I'm going to side with the ACLU on this one without further evidence. Depending on how they got the DNA, they could link it to a family of record. However, would that mean it could only be that family? Could the father not have been off boinking another woman and had another kid there in that same community? Or maybe the mother was unfaithful so the father of record is incorrect.

There's gray areas here and that really bothers me. As does the idea of databases maintained that have DNA in them that can be searched. As an example - I have no contact whatsoever with my father. I have no idea if he's fathered additional children. Last I heard, he does live within a few hours of Columbus, so what might happen if a potential child of his commits a crime and, due to completely innocent and unfortunate circumstances, happen to be in the area? I'm potentially implicated due to familial DNA when I didn't do anything.

That's what the cameras are for, citizen. Not only do they catch criminals in the act, they absolve innocents who did not commit criminal offenses.

You have nothing to fear if you are not guilty, citizen.

I think part of what the Founders wanted was for the law to actually have to work to convict, making it less likely that sketchy convictions could happen. This flies in the face of that. I can deal with the constant cameras (as long as they're private property and warrants are required or the owner voluntarily gives up the data). However, if the government owns them, no dice.