After reading some of the comments here, I think it should be made clear that the DNA database ALREADY exists, right now there are rules on its use, I think its state only, and you have to have a 100% match (or the theoretical "perfect" DNA match) Effectively what they want to do now is open the search criteria up, search the entire country and for 98% matches, its not directly looking for cousins or brothers, they just want to find leads to criminals. Its seems to me like the media spin would rather use the word relative vs. 98% match, which is most likely a relative but.. the idea is less loaded. (this kinda reminds me with what I have to do with google, I'm a developer and 99.9% of my searches are python,php,bash,perl,linux etc.. well .. I wanted tips on rolling hash and .. all I got were MD5 algorithms, log out and search again opens your criteria up.)

They shouldn't have to use active "jamming" jamming creates a large amount of EM noise. They'd more likely use a Faraday cage - there is paint that does this, now if you are VERY close to the prison, as in right next to it, and the cell tower is on the other side, then there is a chance you'll get no service, most likely slightly diminished service. But prisons keep their distance from the populace. And you'd really have to be standing next to the wall to have issues with it. Find out what they intend to use to block cell phones, and then cry out if they are over spending with active jammers. It's quite likely that some bureaucrat saw a jammer in a magazine and though oh-my-god-this-will-keep-my-voters and just went with it, finding someone to install it, a person to support it and never really researching the possibilities. Even Active can be localize to prevent bleed over, directional antennas, with low output jamming, and use multiple units, and it would likely not be a nuisance to the public.