The DNA database...

[Rosencrantz]

A DNA database is too much of a sacrifice of personal liberty to justify solving a few cases, in my opinion. It's one step away from simply videotaping everyone constantly so we solve every single crime ever.

To quote Benjamin Franklin, "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

[Loz]

I voted yes because for one thing i have nothing to hide so why would it be a problem for me or anybody else that is innocent?
Also if it means criminals being caught and dealt with that's great.
For all of you who voted no what if you were on the receiving end of a crime and the database meant your attacker was caught and punished?
Would it be worthwile then?

[Rosencrantz]

Originally Posted by Loz

I voted yes because for one thing i have nothing to hide so why would it be a problem for me or anybody else that is innocent?
Also if it means criminals being caught and dealt with that's great.
For all of you who voted no what if you were on the receiving end of a crime and the database meant your attacker was caught and punished?
Would it be worthwile then?

No. As I said, personal liberty is worth the extra risk.

I understand it's easy to let stuff like this through because you have nothing to hide and it's not a problem to the innocent, but can't you see how massively this could be exploited? To take an extreme example, what if a law was introduced that banned reading books or banned being any religion other than Christian? A DNA database would be intrinsic to enforcing laws that may not be for the greater good - it takes power away from the individual and hands it to the government.

A DNA database means that protesting against unfair laws it something you'll have to do through a complicated system filled with people who want power - the politicians. And how do unfair laws currently garner massive resistance right now? By people just doing it anyway. Actions speak louder than words, far louder, and sadly most MPs would rather bend to the will of a loud, physically vocal crowd than one man on a stand calmly explaining the pros and cons of why the current system is wrong.

[Loz]

Originally Posted by Rosencrantz

No. As I said, personal liberty is worth the extra risk.

I understand it's easy to let stuff like this through because you have nothing to hide and it's not a problem to the innocent, but can't you see how massively this could be exploited? To take an extreme example, what if a law was introduced that banned reading books or banned being any religion other than Christian? A DNA database would be intrinsic to enforcing laws that may not be for the greater good - it takes power away from the individual and hands it to the government.

A DNA database means that protesting against unfair laws it something you'll have to do through a complicated system filled with people who want power - the politicians. And how do unfair laws currently garner massive resistance right now? By people just doing it anyway. Actions speak louder than words, far louder, and sadly most MPs would rather bend to the will of a loud, physically vocal crowd than one man on a stand calmly explaining the pros and cons of why the current system is wrong.

I can see where you are coming from and yes it could be exploited but like you said you came up with a rather extreme example,that is never going to happen,give me a more realistic example of how it could be exploited,not pie in the sky ideas.

[jambutty]

Originally Posted by garinda

You never hear old people moaning about the identity cards that were issued to the whole country, as part of the 1939 National Registration Act.

(Departs, and waits for an old person to start moaning about what a flippin' liberty a national D.N.A base would be.)

The Identity Cards were issued because we were at war and were, quite rightly, discontinued after the war had ended.

[Less]

Originally Posted by Cyfr

Really? How about the guy that planted someone elses DNA in a rape victim?

You've been watching too many episodes of CSI! Earth calling Cyfr, Oh forget it, it's time you and that female student did a mind meld, then maybe some sense could be made from at least one of you!

[cashman]

Originally Posted by jambutty

The Identity Cards were issued because we were at war and were, quite rightly, discontinued after the war had ended.

i aint sure it was quite rightly discarded after the war, if they had'nt it would certainly have made the "Illegal" problem easier to deal with.

[Bonnyboy]

I think the idea is right as regards crime prevention, however, the powers that be seem to be incapable of safeguarding the data already provided. For me, it’s a No.

[Less]

Originally Posted by Loz

I voted yes because for one thing i have nothing to hide

Nothing to hide? What about the abuse you seem to have done to that poor animal in your Avater? That must come from a sick mind that needs to hide itself in shame!

[jambutty]

Originally Posted by Cyfr

I voted no.

Our government simply cannot be trusted with more data after all the recent losses. We have no idea what subsequent governments will do with the data. Who knows, in 10 years time our DNA might be up for auction, I bet its quite valuable to criminals and genetic research companies.

DNA can easily convict the wrong person. It doesn't prove you did a crime, only that you were around that area at some point (even if it was before the crime even took place). It can easily lead to wrong convictions. There have been tons of cases of planted DNA, framing an innocent person.

They already have too much DNA. Taking DNA from innocent people even before they're charged? Not deleting it when its proved their innocent? What is this, a police state? We are the most watched country in Europe, have the biggest DNA database in the world (in proportion to our size), the government even want to invade our privacy in our own homes, getting internet providers to look into what we're doing on the internet whist having a massive ID database storing even more of our information, and for what? To prevent terrorism? Everyone already knows it won't do what its supposedly built for. Scare mongering government using peoples fears to restrict freedoms.

Welcome to 1984.

This is one of the few occasions that I agree with you.

DNA data should be treated in the same way that fingerprints are or rather should be.

When arrested and charged with an offence the police take the fingerprints of the suspect. If the person is convicted of the crime the fingerprints are retained. If the person is NOT convicted the fingerprints should be destroyed. But are they? Is a question that causes concern.

The same principle should be applied to DNA samples, the resultant data held on computers and any other identifying data.

I understand that there are provisions where Joe Public can check to see if the fingerprints have been destroyed. But how can you be sure without Joe Public being given access to the whole fingerprint database to do a search?

[Rosencrantz]

Originally Posted by Loz

I can see where you are coming from and yes it could be exploited but like you said you came up with a rather extreme example,that is never going to happen,give me a more realistic example of how it could be exploited,not pie in the sky ideas.

The best example I can think of is drug prohibition, which is controversial at best so won't illustrate this is well as the examples I gave above. There's plenty of people around who take cannabis who pose no threat whatsoever to society but with a DNA database might end up in prison, filling cells that we genuinely cannot afford. There's a strong argument for declassifying cannabis and whatever your stance on it, locking people up for smoking it doesn't really help anyone.

The reason it might be worth heeding more extreme arguments is that once we accept a DNA database then it will take far more activism to remove it from law than to put it in, especially once the larger abuses start cropping up, and they might only come 100 years down the line. And if the last century has taught us anything, it's that ALOT can happen in 100 years.

[Loz]

Originally Posted by Less

Nothing to hide? What about the abuse you seem to have done to that poor animal in your Avater? That must come from a sick mind that needs to hide itself in shame!

Very funny!
I am probably going to explain this a few times but it isn't my dog!
It's a pic i found on the web that i found amusing that's all
You made me laugh though,thanks!

[Less]

If a DNA data base or Identity cards where to be used to prevent crime, then I say bring it on, (anything that stops even one rape or murder must be worthwhile), but if it is just going to be used to keep law abiding citizens in line, then I'm against it.

If the Authorities want to keep my details on a data base so that my, your, everyones daughter is safer from attack, it is a good thing, (I for one would be in a queue voluntarily if that helped them stop some sick soul from being allowed to strike again).
If however they want me to pay for it, forget it, you can stick your I.D. card where the sun don't shine, if it's important enough to issue then issue it, if I also have to pay for it, take me to court 'cos I ain't going to!

A touch contrary I know, but it shouldn't be considered as an expense that needs to be suffered by the individual, it should be offered like a badge of honour, look at me I've been to the DNA centre had all the tests and they have issued me a card saying I've a clean bill of health.

[Rosencrantz]

Originally Posted by Less

If a DNA data base or Identity cards where to be used to prevent crime, then I say bring it on, (anything that stops even one rape or murder must be worthwhile), but if it is just going to be used to keep law abiding citizens in line, then I'm against it.

I think it's impossible to have one without the other. The police are there to stop crime, but they also keep law-abiding citizens in line. My issue is that this is like a balance - how much freedom do you want to give up to stop crime. The problem is that if we say that anything that stops one rape or murder is worthwhile then that allows crazy amounts of personal intervention. What about being filmed while you're getting changed at a swimming pool? What about being filmed on the toilet in case you do something untoward?

That's not a direction I want to head in.

[cashman]

Originally Posted by Rosencrantz

I think it's impossible to have one without the other. The police are there to stop crime, but they also keep law-abiding citizens in line. My issue is that this is like a balance - how much freedom do you want to give up to stop crime. The problem is that if we say that anything that stops one rape or murder is worthwhile then that allows crazy amounts of personal intervention. What about being filmed while you're getting changed at a swimming pool? What about being filmed on the toilet in case you do something untoward?

That's not a direction I want to head in.

now yer talking crap.