Surely its time we are all on a DNA database

[thediceman]

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.

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

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.

[Geo the Sarge]

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.  

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

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.

See, it's them bloody students again.

Geo

[doubleup]

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.

[Bongo]

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.

[thediceman]

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.

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

[cia260895]

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 !!!!!

[boldie]

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.

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.

[thediceman]

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.

[steeveg]

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 !!!!!

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.

[boldie]

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 !!!!!

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

[Bongo]

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 !!!!!

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.

What if the experts are wrong?

[thediceman]

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

[taximan007]

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).

[boldie]

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"?

[madasahatstand]

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).

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?