Do what, fingerprinting or collecting DNA? Not sure what you're trying to say, if Europe does it, it's fine?

The gist is that this was always done when people were arrested for criminal offences. They're now doing it for civil offences and, like with all the ICE stuff, it seems to be do first, ask questions later. So you can be a citizen but your data might end up in their systems anyway as it's submitted before they find out you are a citizen...

▲

spwa4 an hour ago | parent [-]

A few things we can know for sure. The Dutch immigration enforcement authority, IND, has a blanket exception for to the GPDR collecting any kind of information on anybody "for the purposes of immigration enforcement".

10 years ago we found out, from a budget proposal that was in dispute, that the police had sent every mental health database in the Netherlands to Palantir. Regular health databases too, but if you're Dutch, Peter Thiel knows exactly what you told the "the law guarantees you can trust me" social worker 20 years ago. Or what you told any Dutch police officer at the border, on the street, ... Everything. That's what the Dutch state used their authority for.

	▲	microtonal 7 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		As far as I know the IND only gives the option for a DNA test (voluntary choice), if as a refugee you want to let your family come over to prove that someone is actually your family. This is not great, but faked familial ties have been used in the past to get people into the country. Also, the DNA test is not done by the IND, but by the NFI (Dutch Forensic Institute), who destroy the material after six months. sidewndr46 had a pretty grandiose claim (I don't think there are any European countries that do a DNA test at birth and store the data) and you only come with a lot of handwaving that is not even about DNA.