546
Thomas Matthew Crooks: The registered Republican and gun lover who shot Trump
(www.telegraph.co.uk)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2024
546 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19135 readers
1992 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
How did they identify him using DNA? That's a fucking red flag. Is there some database I'm not aware of? Or did he have prior arrests?
There are genealogy databases that are public and or cooperate with authorities. Perhaps I’m a privacy nihilist, but IMHO, the cat’s kind of out of the bag for a lot of this. If you didn’t submit your DNA to a genealogy DB, you probably have family members that did so could see if they were 30% Italian or something.
That's how they caught the golden state killer. I think it was his niece submitted a DNA sample and it popped up as related to the unknown sample they had.
I once read an expert on this and it seems they only need a very low amount of DNA samples (like 0.1% of the population) in the database to be able to narrow down any search to the sibling level.
And traditional detective work can then figure out which sibling, if there are multiple.
So yeah, the cat is out of the bag with this one.
Exactly, your DNA doesn’t need to be in the DB at all, you just your relatives DNA in the DB.
It was the only reliable way to find who the biological parents of my father were, so yeah.
It was the only way I could find out if my biological father was 30% Italian so I’m with you
Yes all these rocks and minerals need to be watched closely
Lol
I think you mean genealogy maybe?
Yeah. Autocorrect
I figured I was goofing on ya
he didn't have a criminal record according to the article, but if DNA records existed for his parents, you could still identify someone as offspring with pretty high confidence based on that IIRC
Some organizations do mass DNA collection from kids to help identify them later in life.
The school sends out a notification that the parents can sign up to have their kid swabbed so their kid's tiny corpse can be identified. They don't word it like that, but that is the idea.
So he may have been swabbed as a kid and they referenced that.
These days, you can opt in having your child’s dna stored after birth, in case they go missing or a natural disaster or something. We did it, but we opted to keep it physically in our own possession. It’s a little vial.
Why is it a red flag
Because it’s potentially indicative of a national database of everyone’s DNA, rather than just the criminal database, which would be (and perhaps is) a privacy nightmare
some large commercial dna testing companies share their databases with law enforcement, and additionally you really don't need a close match to start identifying someone, 5th cousin type thing etc. heres an good video on the issue.
It's not. Law enforcement can get a warrant on 23 & Me. Everyone turning over the DNA to random companies not required to comply with HIPAA is a terrible idea.
Some states have been collecting blood for almost 40 years and can't even really say why. They just started doing it...
https://www.ibj.com/articles/58596-storing-babies-blood-samples-pits-privacy-versus-science
Like, they have an excuse for taking the samples that seems valid. Except I don't think they're actually testing them. And there's no reason to keep after testing.
Now, I dont think it's for a secret DNA database, I think it's normal red state bullshit.
Just pointing out in some states the take and keep blood samples from every birth
Privacy minded people don’t like the idea of easily accessible geology databases. This was a good use of that technology, but people worry about that technology be used for evil. Health insurance companies reflagging you, or much worse.
Did you mean *biology?
Perhaps genealogy?
Could be geometry?
No no clearly they meant genieology
Blood has iron in it. Iron comes from rocks. Boom - geology.
Human flesh is weak. Stone is strong.
FROM THE MOMENT I UNDERSTOOD THE WEAKNESS OF MY FLESH...
California has been collecting dna from babies since the 80s apparantly
https://web.archive.org/web/20240502111339/https://www.cbsnews.com/sacramento/tag/newborn-blood-spot-privacy-concerns/
https://web.archive.org/web/20240712022257/https://www.cbsnews.com/sacramento/news/baby-dna-parental-consent-genetic-records-california-law-newborns/
I wonder how many people there are aware
I didn't realize how sketchy that all was. The form mentions genetic testing for conditions, but that was just like 2 of the spots. They did like 6 to a tiny newborn. I'd recommend other parents to object.
And I'm going to submit the destruction forms for my kids and myself.