I don't think it's an "appeal or ignorance" at all. Furthermore, the story has an example of DNA from a rapekit being used to solve a years-old burglary. That d

I don't think it's an "appeal or ignorance" at all. Furthermore, the story has an example of DNA from a rapekit being used to solve a years-old burglary. That doesn't strike as a good trade-off to me. The parents may no longer be criminals; they may have done a few stupid things when they were 18 or whatnot. Not excusing it, but also don't need to go above and beyond any lengths to solve these comparatively minor crimes: literally no one is served by that: not the victims of the crime, not society, and certainly not their children. In more serious crimes, it may be worth the trade-off – that I why I used the qualifier "except for some of the most serious crimes". > make this sort of screening mandatory, much like how its a good idea to mandate vaccinations even if it steps on the toes of the poorly informed in the process. It's not realistic this will be enacted any time soon, if ever, and any proposal needs to take this political reality in to account.