Skip to comments.

DNA collected at roadblocks [see post 73]

Matt Murphy 105.5 fm alabama

Posted on by saleman

Our morning drive show reported this morning that the Federal DOT was taking DNA swabs and blood at apparent roadblocks in St Clair Co. Alabama.

Pell City Police chief confirmed that off duty County deputies were used by Fed Dot to man the road blocks.

DNA samples were apparently voluntary, as one witness said she was offered 60 bucks for blood and saliva while another declined blood but was paid 10 bucks for saliva.

Nothing to see here folks, move along. After all it was voluntary"



TOPICS:

KEYWORDS:

dna

dnacollection

dnaroadblock

govtabuse

obamaspeople

pellcity

policestate

terrorism

threatmatrix

tyranny

vanity

To: HomeAtLast

Needs to be donated to the Supreme Court doorstep. I keep suggesting a Spit On Washington but nobody wants to do more than keyboarding anymore. The USSC already ruled that the police can take DNA at an arrest — therefor I would be very surprised if this would get any different treatment, besides that it's apparently "voluntary". ('Voluntary' like the income tax?)



by 61 posted onby OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)

To: servantboy777

Extraordinary claims need an extraordinary link.



To: OneWingedShark

It does seem kinda nutty. But nothing the Feds do really suprises me anymore. The Pell City chief did say that they had their “usual motorist safety” roadblocks out (Forth amendment violation IMO) but that this was by the Feds.



To: maggief

Why the facebook link? I have scrolled back weeks and have been unable to find any reference to the events of this thread....



by 64 posted onby TheBattman (Isn't the lesser evil... still evil?)

To: DManA

It was and is being reported by a radio station, 100.5 FM outta B’ham. You’re welcome to find a link and post it. I wish you would.



To: maggief

Let me rephrase that - I did find one post “by others” where someone copied and pasted something they had seen... but there was no reply from the police department.



by 66 posted onby TheBattman (Isn't the lesser evil... still evil?)

To: saleman

How bizarre! Honestly, though...nothing surprises me these days. And why Alabama?



To: TheBattman

I didn’t find anything on the link either. Pell City wasn’t involved. Heck I don’t know how to find a link to a story that is currently being discussed on the radio. Maybe they have a “podcast” or whatever it’s called? His show is still on AFAIK.



To: TheBattman

See also post #12. Apparently, those posts are what the police chief was responding to.



To: txmissy

“And why Alabama?” I don’t know. Why not? Alabama was found, if I remember right, to be one of the most conservative states in the Nation. Maybe they figure if they can get away with this in Bama then they surely could get away with it anywhere else?



To: saleman

No offense. Just can’t tell anybody about it cause they’d ask me where I heard it and I’d have to say “some guy on the internet.”



To: DManA

You could say “Matt Murphy 100.5 Fm Birmingham”



To: saleman; maggief

From SIGforum, a "quality firearms discussion forum" on the Pell City roadblock checks: posted June 09, 2013 09:34 PM Hide Post This is snwghst's father. I talked to a St Clair County Sheriff's office Lieutenant tonight. The DUI/PIRE Friday and Saturday, and perhaps tonight, stops were for PIRE, under contract to NHTSA, to repeat data collection for a study of alcohol and drug concentrations in drivers since the Sheriffs had already stopped the drivers. Participation in the PIRE study was optional, at the driver's discretion. No personal data were collected by PIRE. DNA testing was not the reason for the cheek swab. Saliva analysis for drugs and alcohol is compared to blood sample analysis to see if a valid saliva test for BAC can be developed, thus making the blood test unnecessary. The report on the 2007 study is here: NHTSA.gov...pdf The abstract is: 16. Abstract

This study developed and tested procedures to enhance roadside survey procedures to include collecting and analyzing oral fluid and blood samples from the nighttime weekend driving population. Roadside surveys involve collecting information from a random sample of drivers. In the past, they have been used to measure the extent of alcohol use in the nighttime driving population in order to establish regular measures of that activity, which is a measure of progress in reducing impaired driving. This study developed and tested techniques to extend the scope of that measurement to drugs other than alcohol. Breath and oral fluid samples were successfully collected from over 600 drivers at 6 locations across the United States. Blood samples were obtained from approximately half of those subjects. Laboratory analyses for alcohol and other drugs were conducted on the oral fluid and blood samples. Procedures and results are described in this report. The findings indicate that this form of expanded roadside survey is practicable in the United States. The intent of this Pilot Test was to develop and test procedures that would be used in the next full-scale national roadside survey. It was not designed to yield a nationally-representative sample of the nighttime weekend driving population; thus the results are not representative of the United States as a whole. - ----------- However, DHS does have a rapid DNA analysis device they intend to use to prove or disprove familial relationships among asylum seekers. The privacy impact assessment can be found at: DHS.gov...pdf One paragraph, middle of page 4, states: "In preparation for the Rapid DNA System, S&T conducted a broad review of DNA needs across DHS operational components and found several consistent needs for verification of family relationships, countering human trafficking, family reunification, identification of victims following mass casualties, and checks against DNA samples of known criminals. Each of these applications require significant policy development or revisions and privacy and civil rights assessments to allow the use of DNA in operational settings." Information on the DHS DNA device was published in 2011 in many locations. An approved Privacy Impact Assessment means the device is ready for test/operational use as described. Hope this puts out at least one fire and doesn't start another.



by 73 posted onby kristinn (Welcome to the Soviet States of Obama)

To: RushIsMyTeddyBear

I placed a call to the Sheriff’s office in St. Claire County and asked for a confirmation of the story.

The lady asked who I was. I told her the truth- that I’m a lawyer from Texas.

I gave my name and office number and she said a Sargent would call me back.

I will keep the FR community posted.



by 74 posted onby Clump ( the tree of liberty is withering like a stricken fig tree)

To: saleman

I’d give them my saliva for free. They’d have to wipe it off their faxes, but it would be free.



by 75 posted onby Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)

To: Clump

Awesome. Thanks!



by 76 posted onby RushIsMyTeddyBear (Great vid by ShorelineMike! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOZjJk6nbD4&feature=plcp)

To: CodeToad

I’m convinced that the DNA request was mostly a survey of citizen compliance. The feds are probably concerned about compliance with any future DNA requirements in IRS health care laws.



by 77 posted onby RadiationRomeo (Step into my mind and glimpse the madness that is me)

To: seeker41

‘I came upon 2 individuals on the corner of a rural dirt road, a white unmarked vehivle with gov plates nearby.’ More likely, they were killing time where they thought they would not be spotted, until their shift ended.



To: kristinn

Your post is very interesting. Not sure if I understand the whole thing tho. Don’t know if you posted it to quell any unease about the stops or just for more info. If anything it makes me even more uneasy that this could be happening. It really doesn’t make any sense. Maybe I’m reading it wrong. The tests were done on people who were already stopped? Apparently for drugs or alcohol? But they were voluntary? Right...And of course, no personal info was attached to the DNA? Uh, huh..... It just keeps getting stranger and stranger.



To: Black Agnes

It’s right in CA vehicle code here. Scalia’s dissenting opinion in the recent case makes specific mention of this...



by 80 posted onby Axenolith (Government blows, and that which governs least, blows least...)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794

FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson