Surely its time we are all on a DNA database

[doubleup]

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

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!

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.

[Bongo]

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 would you not give a sample. Are you a drug dealer? if not... why? why would u hate ur life on a sample

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?

[madasahatstand]

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.

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.

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 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.......

 

[totalise]

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

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!

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.

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

[doubleup]

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

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.

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

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.

[Robert HM]

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?

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 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.

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?

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.

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

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.

[thediceman]

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.

[AndrewT]

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.

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.

[madasahatstand]

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?

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 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.

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?

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.

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

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.

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

[Colchester Kev]

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.

[AndrewT]

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.

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

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

Geo

Geo, earlier today.

[Robert HM]

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.

 

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

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.

[thediceman]

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

A DNA database is unlikely to stop a SPREE killer.

[Geo the Sarge]

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.

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.

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 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.......

 

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

[totalise]

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.

lolol, so pathetic....