Amazon.com Widgets

DNA profiling: Will using a person's DNA help convict more criminals?

Asked by: DShipp527
  • I believe that DNA profiling will convict more criminals.

    My opinion about DNA profiling is that it’s kind of a bad thing. I say this because some of the bad things about DNA profiling is that people can take advantage of your DNA, for example people can know your private information and many other things that can affect you “DNA databases stored on computer are vulnerable to exploitation via hackers”. If a person has your DNA they can detect your identity (know who you are) “ DNA profiling is a way of establishing identity” they could also mess around with it ,that’s why many people think it is not right to take DNA samples unless they agree with it

    People think that DNA profiling is a good use in solving crimes to know who did it for example they can use DNA fingerprints that would be left wherever a person goes “ DNA profiling can find the gene responsible for a hereditary disease, reveal family relationships, or link a suspect to the scene of a crime”, but i think there is other ways to solving the crimes. With DNA profiling there are risks of people messing around with your identity, people knowing who you are, seeing your personal stuff and that could all lead to bad things.

  • I believe that DNA profiling will convict more criminals.

    I think that it will convict criminals because it can’t always get the right person. When you have a lot of DNA profiles the more likely there can be problems. “The more DNA profiles that are compared the more likely errors are to occur.” There are also results that are due to poor building equipped for scientific experiments and research.” Can also result due to poor laboratory procedures. They would also take peoples DNA and they were not even at the crime when it happened.” policy maker are increasingly coming to grips with legal issues related to taking DNA samples from people who have not been convicted of a crime.”

    One case is that people who are not convicted but arrested they are having big debates about it .There are also only 20 states that have let the law pass for DNA collection upon arrest. “Attend that is causing significant debate is gathering DNA samples from people who are arrested but not convicted. About 20 states and the federal government have passed legislation that requires DNA collection upon arrest. If someone who has never been convicted and there DNA is at the crime scene and another person that has been arrested before the person that has never been convicted is more likely the innocent person in this case. “It undermines the presumption of innocence by treating people who have merely been arrested as somehow less innocent than others who have not been convicted of any offence.”

  • I believe that DNA profiling will convict more criminals.

    I believe DNA profiling will convict more criminals. Health insurers could use DNA to deny coverage or claims from citizens.Health insurers use DNA to make citizens pay what the real amount is, and they won’t claim any damage. There can be an error made and the court can be convinced and will let them go. If someone was asked for their DNA they wouldn’t have any privacy considering their looking at their profile. These issues have been a problem to citizens. While the appropriate use of DNA can be helpful in reducing and reversing wrongful convictions, if its not used appropriate, over other evidence on juries and judges can create a system of wrongful convictions.

    A tiny bit of evidence reveals a good amount of DNA for analysis. The
    patterns obtained can be compared with the patterns of DNA in blood or tissue
    samples obtained from suspects. No two individuals have the same DNA pattern everyone has their own unique pattern. The “DNA fingerprint” has link to telling the difference between a suspect and the crime scene.

    For Darryl Hunt in Winston, Salem, was saved with DNA from more time in prison who was convicted for rape and murder. Seyed E. Hasnain from the University of Hyderabad warns the public and other agencies that DNA fingerprinting should only be used for a criminal investigation. Seyed E. Hasnain warns us to think of the damage that could be done if DNA is used to predict if a person is vulnerable to a crime or also illnesses such as cancer or HIV. DNA testing is very accurate identifying characteristics of each person.

  • I agree strongly right

    I think that DNA profiling is a good thing because you can get results from anywhere like the ear, Or semen, Or the heel of your foot also DNA can last a long time so even if the DNA sample is 6 years old then it should be easy to identify an police can identify the criminals quicker ini

  • DNA profiling is very important in criminal investigation

    If a person has committed a crime the investigators can take his/her DNA and make a database of the person and if it is that the same person that had committed the first crime commit a second one that person DNA can be tested and the person can be find guilty of the crime.

  • I think that using DNA to catch a criminal is a great idea

    Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
    yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
    yes yes

  • I believe its wrong because

    I believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong because

  • No its wrong

    I believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong becauseI believe its wrong because

  • DNA profiling is and can be very useful

    People say that Dna profiling is a bad idea but how do they think the police are able to track down criminals. People just do not think about it that way any more. They say oh it is no big deal the police will find the criminals eventually but without the Dna sample no they really can not find them.

  • I believe that DNA profiling will help law enforcement solve crimes and convict the criminals.

    I believe that DNA profiling will help convict more criminals. DNA profiling is the process of using a bodily sample to identify someone. This process is a tool used in law enforcement to help solve crimes more easily and successfully. DNA profiling is also known as DNA fingerprinting however DNA is easier to find at the scene of a crime because any bodily item contains a persons DNA. Examples include blood, tissue, hair, saliva, skin, and the like can all be used for DNA testing.

    DNA profiling can help to protect innocents from being convicted by giving proof that someone was not there to commit the crime. One example is A Mr. Kerry Porter who was sentenced to 60 years in prison for murder. DNA testing was not readily available and reliable in the 1990s. He was exonerated in 2011 because subsequent DNA testing demonstrated his innocence. Another example is the case of Mr. Kenneth Kagonyera and Mr. Robert Wilcoxson who admitted to committing murder in order to avoid the death penalty. When the DNA from was analyzed it demonstrated that neither man was guilty. This shows how DNA profiling is useful in protecting wrongly convicted people.

    DNA profiling has improved the way that law enforcement apprehends criminals. Before this process, law enforcement had to use fingerprints and circumstantial evidence to convict. DNA profiling gives them solid proof to use in convicting and allows them to make their case more solid. One example is the case of Keith Lyon who was stabbed and left to die. The police searched more than 80,000 homes and collected 6,000 sets of fingerprints but the assailants were not found. Four years lighter the evidence was taken to a police station and DNA testing was conducted. The results allowed the police to apprehend and convict the criminals who were subsequently imprisoned.

    As you can see DNA profiling is an extremely useful tool for law enforcement in determining culpability. The aforementioned examples show the effectiveness of this process in solving crimes. The use of DNA profiling has significantly improved the way that law enforcement solves crimes.

  • I don't believe this is correct.

    Learning about this in school was great you think yeah, this help people to be recognized as innocent but you don't think about how those people pay the a price that wasn't meant for them, With this nobody thinks about how the guilty hides away. It has benefits that really wouldn't mean anything compared to how this has wrongfully hurt people.

  • Not cool man

    Because I believe it does not help you stupid piece of k k k k k k k k k k k k k k kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkl l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l Because I believe it does not help you stupid piece of k k k k k k k k k k k k k k kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkl l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l Because I believe it does not help you stupid piece of k k k k k k k k k k k k k k kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkl l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

  • Not cool man

    No nonononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononono no Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
    yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes

  • Yes I believe

    Because I believe it does not help you stupid piece of k k k k k k k k k k k k k k kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkl l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

  • DNA profiling is bad

    Say if DNA profiling was to do more than 1 DNA sample then they would have 2 suspects. The more the perpetrator kills then the more the suspects vary. If the wrong person was convicted of a crime then that certain person would have to wait until the DNA tests proved wrong or came up with a match or if the real perpetrator stepped up, become a man and admitted to himself to what he's done.

  • DNA profilling is bad

    I do not support DNA profilling because too many people have been covicted for crimes. Over 10,000 people have been convited for crimes they seem to not have done. If someone is to go into a prison they will probably find people who have been convicted for a crime they did not do. DNA profilling should not be ok because

  • I belive we should not have Dna profiling

    Why we should not have DNA Profiling



    We should not have DNA profiling because they are not 100 percent correct and they could use their Dna for the wrong purposes . Although Dna can be used for criminal resources the dna can be wrong and the law enforcement could prosecute the wrong person and that person could be sentenced to life. My next reason that Dna profiling is bad is because it has caused many ethnic issues in the past and still is today the process of dna profiling can be altered and they would assume the this man is a criminal and he is not because they planted a man’s dna to make it look like that he is the criminal. The fact that Dna profiling is that does not work and is not 100 % correct it shows that Dna profiling is a bad thing.Another thing is that Dna profiling can be used in insurance companies and not allow them to have insurance because they have a genetic issue with them.

    Dna profiling issue Paragraph two

    In my previous opinion i mentioned that Dna profiling can be use to convict suspect for crimes they did not commit they can use it in insurance companies to not allow them to have insurance because they have a genetic disease. Multiple companies will not allow a person to have access to having life insurance because they have a genetic disease because if they could get access from their Dna or fingerprint they will deny you family from support.Children who have a genetic disorder may not be allowed to check into a hospital like an adult they are denied health support because of a disorder.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.