# FILE NAME: 00001791.soc
# TITLE: Is it acceptable to use a person’s DNA to identify them as a criminal? [98825fa0f46599afb1af24cdd3cd9d2a]
# DESCRIPTION: 
# DATA TYPE: soc
# MODIFICATION TYPE: original
# RELATES TO: 
# RELATED FILES: 
# PUBLICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# MODIFICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# NUMBER ALTERNATIVES: 4
# NUMBER VOTERS: 5
# NUMBER UNIQUE ORDERS: 4
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 1: Statement 1 - 
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 2: Statement 2 - We have come to the consensus that it is acceptable to use a person's DNA to identify them as a criminal. However, this is only acceptable if it is used to confirm a person's identity from material found at a crime scene. It is not acceptable to use DNA to identify a person as a criminal if they have not committed a crime. We believe that it is important to maintain the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven, and that DNA should not be used to identify a person as a criminal before they have committed a crime.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 3: Statement 3 - It is acceptable to use a person’s DNA to identify them as a criminal as long as it is collected in an ethical, consensual and legal way.  DNA evidence can be a powerful tool in solving crimes and bringing perpetrators to justice, especially in cases where other evidence may be lacking or inconclusive.  However, it is crucial to ensure that DNA collection and analysis are carried out with respect for individual privacy and liberties.  To maintain the acceptability of using DNA for criminal identification, safeguards must be in place to prevent misuse or abuse of this sensitive information.  Clear regulations should be given when and how DNA can be collected, stored and accessed by law enforcement, and there should be transparent oversight to protect against potential biases, or discriminatory practices.  Additionally, it is essential to preserve the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven, ensuring that DNA evidence is not used to unfairly target or convict an individual.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 4: Statement 4 - It is acceptable to use a person's DNA to identify them as a criminal if done so in a ethical and consensual way. It is only acceptable to use DNA as evidence of a crime in the case that there is a physical connection between a suspect and a crime scene. For example, hair found on a crime scene which can be traced to the suspect. It is not acceptable to use DNA evidence as the sole evidence to convict a suspect, there must be supporting evidence to be found guilty of a crime. It is also not acceptable to use DNA to identify a suspect before the crime has been committed. If this is done, then society is walking into a dystopia where citizens are guilty of a crime before having actually committed said crime. It is vital that the use of DNA evidence is used with respect for individual privacy and liberties.
2: 3,2,4,1
1: 2,4,3,1
1: 2,3,4,1
1: 3,4,2,1