|
|
DNA samples should be on record for...
| 6562 votes / 20% |
| 9477 votes / 29% |
| 4937 votes / 15% |
| 1231 votes / 3% |
| 885 votes / 2% |
| 3093 votes / 9% |
| 3786 votes / 11% |
| 2218 votes / 6% |
[ Voting Booth | Other Polls | Back Home ]
- Don't complain about lack of options. You've got to pick a few when you do multiple choice. Those are the breaks.
- Feel free to suggest poll ideas if you're feeling creative. I'd strongly suggest reading the past polls first.
- This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Re:Everybody but me? DOH! (Score:4, Informative)
Note to self: Before running for office, change name to Aaron Aardvark.
Ballot option ordering (at least the ones I have seen) are randomized for that very reason :-)
Re:Not saying I don't care...but... (Score:5, Informative)
Except that the keepers of CODIS actively seek to prevent dissemination of the knowledge that there are far more "collisions" in certain searches than should be statistically possible. Combine the number of collisions with the prosecutions oft stated mantra that a DNA "match" means suspect X did the crime and you have the potential for abuse that is difficult to reconcile with the principle of "innocent until proven guilty".
DNA evidence is a very strong exclusionary tool, but I've never been convinced of the ability to prove guilt. There is no analysis of DNA in current DNA testing or the entries stored in CODIS; the entries are the compsci equivalent of MD5 hashes.
See:
FBI resists scrutiny of 'matches' [latimes.com]
From the last page of the above article:
In a database of fewer than 30,000 profiles, 32 pairs matched at nine or more loci. Three of those pairs were "perfect" matches, identical at 13 out of 13 loci.
Experts say they most likely are duplicates or belong to identical twins or brothers. It's also possible that one of the matches is between unrelated people -- defying odds as remote as 1 in 1 quadrillion.
Maryland officials never did the research to find out.
Re:Not saying I don't care...but... (Score:3, Informative)
It's bullet lead analysis all over again. The FBI wants something that sounds 'sciencey' that they can use to convict anyone they want. Bullet lead analysis was disproven, so now it's DNA, and everyone knows that DNA matches are infallible, right? Now to just rig the system to match any suspect that we want...