4 ms·

Is dna testing instant?

sokoloff 3y ago
Does it need to be in this case? Does the (real or perceived) need for immediacy justify the incredible level of invasiveness of this mass surveillance?
- averageRoyalty 3y ago
  With multiple grounded aircraft at one of the busiest international airports in the world? Immediacy is definitely warrented. I'm unsure if the invasiveness is, but obviously a 24 hour+ process isn't viable.
- Dalewyn 3y ago
  If it turns out one of the women is the mother, it would not be trivial to arrest and bring her to trial across international borders. This is also assuming the mother doesn't further vanish into thin air, so to speak. So while I find the methods questionable, I also accept there is merit in pursuing methods that can give reasonable evidence towards an arrest now before the mother can high tail it.
- irjustin 3y ago
  > Does the (real or perceived) need for immediacy justify the incredible level of invasiveness of this mass surveillance? "mass surveillance" this is not; invasive - absolutely. What you're proposing, if I was a woman (I am not) to be searched is instead i have to give up my DNA to have them store on record in case I was the person who abandoned the newborn. That's much closer to "mass surveillance" than a body search. If given the choice, I would give the body search 100%.
  - sokoloff 3y ago
    > "mass surveillance" this is not How so? I'm imagining they're intending to detain and investigate indiscriminately every woman of child-bearing age in the airport and on flights that recently boarded. That seems to meet the definition to me.
    - irjustin 3y ago
      Because it has a clear target and a very defined line. They can't keep doing it, that's the biggest part it stops. Mass surveillance has a definition[0]. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_surveillance#:~:text=Mass%20surveillance%20is%20the%20intricate,monitor%20that%20group%20of%20citizens https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_surveillance#:~:text=Ma....
anonym29 3y ago
If I had to hazard a guess on the time requirements for DNA testing, I'd probably put it somewhere between "instantly" and "before the statute of limitations for 'DIY airport abortion' expires"
- gruez 3y ago
  And what do you do in the meantime? All those people have a flight to catch. Do you detain them? That seems like it'd spark the same amount of flak. Do you let them go? To people who think that abortions should be legal that's probably acceptable, but what about to people who think abortions are murder? If there was a murderer loose would you let the suspects fly out?
  - sokoloff 3y ago
    > Do you let them go? Yes! > If there was a murderer loose would you let the suspects fly out? Absent any probable cause (or even articulable specific suspicion) against a particular individual? Yes! If someone is murdered by a woman in my city, we don’t detain all women. I get that Qatar doesn’t have the US Fourth Amendment (and perhaps no enumeration of rights of the people), but this behavior would be considered absurd (ly unconstitutional) here.
    - fastball 3y ago
      They didn't detain all women, they detained a dozen or two? And they found the mother so seems like it worked.

Does it need to be in this case? Does the (real or perceived) need for immediacy justify the incredible level of invasiveness of this mass surveillance?

averageRoyalty 3y ago
With multiple grounded aircraft at one of the busiest international airports in the world? Immediacy is definitely warrented. I'm unsure if the invasiveness is, but obviously a 24 hour+ process isn't viable.
Dalewyn 3y ago
If it turns out one of the women is the mother, it would not be trivial to arrest and bring her to trial across international borders. This is also assuming the mother doesn't further vanish into thin air, so to speak. So while I find the methods questionable, I also accept there is merit in pursuing methods that can give reasonable evidence towards an arrest now before the mother can high tail it.
irjustin 3y ago
> Does the (real or perceived) need for immediacy justify the incredible level of invasiveness of this mass surveillance? "mass surveillance" this is not; invasive - absolutely. What you're proposing, if I was a woman (I am not) to be searched is instead i have to give up my DNA to have them store on record in case I was the person who abandoned the newborn. That's much closer to "mass surveillance" than a body search. If given the choice, I would give the body search 100%.
- sokoloff 3y ago
  > "mass surveillance" this is not How so? I'm imagining they're intending to detain and investigate indiscriminately every woman of child-bearing age in the airport and on flights that recently boarded. That seems to meet the definition to me.
  - irjustin 3y ago
    Because it has a clear target and a very defined line. They can't keep doing it, that's the biggest part it stops. Mass surveillance has a definition[0]. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_surveillance#:~:text=Mass%20surveillance%20is%20the%20intricate,monitor%20that%20group%20of%20citizens https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_surveillance#:~:text=Ma....

anonym29 3y ago

If I had to hazard a guess on the time requirements for DNA testing, I'd probably put it somewhere between "instantly" and "before the statute of limitations for 'DIY airport abortion' expires"

gruez 3y ago
And what do you do in the meantime? All those people have a flight to catch. Do you detain them? That seems like it'd spark the same amount of flak. Do you let them go? To people who think that abortions should be legal that's probably acceptable, but what about to people who think abortions are murder? If there was a murderer loose would you let the suspects fly out?
- sokoloff 3y ago
  > Do you let them go? Yes! > If there was a murderer loose would you let the suspects fly out? Absent any probable cause (or even articulable specific suspicion) against a particular individual? Yes! If someone is murdered by a woman in my city, we don’t detain all women. I get that Qatar doesn’t have the US Fourth Amendment (and perhaps no enumeration of rights of the people), but this behavior would be considered absurd (ly unconstitutional) here.
  - fastball 3y ago
    They didn't detain all women, they detained a dozen or two? And they found the mother so seems like it worked.