A lot of us have fingerprints on file from identification when we were in high school and they had an identification program, and they go on file somewhere; or when you become a father, both you and the mother have fingerprints taken for identification purposes, and they're kept on file somewhere. What I'm driving at is that when you have something that is so effective in solving crime and exonerating innocent people, something that has become very important, it should be broadened as much as possible.
I'd like to hear Mr. Bird expand a little bit on one comment I heard that I certainly agree with. The precursor crimes that lead to worse crimes in the future seem to be the majority of crimes. They're not quite so serious at this point in time, but we know what they lead to in the future. I'm thinking of the recent law that we're discussing in regard to animal abuse. It's a well-known fact that if a person heinously attacks and kills an animal for the fun of it, eventually they end up in jail for committing the same kind of violence against humans.
Isn't there a real advantage to taking on some of these precursor crimes and saying we are going to start banking DNA, not only to get more arrests but as a preventative measure, a deterrent measure? We are actually here not only to legislate laws to take care of the guilty, but to do everything we can to prevent. Wouldn't that be effective? Or am I living in dreamland?