted to NDNAD by police in 2001–2002 were related to high-volume crime, whereas only 14 percent of samples
were related to violent crime. The benefits of such a complete database are evident. England has a 40 percent chance of
obtaining a match between a crime scene profile and a known offender or arrestee.
For every 10 crimes solved through DNA,
eight other crimes are solved. English criminologists project that for each sentence resulting from a DNAbased conviction, 7.8 other crimes are prevented.17
-2-
Blake Debate
BLAKE
CONTRACT NC
2010
Subpoint B is Innocence:
Citizens are guaranteed the right to an objective trial since otherwise they could be punished arbitrarily. Hence,
it would violate the social contract if innocent people were convicted. Compulsory inclusion of DNA in a database
protects innocence through exonerating suspects: John Cronan in the American Journal of Criminal Law writes:
Cronan, John. "The Next Frontier of Law Enforcement: A Proposal for Complete DNA Databases" American Journal of Criminal
Law 28 (2000), lexis.
Studies on the effects of current DNA use reveal that wrongful convictions have been averted. Since 1989, in approximately 25% of the sexual assault
cases referred to the FBI, the primary suspect has been excluded by forensic DNA testing. n233 Peter Neufeld and Barry C. Scheck estimate that
"hundreds of people who have been exonerated by FBI DNA testing in sexual assault cases over the last seven years would have otherwise been
convicted." n234 Complete DNA databanks would go a step further and reduce the number of individuals wrongfully
accused of crimes. Although DNA testing has exonerated many individuals wrongfully accused during the initial testing of physical evidence,
innocent individuals were still arrested and detained for crimes they did not commit. A system of
complete DNA databanks would prevent such miscarriages of justice. When crime scene evidence is
entered into the proposed databanks, matches would immediately tell investigators who was present at the
crime scene [and]. Therefore, the risk of wrongful arrests will decline.
n235 these
Further, DNA databases prevent systemic violations of innocence through improper police procedures. John
Cronan In the Next Frontier of Law Enforcement explains that:
John P. Cronan, “The Next Frontier of Law Enforcement: A Proposal for Complete DNA Databanks”, American Journal of Criminal
Law, Volume 28, 2000.
Another benefit of increased reliance on DNA technology is subtler. By examining DNA evidence in conjunction with other areas
of criminal investigations, DNA can provide insight into systemic flaws in the criminal justice system by creating the
opportunity for groundbreaking research in the field of wrongful convictions. Neufeld and Scheck have argued that
DNA presents perhaps the richest opportunity for criminal justice researchers to shed light on how law
enforcement methods impact the problem of factual innocence. Among cases involving DNA evidence, one can confirm with great
scientific assurance which suspects charged were innocent and which were guilty. As a result, we may be able to pinpoint the specific flawed
areas of investigations, such as eyewitness identification procedures, false confessions, police interrogation
techniques, police perjury, and prosecutorial misconduct.
-3-