4 ms·

> If she did why do we have a problem with the way we got to the truth? Do you think in the future people will decline rape exams knowing their info will be pu

by pfranz 5y ago

> If she did why do we have a problem with the way we got to the truth? Do you think in the future people will decline rape exams knowing their info will be put into a database that could be used against them indefinitely?

RickJWagner 5y ago
I'd say only someone who has done something so horrible that they fear getting caught worse than they want their rapists caught. It's a trap of their own doing.
- krageon 5y ago
  You never know what will be illegal later. Especially when you are in a vulnerable class (i.e. already a target), you can be fairly certain you will be found already "guilty" of something once someone powerful enough starts to dislike you. As such, providing such things and cooperating with the police is essentially assisting your own oppression. It's a stupid idea, regardless of your own conscience.
- kuschkufan 5y ago
  You did not answer the questions though. Answer whether you think if people will decline a rape kit exam, knowing the DNA from that could be used against them in the future. I.e. crimes or whatever circumstances that have not happened yet.
  - RickJWagner 5y ago
    Sorry, you're right. I'll now reply directly. I think it depends. If the person in question knows they are guilty of some crime that carries a heavy penalty, then they may decline the rape kit. If the person in question does not know they are guilty of some crime that carries a heavy penalty, then they likely will not decline a rape kit. I think people who commit crimes cause damage to society, so I tend to have little sympathy for schemes to let them escape justice, FWIW.
- pfranz 5y ago
  That sounds a lot like, "If you don't have anything to hide, why do you need privacy?" I'm not trying to put words in your mouth (feel free to clarify if you feel its needed), but I feel like I hear the kind of thing you're saying fairly often. "Never talk to the cops." Isn't just for people who are guilty. Same with talking to a lawyer. I would hesitate to hand over my personal information, moreso if I don't have faith in the institution it goes to. I hear so many stories about rape kits never getting processed and how difficult it is to convict on rape because it's mostly he-said she-said. I also think putting someone in the position of getting caught so they can maybe catch their rapist isn't a great way to reduce overall crime. There are a bunch of examples where this plays out poorly and nobody has a fear of getting caught. Black people had higher vaccine hesitancy because of historical distrust[1]. The CIA used a Hepatitis B vaccination program as cover to collect DNA to find Bin Laden[2]. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-13/understanding-vaccine-hestiancy-among-black-americans https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-13/understan... [2] https://news.yahoo.com/cia-bin-laden-vaccine-ruse-010004824.html https://news.yahoo.com/cia-bin-laden-vaccine-ruse-010004824....
  - polski-g 5y ago
    In this case, the person DID have something to hide: The property crime she committed.
    - pfranz 5y ago
      I guess if you include future crimes? The article says the DNA was collected years ago and the crime was recent.
fargle 5y ago
Do you think that people that have given their DNA for a rape-kit or some other reason would think twice about later committing a property crime, knowing that info was put into a database that could be used against them indefinitely? The point is that a) when you voluntarily give information, you've given it - and can have no reasonable expectation that the cat can be put back into the bag. and b) it's wrong to worry about a guilty person being caught because the truth was just too darn easy to find. Justice is a search for truth. Liberty is in a way the choice of what to share, but it doesn't matter why you shared - you did, it's out.

by pfranz 5y ago

RickJWagner 5y ago

I'd say only someone who has done something so horrible that they fear getting caught worse than they want their rapists caught. It's a trap of their own doing.

krageon 5y ago
You never know what will be illegal later. Especially when you are in a vulnerable class (i.e. already a target), you can be fairly certain you will be found already "guilty" of something once someone powerful enough starts to dislike you. As such, providing such things and cooperating with the police is essentially assisting your own oppression. It's a stupid idea, regardless of your own conscience.
kuschkufan 5y ago
You did not answer the questions though. Answer whether you think if people will decline a rape kit exam, knowing the DNA from that could be used against them in the future. I.e. crimes or whatever circumstances that have not happened yet.
- RickJWagner 5y ago
  Sorry, you're right. I'll now reply directly. I think it depends. If the person in question knows they are guilty of some crime that carries a heavy penalty, then they may decline the rape kit. If the person in question does not know they are guilty of some crime that carries a heavy penalty, then they likely will not decline a rape kit. I think people who commit crimes cause damage to society, so I tend to have little sympathy for schemes to let them escape justice, FWIW.
pfranz 5y ago
That sounds a lot like, "If you don't have anything to hide, why do you need privacy?" I'm not trying to put words in your mouth (feel free to clarify if you feel its needed), but I feel like I hear the kind of thing you're saying fairly often. "Never talk to the cops." Isn't just for people who are guilty. Same with talking to a lawyer. I would hesitate to hand over my personal information, moreso if I don't have faith in the institution it goes to. I hear so many stories about rape kits never getting processed and how difficult it is to convict on rape because it's mostly he-said she-said. I also think putting someone in the position of getting caught so they can maybe catch their rapist isn't a great way to reduce overall crime. There are a bunch of examples where this plays out poorly and nobody has a fear of getting caught. Black people had higher vaccine hesitancy because of historical distrust[1]. The CIA used a Hepatitis B vaccination program as cover to collect DNA to find Bin Laden[2]. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-13/understanding-vaccine-hestiancy-among-black-americans https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-13/understan... [2] https://news.yahoo.com/cia-bin-laden-vaccine-ruse-010004824.html https://news.yahoo.com/cia-bin-laden-vaccine-ruse-010004824....
- polski-g 5y ago
  In this case, the person DID have something to hide: The property crime she committed.
  - pfranz 5y ago
    I guess if you include future crimes? The article says the DNA was collected years ago and the crime was recent.

fargle 5y ago

Do you think that people that have given their DNA for a rape-kit or some other reason would think twice about later committing a property crime, knowing that info was put into a database that could be used against them indefinitely? The point is that a) when you voluntarily give information, you've given it - and can have no reasonable expectation that the cat can be put back into the bag. and b) it's wrong to worry about a guilty person being caught because the truth was just too darn easy to find. Justice is a search for truth. Liberty is in a way the choice of what to share, but it doesn't matter why you shared - you did, it's out.