blonde poker forum

 The last two days have shown two horrific murders would have been solved in days rather than weeks and months if we had a nationwide DNA database.
 If fact that f***** b****** that got put away today wouldn't have been able to rape and murder that poor girl, because his DNA would have showed he raped and  attempted murder before.

 

I dont think it would have stopped it, all it would have done is like u said sped the arrest up.

fortunately i volunteered my dna for the database,

in the ipswich case it would of stop some of the deaths

If you have nothing to hide, whats the problem?

Agreed.

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety  - some dead guy.

You want me to give some DNA so that I can go on a database where the only benefit is that if I commit a crime in the future I can be caught easily? Sure, I'll sign up to that. Never did care much for freedom anyway.

I keep offering my DNA to various women, suggesting they catch it in their mouths, but they rarely take me up on the offer.

'You can put it on the database and stop crime', I say, but it never seems to sway them.

Just so you cant delete it in the morning when you are sober ;)

may I suggest.......

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Little-Book-Chat-up-Lines/dp/1840241799/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1203731486&sr=8-1

Re National DNA database, I'm on the fence.

Anyone arrested has to give a sample these days,.

Or this

(http://www.inflatablesheep.co.uk/images/sheep.jpg)

I could not disagree more with this statement.

DNA has its place. I dont committ crime much and certainly never anything serious so why would I want to give my DNA? It's the governments job to prove I'm guilty, not for me to prove I'm innocent. I firmly believe in liberty and this DNA databasing and ID cards are all part of the same movement to control the people. I say power to the people and never give up your freedom. All this ID card and DNA stuff is slowly eroding our liberty but its done in a clever way to make us think 'if you've not done anything wrong, whats the problem?' Martial Law is just around the corner!

Like I say, DNA does have a place and the police usually have suspects in mind for various crimes. If there is a shred of evidence, test those feckers!!  Think about why they would want 'volunteers' to step forward when they generally know who they are after? And the clever thing is, if you don't step forward, do you have something to hide?

If he raped and murdered before, I would agree that his DNA should be put on the database. He's a danger to society so it's a reasonable thing to do to reduce risks to the public.

i agree there should be a dna datbase,i dont think it affects civil liberty, when the ripper was running loose a lot of woman where so scared of being attacked it affected there life style, stopping then from leading a full life, the only concern i have is the convictions proven from samples are safe, i believe it would stop a lot of first time sex attacks, it certainly would stop serial sex killers, you will never stop a nutter who cant help himself from committing the first attack but you will stop him being a serial attacker, it would also save the country a fortune in police work leaving more police to concentrate on other crime, we have to ask whats more important stopping horrendous crimes on woman and children or being upset .

If you think DNA sampling will stop serial killers then you are kidding yourself on. I agree we need to protect people from horendous attacks, Im just not sure DNA sampling society as a whole will stop that. The criminals are always one step ahead of the authorities....

Luckily in Scots law you must have corroboration to prove guilt, so conviction on dna evidence alone can't happen.  I don't think this is the case in England so until you change your law this should be opposed.

Time and time again the authorities take short cuts to gain convictions and the fact that dna evidence will be presented in court as ironclad proof of guilt to a probably disinterested jury is likely to lead to miscarraiges of justice.

the killers are psycho or evil, not experts on committing the perfect crime,  if they can be identified from there dna at the scene it must help in catching these people, there was a programme on telly a few months back saying, a person only has to talk for 30secs in a room and he can be identified from his dna ,if dna tests are so sensitive the attackers must leave some dna behind as you would not even know other techniques they have for getting samples of dna from a crime scene

I disagree on soo many levels with this idea.

Say we have the DNA database..that doesn't mean you'll stop the next rape or murder...know what would make it easier? Put a chip in everybody so that the govt always knows where you are. Combine this with DNA and they can immediatly go and arrest a suspect as they won't have to go looking for them.

After all, if you have nothing to hide why would you not want that chip implanted?

Haven't we had this debate before when a lot of blonde members thought it was a great idea that everybodies DNA should be taken at birth. Personally I do not share many peoples blanket faith in the Government and police authorities ability to administer such a database or trust them to use it for the sole purpose of using it to solve serious crime. The government and police have and history of misusing information for alternative purposes other than those that they campaigned on and I for one see no reason why I should give them my DNA when I am innocent. Civil liberty is a wonderful thing and I would hate to see our fundamental social structure change. I enjoy the system of innocent until proven guilty rather than that of living in a totalitarian run state where by we are all treated with the suspicion of guilt.

Hasn't the Government's incompetence re: losing individuals personal information not scared people enough. What about the guilty convictions which have been reached due to an over reliance of DNA evidence, evidence which at a later date was proved wrong. And what about cross contamenation ?. These reasons alone are enough for me to not share many blonde's blanket faith in a national DNA database. I also recall a documentary in which it was suggested that such a large database could actual hinder the solving of crimes as already happens in many cases where the police receive so much information that it fails to process it correctly.

For those that do believe in a DNA database why don't you volunteer to be tagged 24/7 so your every movement can be recorded. After all you have nothing to hide.  ::)  

I really doubt it would have stopped some of the deaths. I live in Ipswich and having known one of the girls from my college days I have followed this case as it had such an impact on our sleepy suffolk town.

Firstly the first two bodies were found some time after there death and they had been disposed of in water. As a result there was no Steve Wright DNA on the first body discovered, that of Gemma Adams, and whilst there was some found on Tania Nichols there was probably other individuals DNA also on her body. Also the timeline was such that the last three murders were so soon after Tania's body was found that that I doubt that they would have had enough evidence to either arrest or even have Steve Wright as a prime suspect. Much of the evidence that was collected that went to convict Steve Wright was gathered from the last three bodies which were done in such a short period of time.

It's the perception that DNA is the answer and the belief well if you have nothing to hide that see's people cry out for such a database without people actually being aware of all the facts. I am in support of a DNA database be held for those who have been found guilty of previous crimes but I do not see why the innocent should also have to give they DNA.

And the police have also been known to keep the DNA of school children after they have gone into schools to do police demonstrations.
And no they didn't ask them for their constent to keep the information.

1984

http://news.aol.co.uk/no-universal-dna-database-plans/article/20080222235409990003

DNA database.ID cards chips implanted cctv  ;tracet; :redcard: ffs even oyster cards now track where u go  Big Brother is watching you well Big brother   GFY

i've always maintained that i would go to prison rather than accept an id card or being forced on to a dna database, starting to worry that it might come to that soon.

How can you be so eager to give up your liberty?

I am confused how is giving up DNA affecting your liberty?

What is the difference with that and giving the DVLA your home address?

You aren't serious surely.  You do know what dna is?

 ::)

lmao......

"Liberty, in modern time, is generally considered a concept of political philosophy and identifies the condition in which an individual has the ability to act according to his or her own will."

Someone having my DNA on record doesn't stop this surely?

and its my will not to provide my genetic information to a government.

If there was a national database or you committed a non serious 'recordable' crime, you would have no choice but to give a sample of DNA, even if you didnt want to. This does not constitute liberty and especially not freedom.

...but you would sleep better in your bed at night. ;)

You can even be forced to give one just for carrying an mp3 player...

Does that mean that you feel the same way about the speed limit? Or laws that make murder illegal?

Yes that is what this is all about - a government wants you to vote for them and will therefore spend vast amounts of taxpayer's money in an attempt to win your favour.

When you get what you want, I hope you sleep better knowing that the money could have been used to save/improve lives had it been spent on the NHS and will in reality not reduce crime and knowing that future generations might find themselves branded from birth because they have a gene that some scientists theorise in some cases cause abnormal behaviour.

Life is not risk free and comes to an end for all of us.  People misunderstanding risk management and governments appeasing them is leading to more and more restrictions and intrusions in our daily life for no return whatsoever.

What you talking about? lol.  If you mean do I think people should be able to do what speed they want then no. That endagers life but me refusing to give a DNA sample doesnt and it's not against the law (yet!). If someone is convicted of a serious violent crime then sure force them to give DNA but I chose not to. Thats called freedom of choice because Ive not done anything wrong.

As for making murder illegal, thats the law and its a good law........  I find the question completely irrelevant?  Care to expand?

lolol, well its getting that way for sure :)

I wouldnt because crime would still be committed as it is now. No database is going to give you real security....

Oyster card tracking evidence has now been used to obtain a conviction.


You don't need to have committed an offence, the mere fact that you have been arrested gives the right for police to take the sample by force, even if not charged.

Would it be so ridiculous to think that maybe DNA has been taken from every baby over god knowns how many years?

Nahhh..they would be allowed to do that surely!!

I might have thought the same but I had to comfort my best mate about 12 years ago when she was told that the baby she buried 8/10 year before was only a shell and all his organs were in a pickle jar.

She made a choice to have his organs buried with her mother who died shortly after.

A year later she received a parcel by courier and it was some more of his organs, she had no idea what was in the box as there had been a mix up and she hadnt been notified.

Put yourself in her place when she opened that box and then seriously try to tell me that there isnt an ongoing DNA database in progress for every newborn child that has been going on for many many years.

Im pretty sure we will on be on the database before long which is good if the system works but like everything in this world it can and will be exploited.

It's true the same people who rigg online poker collect DNA from babies.

Anyone else here in the database??

This is highly worrying. Whats the  position on it among your peers Robert? Is it split into those lawyers who defend and prosecute?

There are other databases that would have triggered this guy as a previous rapist/attempted murderere/murder etc. The DNA database would merely assist in estalishing a link with him and his victim. A previous post highlighted in Scottish law that DNA evidence still has to be corroborated with other evidence to secure conviction. I'm sure that you'll find in the recent cases that DNA was only used to confirm a link between victim and accused.

In the Ipswich case it appears that the most damning evidence was a fibre from the carpet in the boot of his car found on one of the victims as he did not deny being with any of the girls and therefore would expect his DNA could be found on them.


I'm not against having the database, however I am concerned, as others have previously posted, on how this info is handled and used.

For many years the fingerprint database was considered one of the greatest tools to the authorities, cases in recent years have shown that to also not be foolproof, how long before someone is incorrectly convicted using the DNA method?

Geo.

Already happened - just ask my twin brother doing twenty years in Wormwood Scrubs. :)

Mad it was brought in as a package of measures and went through with only a modicum of pressure against. We are at a time when even prosecutors believe that Civil Liberties have taken a huge knock and the pendulum has swung massively in favour of the prosecution. At the same time Criminal Defence Legal Aid has been hit by severe cuts causing many firms forced to close or make defence lawyers redundant. I only work part time now. So many people were distracted when many anti-freedom changes were slipped in.

interesting film made last year about our civil liberties being taken away.........

Taking liberties

well worth watching.

we can only be guided by what dna experts tell us, if a dna test is carried out properly and all rules for collecting and testing dna are followed and the top experts tell us the dna sample is reliable in court,it should be, there is not 1 foolproof method of convicting anyone, eyewitness, fingerprinting, all are not 100%, we where discussing our jury system the other week on here and most agree that is also very flawed, there are probably more people wrongly convicted by juries in prison than we imagine, so all you can do is come up with the most reliable system available at the time, it will not be 100%, no system will be, but dna will stop far more miscarriages of justices than convict innocent people, but we cant have it both ways, you cant clear someone of crime through dna then say dna is unreliable to convict as well. the papers do not print all the details of the crimes these people commit, they are sick, horrific and terrifying , these people must stopped by any method within reason available, as long as the database is only used for this purpose i cant see how it affects anyone's rights

ok...so what about implanting a microchip into everybody?..Same thing no?

the point is; Where does it stop?

It's good to see your finally understanding the issue.  ::)

One is passive, one is active.

why is one active and one passive? The chip wouldn't be used untill DNA of a certain someone had been found on the scene and the police wanted to find that person immediatly..thereby prevent more crimes.

Sounds like a good idea to me then

nobody is saying implant chips in people, it just makes people get emotional and think of a big brother monertering us all  for some sinister reason, and forget  the real reason for using dna testing, to stop little children being murdered by some pervert who we may easily of been caught years ago, where will it all stop, as far as using the dna database is concerned, that's all it should be used for, sex attacks and murder,,a grey area could be serious assault, but progress will never stop ,as soon as they come out with a more reliable system than dna i am sure the world will use it,this will happen no matter what happens with dna testing.

When will you ppl stop believing that these things are common occurences and therefore have some grasp of the proper use of resources.

a) such a proposal assumes that everyone is a potential criminal and this has overtones of repression
b) it won't stop crime
c) there is potential for abuse by future governments, they are imo only entitled to information that they require to provide me with services like any other organisation.
d) what are you going to do to the many who will refuse - jail them? -take samples by force?
e) there is huge potential for miscarriages of justice due false positives/contamination, at the very least many people will have to prove innocence.

Finally,  I'm sure the Nazis would have been far more efficient in purifying the Reich with such a database.

They would only implant microchips in ppl who had the genes that the scientists think make them possible criminals ldo

lol

Here's a couple of examples...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02/13/mp3_gun_swoop/
Someone thinks an mp3 player is a gun, calls the police, they find him on CCTV and he's arrested by armed police.

http://gizmonaut.net/bits/suspect.html
Man arrested for "looking suspicious" when entering tube station.

i am talking about trying to defend little children from attacks,from being tortured and abused by evil people who should be caught as soon as possible, its not about big brother to me , if the database was used for any other reason i would be as opposed to the idea as yourself.
these are not common occurrences that's the whole point ,the database should not be used to solve ordinary crime, leaving it open to abuse by a lot of people having access to very personal data.thats why it would not noticeably cut the crime rate, but does that mean we should not try to protect woman and children from attacks so sickening and horrific they devastate communities for years like the ripper did, when we may have been able to catch him after the first attack. this would also save a lot of police having to work for years trying to catch these people.
(a)no, innocent till proven guilty will always be first,
(b) stopping serial killers is not about reducing the crime rate its about catching the few crazy people in this world,  if a  sex killer commits his his first killing and is caught within weeks this would cut the crime rate for this crime.
(c) i agree there is potential for abuse of this system, that's why it should not be used as an excuse to solve ordinary crimes.
(d)  how it would be implemented is a separate issue which would cause uproar i agree
(5) i have never read far more cases of dna clearing falsely imprisoned people than innocent people getting convicted, how many people must there be in prison now who have been convicted by bad eyewitnesses and poor juries who wish dna could of been used to clear them, connection between the 3rd reich and a dna datbase and jews ,trying to protect children is going a bit far

I have to say with the content of some of the views here, its clear a lot of folk do not understand what freedom and liberty mean. I'm not doubting the intentions are good but the implications are clearly not well thought through in many examples.

Thanks Robert, it appears the government/powers that be, have many techniques to take our eyes off the ball and many ways to put our eyes on a ball that isnt there. Take the example of where it has been proven that governments have comitted terrorism on their own countries only to blame it on others  as an excuse to go to war and raise anxieties among its people so they can put in what Robert describes as 'anti freedom changes'. It makes us feel more secure!! LMAO....... 

Last week there was a fuss about DNA from Holland gathering dust on a desk in the UK for year. It transpired that some of the samples related to people who had also committed crimes in this country as well. Much of the subsequent fuss was about the fact that the info hadn't been processed and used.

Nobody has raised other issues, such as:

1. Since when was it agreed that there will be international swapping of DNA data?
2. Nobody is saying the crimes wouldn't have been committed anyway
3. Why was the DNA data sent to the Crown Prosecution Service when they are not involved in investigation, that being the job of police.


As each day goes by we see a new surveillance camera being installed somewhere, a new form to complete for "record keeping" purposes etc etc.

Every now and then we hear about data being lost, misplaced, misdirected or whatever term the Government body wants to use. We only hear about the major cock ups and only when they are discovered. God knows how many other instances there have been.

I value my freedom, liberty and privacy, more it seems than some others on this thread. I don't want my details kept by some anally retentive bureaucratic government/Civil Service who, after offending my afore mentioned values, don't know how to properly use the information in the first place, or worse still knowingly misuse this information.

 :goodpost: ;iagree;

I'm married.  I have no idea what freedom and liberty means.

If anyone hasn't taken the time to read the second one then I would advise it. Its incredible that it took so long for him to clear his name, I doubt many people would have his determination.

Yes I agree, it could happen to you!  /:-| /:-| /:-|

OK, now guarantee me that nobody will ever use the database for anything other than the above.

It is silly to think that this is all it would be used for.

Can't understand why it's considered a good post with a comment like this. Robert, think of it this way, maybe others on this thread also value their freedom, liberty and privacy just as much but are prepared to sacrifice a little bit of this so that others can be safer.

Geo

id happily give up some libery and freedom to reduce the chances of small kids/women getting raped/beated/murdered.  If that means i cant break the law by smoking weed, drink driving or stuff like that, its a minute price to pay. id happily do it. Can one of the learned people tell me what liberties we would give up under this system?

Another quote from Mr franklin:
as we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;

Quotes are much like statistics, they can be used various ways depending on views. Like proverbs, for most quotes there is usually another countermining.

E.G. - Too many cooks spoil the broth - many hands make light work.

And how would me giving me DNA stop those crimes you describe? Or yours for that matter?  The liberty some would be giving up is consent and the freedom of choice. A blanket database may be a choice you would make based on your assumptions about DNA stopping crime, but it's not the choice of many.....

It's not quite as simple as that, it's very easy to say "We should have a DNA database it would prevent these from happening" without looking at all the potential downsides (in both opportunity cost and potential for nefarious use), and also it's ability to prevent these crimes from happening.

Question: How does a database of DNA prevent a crime from being committed?

Agreed, completely off topic though!

it would be a zero sum percentage. I am still yet so see a logical reason to argue against it... i see a lot of people crowing aboout consent and freedom of choice.. but my perspective is that if there is a 1% chance this would reduce rape and child crimes... id happily go for it.... even if it meant i got "done" for smoking weed.

I didn't read all of it but i think its only fair to point out this was 3 weeks after the attacks in the tube, i don't know the full details of the case but i imagine he must have met some criteria for a person of interest


It stops repeat offending, guy can't rape and murder 5 women if they already know who he is after the first.

What if future research showed people with certain DNA profiles were more likely to commit some form of crime. What would you do then?

He can if they can't find him.

I guess we should all be tagged so the police know where we are at all times!

An instance could be:

A woman is found raped and murdered, no other evidence available to the police except for DNA samples. DNA sample matched to criminal through the database. Further investigations of criminals whereabouts/property/car etc uncovers further evidence which is good enuff to convict.

Whilst we have not prevented the first crim, we sure as hell have pevented this crook from committing similar...........Would this not then be a DNA database assisting to prevent a crime from being committed???

I am also dissappointed in some of the posts from members who regularly post here about having respect and doing well by others that are unwilling to support an action that could ensure that someone in the future may have the most important right we have..............the right to live.


Geo

Maybe you are stoned right now? :)  

What would happen if it became law and people were jailed for not consenting to give DNA?  Would you drag them kicking and screaming? Thats one example of loss of freedom because how else would you enforce it?

what liberty would u give up.. would you be refrained from buying beer at the store? what liberties would they take from you if we agreed to a database. I am really interested in that. where do we lose our liberties.

Choice

I can think of a million ways such a database could be used in future to take away people's liberty. No one can guarantee that these won't happen.

no i dont do drugs, unlike most law abiding people.  your example shows no depth. I still want one person to tell me why DNA sampling is so bad for a human. Give DNA, help stamp it out, and be happy. If you want to smoke pot and break the law, fair play to you.

so tell us in detail all these millions of ways it might happen! coz i cant see it

Question:

If a family member was murdered and the only evidence against the criminal was a DNA link, would you be glad that that link was there or would you be asking the court not to convict because the criminals civil liberty/freedom of choice had been infringed??

Geo

http://www.ibmandtheholocaust.com/

Totalise, you make your living by make better risk based decisions than your opponents on the poker table.  Why does that logic go out the window when you are considering a) the actual instances of these crimes b) whether these crimes would actually be less likely if such a database existed c) the possible misuse of the information on the database to intervene in citizens lives d) the huge cost of maintaing the database and the loss of other public services.

A hypothetical situation:  Lets say a gene that leads to premature death is discovered and there is a simple cure.  The dna database can identify all those at risk.  There is no doubt that under those circumstances the database would be used to identify those at risk.  Once this happens the genie is out of the bottle.  What other interventions will take place?  What other assumptions will be made about individuals as various patterns in genes are discovered?  Perhaps a terrorist gene?  Perhaps a gene that according to scientists is highly likely to lead to anti-social behaviour - better lock them up just in case.

    

what is the purpose if this Q? of course any family member would latch onto the DNA link!!  it eases their pain

it has nothing to do with civil liberties/loss of freedom

okay, since you are not keeping up, I will talk you through this :)

1) database becomes law
2) some people dont give samples
3) those people fined, jailed and punshed by the law
4) Those people forced to give samples


This is all against their will and if you see that as shallow? theres no hope for you :)

i want to know about the misuse of the data... coz i really have no understanding of it.

Passage from above link:

The fact is, IBM technology was used to organize nearly everything in Germany and then Nazi Europe, from the identification of the Jews in censuses, registrations, and ancestral tracing programs to the running of railroads and organizing of concentration camp slave labor.


What has that got to do with DNA??

so what? i got a better idea.. if you dont break the law, give samples, then u dont have to get forced into doing it. If you do worry about it, stop breaking the law, and accept that human life is more important then whether or not you can get stoned on a weekend.

They made a database of the population and used it to aid them in trying to wipe out the jews...

If you can't see the parallels to a database of DNA then I am seriously worried!

My hypothetical example is a scenario where the data will ultimately be used for other purposes than the detection of crime.

instead of saying you are worried, explain it!!!!!!!!!!!

ok explain that! where would our DNA get voilated.

The purpose of the question was to ascertain whether the "I'll fight for your rights" brigade would be happy for evidence which was gathered by a method they disagreed with should be used in court. The purpose of linking it to a family member was to ask them to really think about it before replying.

And I'm glad you agree that it has nothing to do with civil liberties/loss of freedom.

Geo.

I just posted a link to a book about a similar system being used to facilitate the holocaust.

It is possible to appreciate the value of DNA evidence in solving crime and disagree with the value of a "compulsory" national DNA database. Therefore your question is somewhat flawed.

I agree, the database used was built for purpose, to identify wqho the Germans wanted and then carry out what they did. The fact that you feel that this tactic would be used in mordern day Britain totally astounds me.

Please explain.............

Geo

i want to know where our liberties would be compromised if we had a DNA database.  What are the repercussiions?

 rotflmfao rotflmfao rotflmfao

But surely the point it that it could be. We don't know all the ways in which such a repository of valuable information could be used for nefarious means.

I am with totalise here ... I can see no logical reason why anyone would refuse to give a sample for a database unless.


1, you have committed a crime and are fearful that doing so would mean you get caught and convicted.

2, you are an anarchist and are totally against anything authoritarian.

Your dna is yours.  It is a blueprint of your physical self.  It is far more than a mostly unique identifier.  Anyone in possession of it can use it to make assumptions about diseases you may suffer from and perhaps character traits.  It is MY CHOICE who I want to give this information.  There is a high probability that as genetic research progresses such a database will be used for interventions in citizens lives.

Hi Diceman,

Assume this reply is for me. I've never stated that the Database should be compulsory, I myself would have no problem with providing a sample for this database, I just can't understand why others would have a problem with it and the civil liberties thing doesn't cut it with me.

All of us have more details sitting on various databases that are potentially more harmful to us if used incorrectly that no-one seems too bothered about. DVLA - passport - Census - medical regards etc. etcd. I just don't see that it is any bigger a deal.

geo

There is only one right truly worth fighting for.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/02/Beastie_Boys_YGFFYRTP.jpg)

i see a lot of words, but i see no logic. I want one person with an IQ bigger then zero, tell me in lay terms, why woudl you not give a sample. Are you a drug dealer? if not... why? why would u hate ur life on a sample

Yeah thats what they were saying in the beerkellers in the 30s.  Think a bit more about what we are debating here.

3. Concerned at the potential mis use of information.

4. Have a lack of faith in the ability of certain parties to manage this information. It's not like there hasn;t been presidents.

BECAUSE MY FECKING DNA IS MY PROPERTY JUST AS MUCH AS MY HEART LUNGS AND BRAINS ARE.  iT IS MY CHOICE WHO I GIVE IT TO.

makes no sense.. but at least you used caps!

yes, but as has been said earlier, what about your medical records, your bank details, DVLA, Insurance policies, etc etc ...   why is a dna database so abhorrent to some people yet they have more than enough of their personal details splashed about on a million and one databases ... the difference between these and DNA is surely the DNA database could actually do some good.

I'm thiking about the potential of making it safer for my grandchildren........what are you thinking about??

Geo

Voluntary declaration vs totalitarian state compulsory scheme.

If this is your typical response to a debate where not everyone agrees with you, I'd feel safer if you were on the database. LOL

Geo

I give up if you can't see the difference between the proposed use of the coerced information and the potential use of the information, you are either trolling or being deliberately obtuse.

Ok let's make a hypothetical situation where we set up a compulsory national DNA register. As a good citizen with nothing to hide you give your sample and are happily on the list.

Then some scientists discover that certain DNA makes people 20times more likely to be a paedophile.

Your profile contains the DNA, although you have never done anything even remotely paedophillic. Do you still have nothing to fear?

I think the idea is about doing something against your will......... you can choose to opt out of having a driving license and your medical records are confidential and are not on a national database. You cant be forced to sign your provisional can you.......

 ;boltpp;

no i cant see it, and as you are a genius, im sure u can explain it to me. why does it matter if the info is coerced? I just cant see why pepole that dont brek the law would mind if we enforced the law a lot tougher

If you read my earlier responses you will see that it is not typical, but ultimately if a child won't listen you have to raise your voice.

It's has progressed a little more than you think mad.

Let's say you are arrested for an offence, simply as a suspect. The police have the right to take samples. On two occasions that readily spring to mind samples were refused. The first related to fingerprints, "reasonable force" to take them was allowed, that ended in a sprained wrist and a broken finger. The second was a refusal of a DNA sample, a doctor was called to take the sample, he refused to use force so a police officer did the deed, hair was chosen, in such cases the bulb from the root of the hair is required, a police officer plucking a mans head without consent is not a pretty picture.

As for the prospect of a prison sentence, I can give an instance of a man arrested for a "trigger offence" for a drugs test, the right to take the test is based simply on arrest, not charge. The police realised he had NOT committed the offence but charged him with the criminal offence of failing to give the sample. He did receive a prison sentence which was more than he would have got for the offence for which he was originally arrested.

Re: potential mis use of DNA records it is already the case that some employees and insurance companies use such information.

How would you feel that you can't get life insurance for your family just because your classified as a high risk because your DNA may indict a high potential to a certain disease. What if your employer decides not to promote you because your a high risk category than your rival candidate. What if the state/police used such information and profiled you as a potential offender and subsequently were prejudice in their treatment towards you.

The difference is that, to all intents and purposes, our DNA is us, it's what we are. It's not a signifier of our identity (like an NI number, driving licence, bank account number etc) but it tells someone us what we actually are - it's us.

That crosses an abstract boundary in many people's minds. It's similar to the way in which a lot of people have no problem with their heart, lungs, or kidneys being donated to someone else after their death, but stop at their corneas. We view the essence of someone else as exisiting through their eyes - that's what makes us view them as a person, rather than just a bag of blood and bones. So we see our eyes as being more than just another bit of us. Even to the extent of using words like 'view' and 'see' non-literally.

Personally, I don't want to be on the database because, who knows, I might fancy a little whore-killing spree one day and I don't want to get caught afterwards.

Unreal and it's happening now. Imagine if this was large scale? They would have to end up sending the army in!!!! Marshall Law!!

Ok I give up ... I will just say that I would have absolutely no qualms about providing a dna sample for a national database ... DESPITE the fact that it will obviously be used to aid genocide and find a reason for paedophilia. ;)

Geo, earlier today.

(http://www.owenbloggers.com/tyler/WindowsLiveWriter/WinterWonderland_13F83/image%7B0%7D_thumb%5B6%5D_1.png)

We all have differing ideas of these "rights" and values are set at different levels. Let's agree to differ, my opinions are based on too long defending people from excesses of lawmakers and their enforcers. I also declare that it is an important issue with me. Those who know me well I have arranged my life to have as little to do with authority as possible, for instance you will find I am legally missing from any electoral register.

A DNA database is unlikely to stop a SPREE killer. :)

You can also choose not to live in a house, have a television, have a bank account, not work etc. etc. if you do all of that then yes, your details will  not be held.

The OP's question, a reasonable one, was whether we should have a DNA database, not whether it should be compulsory. The compulsory part came in replies from posters who would not want to be on the register and used the "compulsory " position as part of their defence.

Geo

lolol, so pathetic....

so what is ur opinion. i cant see a valid reaon to oppodose it.

Ah yes, spree was the wrong word. I know how lazy I am - I couldn't kill more than two a week.

Blimey, I think we broke the board.

The thread title "Surely its time we are all on a DNA database" implies that it would be compulsory!

I'm actually thinking about your grandchildren and evryone elses.  They are the ones that as genetic research progresses will be subjected to various prejudices about their likely predilections based on their genetic makeup.

I'm intrigued to know if those persons who are willing to agree to giving the state their DNA, in the interests of making our society a safer one, would you agree to voluntary being tagged as this would really make it easy to solve crimes.

Also as most violent crimes are committed at night how about a government imposed curfew, all in the interests of making our society a safer one.  ::)

I've already expressed in a previous post that I would have no problem with being on the database.

Geo

I don't think it's the thought of catching paedophiles and serial killers now that's scary it's the potential for future governments to do nasty things with the info maybe many years into the future that's the problem.

For example Ken Livingstone who I saw once on TV admitting that he is insane, has recently introduced a huge low emissions zone all of greater London I think is inside this zone. I am like 20 or 30 meters inside it and ATM it doesn't affect me at all. Except that Autocar magazine who are pretty reputable i think and not prone to hyperbole have found out that the system put in place is exactly the same as the one used for congestion charging bar a minor difference in software, will run at a huge loss and will reduce emissions by 0.01%. They claim that if Ken gets a third term in office he's gonna introduce congestion charging for the whole lot of us, not just the zillionaires who live near the centre of London, millions of people will have to pay to travel on roads we already pay road tax for. He is just sneaking it in sneakily by doing this emissions thing to start with.

I was reading an article the other day about how food affects people with different genes, apparently already they have found out that coffee is good for people with a certain gene and bad for people with another gene. Broccoli is good for everyone but super awesome for people with the super awesome broccoli gene. The technology is just starting out, but already you can let this dude get a sample of your DNA and he will tell you what you should be eating. Just think what they will be able to do in a few years, it's not beyond the realms of possibility that future unknown governments may use this info to do things we don't want them to do.

Also if all this info is on a computer somewhere then people like bongo will be able to hack into it, so it ain't just the police and government who you'll have to trust it's Harry Hacker, any people who may pay him to get the info and random people on public transport who find laptops and Cd's left behind by government employees :)

yes nobody allowed out after 6pm or you get shot! ::) Who cares- why would you want to go out after 6pm anyway? :)

A governments greatest control tool is fear. Just look at what happened in America after 9/11 with the introduction of the patriot act.

I enjoy the right to free movement rather than being subject to government imposed sanctions, which in truth have little to do with social welfare and our protection and more about a government totalitian attitude. Scare mongering may work on some but some of use like to look at the bigger picture.

Vote Conservative.

LOL.....reminds me of a joke i once heard:

2 South African policemen where patrolling in Soweto, it was 8:50 at night.

A young lad went whizzing by on a bicycle and one of the policemen raised his shotgun and shot the poor soul.

"why did you do that?" asked his colleague

"The curfew" was the reply

"But the curfew doesn't begin until 9pm"

"I know, but I also know where he lives and he would never have made it home in time"


Geo

Only bad people go out at nights.  ::)

I've actually had someone say this before and I'm sure some police share this attitude. A model citizen is one who works 9 to 5 and stays home at night. Now everybody subscribe to this and we shall live in an ideal world we all seek.

Agree, but then again the scare mongering from the anti-Databasers isn't working for me.

Geo

No can do mate, I enjoy playing poker but don't like playing on the net, I'll just have to get tagged so I can go out after 6pm to visit the Casino.

geo.

The truth lies somewhere in the middle. But the intial question, and matter of debate, is an extreme absolute so you tend to get extreme counter agruements.

See, it's them bloody students again.

Geo

This thread has been a real revelation to me.  I now understand how politicians find it so easy to persaude people to go down the roads that history records as dark places.  Just create a bogeyman.  Rapist, murderer, child molestor, communist, Jew - doesn't really matter who, as long as you whip up a hysteria.  No one will really oppose anything you do, despite the fact that virtually none of them have been directed affected by the bogeyman in question.  After that it's really just a matter of apathy and we're pretty much good to go.

The other reason I'd be against a database is we could use the billions it would cost to do more good elsewhere - e.g. spending it on the health service would save more lives.

Even worse is that people are willing to pay for the privilege in the form ID cards.

Generally, DNA is 99.9% reliable. In practical terms, in a city of 1 million people, if a person commits a crime and is identified using DNA, only 1000 other people could have committed the crime. So with a population of 60 million,60,000 people could be the offender, but what if the offender was from another country and your DNA matched his you go down !!!!!

And there you have it in a nutshell.

I am sure for some people Brittain is just running over with Peadophiles and murdered but..I've yet to see any proof of this (contrary to what the media tell you in their big headlines) and wonder what those who are for a national DNA database (which by definition would have to be compulsary as otherwise it wouldn't work, would it?) are willing to give up to prevent more horrible crimes from happening.

I am not planning on molesting any children in the near future so why should I give up my DNA? It's not going to help you find a peadophile if I do...all it would do is allow me to get done for something I didn't do.

Approx 5%, 4 1/2 millions brits are currently on the DNA database of which 1/2 million are innocent. This database includes approx 100,000 children, many of whoms DNA was taken at school demonstrates and without them knowing that their DNA would end up on the database.

The fact is only a small percentage commit the majority of crimes. Many of these will already, or quite possibly in the future have their DNA taken so will end up on the national DNA database. Therefore is their any real benefit in cataloging everybodies DNA when it is a consideration that such a vast database may actually hinder future investigations. Couple this with the fact that any such compulsory scheme and general totalitarian attitude actually alienates many and thus potentially criminalising individuals. Even on a pure economics basis alone it doesn't make sense. Then again as people are willing to pay for an ID card for it's supposed benefits maybe these same people are willing to pay for the privilege of having their DNA taken and added to the database.

I agree DNA is a very valuable tool in solving crime. What I disagree with is the many in which we are made to believe it is of value by the means of scare mongering with stories of worst case scenios and without any real discussion as to what the true implications that such a database may have. The "if you've got nothing to hide argument" really doesn't justify a scheme which may not only be necessary but not workable. And yes they is always the issue that is information may be abused you used in other areas.

I fight the right NOT to become a patsy for yet another a state initiative especially when I don't have any faith in their capability to administer it.

is there a difference of opinion between the experts on this, ive always thought it was in the high millions to1,quick search gave me a figure of 1 in a billion,
The FBI's CODIS database uses samples that have undergone STR analysis examining 13 loci. The odds of two people having identical 13-loci STR profiles are about one in a billion.

yes that's about correct...but

http://forensic-evidence.com/site/EVID/EL_DNAerror.html

Fairly interesting article. I can not vouch for the accuracy of it but the point it makes is a fair one, I think

What if the experts are wrong?

DNA did help the police identify a prime suspect for the Omagh bombing. Personally I doubt it was a 6 year old child.

Definitely not educated enough to get involved in such an interesting debate.

I am just wondering whether or not the following scenario would be possible:

You go to the hospital/doctors where a routine blood test is done, then without your knowledge it is then passed on to the National Database ?

Personally I wouldn't object to being on such a database, on the grounds that I don't have anything to hide, and I don't see myself as committing a crime (but that appears to be the wrong reasons).

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23412351-details/Outrage%20as%20DNA%20profile%20of%20seven-month-old%20baby%20is%20added%20to%20register/article.do The parents knew in this case but why would this even be considered as an "experiment"?

I doubt it because most health care practitioners act in a professional, ethical manner and would require your consent. If you didnt give it and found out your DNA was on, its likely the person would lose their job so I wouldnt think so. You just never know though?

I have wondered this myself.

I have also been wondering about cloning ... I don't know that much about it but have wondered what future technologies could be used to 'misuse' someone's DNA held on the database.

If you do any cloning, can you knock me one up that looks like your avatar please?


Perhaps "knock up" was not the best choice of words.

 rotflmfao rotflmfao

excellent idea cloning maybe they could clone me rotflmfao

An amazing coincidence happened today,  on the front page of the Times there was a story (one of the boxes on the right) about a psychologist who was an "expert witness" in a murder case - with his evidence being vital to the case. He now thinks he was wrong and the man is innocent!

I haven't read through all of this thread but IMO a national DNA database is simply a must!

I dont know anything about medicine, Dr Menegele, but if you say I can live without a brain thats fine by me.

lol

The chief argument for a DNA database in this thread has been "If you have nothing to hide why would you mind? If this is the mentality the present government want us to except then WHY are they objecting to their annual expenses being published?

doubleup has been the voice of reason in this thread

A footballer is never going to be bigger than the team he plays for. So in the grand scheme of things....my DNA is more important than Gordon Brown.

Why should I give him something of such vital importance? Some reasons not to......

1. My DNA is not Labour's to take
2. This government wastes our money, so much so, they are currently objecting to publishing their dodgy expense accounts
3. They want us to be open when they are not
4. Corruption or scandal occurs in police/government all the time
5. The frequency of mistakes depends upon the competence of future governments and this is uncertain
6. I did not vote for the present government 
7. The money would be better spent on improving a creaking justice system.
8. More police/prisons would save lives immediately.
9. More police instead would make people outgoing and social rather than introverted and safe.
10. 99% of people want the death penalty, so why don't we have the death penalty?
11. There WILL be flaws in the system. E.g. babies not born in hospital/not registered
12. I don't want to


If future generations even consider categorisation then today's discrimination will seem like child's play.

I would be afraid of having my DNA on a database.  My concern would be my details falling into the wrong hands or the future possibillty of it being used to screen candidates for jobs, etc.  I would be concerned that we would end up living in a society like in Gattaca ( one of my top 10 movies of all time ).   

It's in my top 1.

Just a different stance on this, aren't we really talking about having a DNA database on all men? This would cut the cost and requirements of maintaining such a database, compared to a database for men and women. Although I think if there was a vote on this that it would be passed, if it was men only the vote would sail through.
I have also read the arguments on here but I can't find any argument powerful enough to counter the benefits to the safety of women and children.
Correct me if I am wrong.

All objections of course still stand. Really "the safety of women and children" is not actually that much at risk..honest to God..your wife can take the kids to the local cornershop without getting bumped off by the neighbourhood murderer/peadophile.

As long as the science is in place, there's nothing to stop a government agency using your DNA to cultivate cells and then planting this 'evidence' at a scene of crime. 

Would be a very quick and easy way of governments dealing with 'objectionable elements' - whether that be terror suspects, political opponents, or just people who've rubbed certain individuals up the wrong way (maybe they don't like you seeing their daughter, or the way you parked your car to block their driveway). 

Stand corrected.

The official death of this thread.

yeah that's kindoff what I thought when I saw it.

even I don't watch enough Hollywood conspiracy theory movies to believe the above.

It would be easier just to arrest them under some new terrorism laws which allow you to throw people in prison, because you feel like it. :P

indeed..who needs to fake evidence?

Prince Philip.

You can't arrest them if you're not government of that country.

You can just fake an accident by having the paparazi chase them down a tunnel though.

EXACTLY!!

I suggested this early on in the thread but was dismissed.

I know when my kids were born a blood test was taken by pricking their heel, 4 spots on a paper to be sent off to the labs.

Am I REALLY the only 1 that thinks there is a database ongoing without our knowledge?

Suzanne

That heel prick test is taken to look for some serious conditions in your baby that might require treatment, for example to make an early diagnosis of cystic fibrosis and hypothyroidism.  Heres a link..http://www.homeandhealthtv.co.uk/hh_site/article.jsp?section_id=7&theme_id=23&subtheme_id=80&article_id=81&site=uk

Other than Oliver Stone and Kinboshi?..Probably, yes. ;)

The science isn't in place now - but it will be within 20 years.

Yep, High Jinks on a stag do ( No arrest or conviction, time in the cop shop to sober up but details taken) in Newcastle landed me on the Database 6 years ago.

Cant say I like it, I do think the Police are under pressure to solve crimes and if my DNA is found at the scene of a crime (however that may be and there are lots of possibilities where this could happen innocently) then I am going to become a suspect.

I actually think that a universal DNA database has more positives than negatives. But I would never have volunteered to go on it as false convictions can occur and lets face it you never know if you might commit a crime in the future. I have no intentions of ever commiting any crime but thru circumstance, drink, misjudgement or antagonism something might happen that i would rather get away with rather than hold my hands up and spend years inside thank you.