Introduction This year, Kuwait is going to begin the collection of DNA samples from all its citizens and visitors for the sake of national security (Lee, 2016). Before that, only the UAE had the policy of collecting the DNA of its entire population, although the complete coverage is not achieved yet (Wallace et al., 2014, p. 4). The dilemma of universal DNA retention is being contemplated by governments all over the world, but for the time being, only two countries consider the security benefits offered by the method to be more important than its potential negative consequences and the right for privacy. In the US, the applicability of DNA retention and use is limited, even though suggestions for their expansion proceed to be voiced (James, 2012). In this paper, both the advantages and disadvantages of the method are considered, which allows me to argue that any changes to the legislation that regulates DNA retention needs to be considered with utmost care, and it is best not to remove too many restrictions as long as the negative consequences of such a decision cannot be severely limited. The paper uses credible and relevant sources: recent peer-reviewed articles, a report for Congress, current legislation on DNA retention from the FBI website, and news articles. DNA Retention: Advantages and Disadvantages DNA DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) is “is the fundamental building block for an individual’s entire genetic makeup” (James, 2012, p. 1). It is unique for every person with the exception of twins, and it can be extracted for examination from a number of sources, including saliva, blood, and hair. Since the 1980s, the states of the US have been introducing legislation that required the collection of DNA samples from the people who had committed violent crimes, and in 1994, the national database of DNA was created (James, 2012, p. 2). The specific legislation on state databases are regulated by states; the national US database is regulated by the federal law. The retention of the DNA of innocent people is not included in the current federal legislation; if a person is proved innocent, his or her DNA is to be expunged from the national database (FBI, 2016). However, the situation may be different for individual states (Wallace et al., 2014, p. 4). The experiences of Kuwait and the UAE are yet to demonstrate the consequences of the extreme expansion of DNA retention system, but another country has also provided some information for the consideration in the worldwide debate on the subject. The UK practice of retention of the DNA of minor offenders (including children who had been damaging trees or the people who were proven innocent) has been raising criticism. In 2008, the European Court of Human Rights requested the deletion of innocent people’s DNA from forensic databases. The UK responded with the Protection of Freedoms Act of 2012, which decreased the years of innocents DNA retention and imposed certain limitations on it, but did not eliminate it (Wallace, Jackson, Gruber, & Thibedeau, 2014, pp. 1-2). It appears necessary to discuss the pluses of DNA retention in an attempt to understand this course of actions. Advantages The advantage of DNA use in justice systems is apparent: it provides forensics with a powerful