Would you be in favour of a national DNA database ?

HalifaxSeagull · Oct 24, 2014

Brighton Lines said:
A number of years ago I had my car stolen. The Police told me they had arrested someone, who turned out to be a known car thief, on the basis of DNA taken from a cigarette butt found in the car. (Stupid thief).

I initially feared that they may have the wrong person though. A friend of mine had been in the car a few days previously. He has a criminal record from when he was younger, and his DNA was taken at the time. As it happens all was well.

Part of me believes this is a good idea, but another part of me, the one that has a deep distrust of some of those in the Police, worries that some people could be implicated and wrongly prosecuted for crimes they didn't commit.

A lot of innocent people will have much trauma before being cleared of wrongdoing.

If you're friend had been identified by his DNA on a cig butt in your car, the police would approach you first to see if you knew him and if he had at some point a legitimate reason for the cig butt to be in your car... You'd have said yes and e would have been discounted from the offence...
If they cocked up in that and locked him up, then during interview he would have been able to account for the DNA hit in your car, this would have been confirmed this with you and he would have been NFA'd from the crime an released...

fat old seagull · Oct 24, 2014

Shropshire Seagull said:
I'd suggest the vast majority of folk against such an idea are generally the perpetrators of crime ....

Easy to capture with every birth registration - need a birth certificate for passport / DL / etc later in life - MUST have donated DNA to the world wide DNA register.

If ever there was a deterrent - only the very stupid will get caught ....

Though in fact I'm dithering and probably at my age not that much concerned, with regard to myself anyway. But I think it's way, way over the top to suggest that anyone who doesn't agree is a criminal! Not far short of outrageous and naive. There are a great number of people who don't entirely trust either the Government or the Police. Sadly it's not without some justification as we all to regularly hear nowdays.
At this time there seems to be no option for a DNA Database to be abused, but who knows what the future and devious minds might concoct. Fact is once your in....you are for life.

Westdene Seagull · Oct 24, 2014

Diego Napier said:
Good grief, talk about hyperbole!

You've let your obviously fervent imagination run riot. There is no logical connection whatsover between "if you have nothing to hide" and accepting the 3 draconian scenarios you postulated. Where has @Worthingite suggested that he would want DNA to be recorded without any safeguards; he's referring to the principle not it's implementation.

And then your last paragraph. Words fail me. You've asked the question and answered it yourself and then flown off on some fanciful tangent all of your own.

Reconnect with the logical side of your brain, block out the emotive, analyse your post and see what hysterical drivel you've posted.

You think my post was fanciful imagination and hysterical ? OK, let's simplify the question - I wonder how many people would truly volunteer their DNA if the government created an optional system where you were paid say £10 to give your DNA ?

fat old seagull · Oct 24, 2014

Westdene Seagull said:
You think my post was fanciful imagination and hysterical ? OK, let's simplify the question - I wonder how many people would truly volunteer their DNA if the government created an optional system where you were paid say £10 to give your DNA ?

Mmmm I might give it numerous times, giving a number of aliases. Make myself a few quid.....get caught and give it again for nothing !

Thunder Bolt · Oct 24, 2014

There is a lot of concern over how the database would be managed, and protected from cross contamination, for me.

Diego Napier · Oct 24, 2014

Westdene Seagull said:
You think my post was fanciful imagination and hysterical ? OK, let's simplify the question - I wonder how many people would truly volunteer their DNA if the government created an optional system where you were paid say £10 to give your DNA ?

Again, you're still confused, you're talking about implementation not principle. There are hundreds of different scenarios you could imagine that have no bearing on the principle whatsoever. It's like saying that I believe in capital punishment and then you respond by saying what if it was by electrocution, or what if there were no right of appeal or what if guilt was to be determined by the police instead of a jury. Capital punishment is the principle, the establishing of adequate and acceptable safeguards is the implementation.

TonyW · Oct 24, 2014

I can assure you all that there will be one eventually, even if it's not official, as the DNA of all new-born babies in this country is already being catalogued.

Czechmate · Oct 24, 2014

Wrong-Direction said:
Its quite simple really, once you commit a medium to high level crime you have your DNA taken, that way the rest of us law abiding folk won't have anything to worry about, unless of course you are a victim of crime..

This !

I went to hospital a couple of weeks ago for a check up and they took a DNA swab from inside my mouth ?? Now I am wondering what it was for , was it an underhand way of getting my DNA ? Where will the results be held ? I am going in again next week so I will check .

Gritt23 · Oct 24, 2014

I find it a terribly sad state of affairs, that it is the distrust of Governments (and maybe the police) that seems to be at the root of any objections. How have we got ourselves into a situation whereby the authorities are distrusted to such a degree that it could well prevent bringing something like this in, with all the amazing upsides it would bring.

Put the distrust aside for a moment, and just imagine the World we'd be living in if we had this. A crime gets committed, a violent assault, a murder, a rape, then the moment DNA is found, we know the perpetrator. He's behind bars, and the World is a safer place, justice is done. It would be such a monumental step forward in the clear-up rates of crimes, that SURELY the crime rates would drop dramatically. If you do it, your chances of getting caught are VERY high. Maybe the solving of cases becomes so much easier the Police have time to investigate burglaries, and other minor crimes a bit more. Again, finding a bit of DNA in a burgled house and arresting the scroat would be like shooting fish in a barrel.

But it's not just crime, there are other things that could come with it to just make the World a better place to be. Anyone who has had a relative die in unpleasant circumstances will NOT have to "formally identify the body", with all the lasting memories that leaves a poor relative. When there are shortages of particular blood groups, appeals go out for donations, but maybe you tick a box when you register, and you are allowing hospitals to contact you when a rare blood group is needed. How about bone marrow, from a DNA sample, is there any way of knowing whether you are a bone marrow match for a dying patient?

Science is amazing, and for our fears and distrust of authority, it just feels we are holding back a phenomenal advancement.

I'd put my distrust aside, and vote YES.

Worthingite · Oct 24, 2014

Westdene Seagull said:
Well at least this time it took a few posts before this utter drivel was added. So taking your statement about 'if you have nothing to hide' would you support the following :

> Everyone has an RFID chip implanted at birth so they can be tracked 24 hours a day
> Everyone has to supply an itinerary of where they will be each day
> Police can search your home without a warrant whenever they like

What about police corruption ? There isn't any I hear you cry ? Hmmm ...... 96 Liverpool supporters STILL don't have justice and the police are using very high powered barristers to intimidate witnesses at the inquiry - still happy that the police should have access to your DNA ?

You are [MENTION=20045]hybrid_x[/MENTION] and I claim my £5.

In all seriousness though - nobody is talking about having a chip put inside them, or supplying an itinery of your whereabouts. We're talking about a simple DNA swab that can trace back to you should there be a medical or criminal need.

I genuinely don't understand these conspiracies about there being some ulterior motive - we don't live in an episode of the X files, politicians in this country are, in the main, incompetent and incapable rather than devious and scheming, and yes, if we lived in a country where human rights aren't so prominent then I guess my reactions to something like this would be different. But we don't, so I wouldn't be worried about it, and instead I choose to look on the sunnier side of the street - what if, for instance, a child has leukaemia, with this database there is every possibility that a match could be found, and the situation made less stressful for the family, that's got to be progress surely?

Westdene Seagull · Oct 24, 2014

Worthingite said:
You are @hybrid_x and I claim my £5.

In all seriousness though - nobody is talking about having a chip put inside them, or supplying an itinery of your whereabouts. We're talking about a simple DNA swab that can trace back to you should there be a medical or criminal need.

I genuinely don't understand these conspiracies about there being some ulterior motive - we don't live in an episode of the X files, politicians in this country are, in the main, incompetent and incapable rather than devious and scheming, and yes, if we lived in a country where human rights aren't so prominent then I guess my reactions to something like this would be different. But we don't, so I wouldn't be worried about it, and instead I choose to look on the sunnier side of the street - what if, for instance, a child has leukaemia, with this database there is every possibility that a match could be found, and the situation made less stressful for the family, that's got to be progress surely?

Nice try but no £5 :thumbsup:

So it's nice you trust the current authorities but what about those in power in say 20 years, 50 years or 100 years ? Just some examples ( and I await to be told I'm hysterical ) :

> Would people have believed that police officers would have sold information to the press ?
> Would people have believed that senior police officers and politicians would have colluded to hide incompetence that killed 96 people ?
> Would people have believed that the police would have lied to try and get a senior politician sacked ?
> Would people have believed that the police, politicians and security services would have buried evidence of child abuse to protect their own ?

Just a few examples. Now I don't know about you but I struggle to trust these organisations enough to give them access to something as powerful as a DNA database. It it's purest form a DNA database of everyone would be great - then you have to consider who would use it and what safeguards would need to be in place to prevent misuse. I for one have no faith that there are enough safeguards possible to stop misuse. Therefore it's a No from me.

ThePompousPaladin · Oct 24, 2014

Gritt23 said:
Put the distrust aside for a moment, and just imagine the World we'd be living in if we had this. A crime gets committed, a violent assault, a murder, a rape, then the moment DNA is found, we know the perpetrator. He's behind bars, and the World is a safer place, justice is done. It would be such a monumental step forward in the clear-up rates of crimes, that SURELY the crime rates would drop dramatically.

But would they? And is it worth the risk for an extra few convictions? Surely 'career' criminals will find a way around this, like, i dunno not giving their DNA... or spreading a load around the crime scene. Sure, it would clear up a few crimes but it wouldn't be as amazing as you'd like to believe. And the risk is simply staggering. Anything put in place to control the population is very risky - just look at history.

The only way i'd be completely happy for this to go ahead would perhaps be to allow all the population to be armed to ensure if the government tried anything they could only do so with the consent of the population. Drastic eh? And i wouldn't be happy with all the extra crime that would create...

ThePompousPaladin · Oct 24, 2014

Worthingite said:
I genuinely don't understand these conspiracies about there being some ulterior motive - we don't live in an episode of the X files, politicians in this country are, in the main, incompetent and incapable rather than devious and scheming...

You're right we're lucky, many people do. But things change, and in all seriousness IF during the last downturn a well placed bomb had gone off at the right time in the city. We could well be looking at having a radical government now that could push through a radical agenda.
It is unlikely, but is it worth the risk?
I'd suggest that for medical advances it should be voluntary, unless you're envisaging a 'meaning of life' type transplant.

beorhthelm · Oct 24, 2014

Diego Napier said:
Good grief, talk about hyperbole!

You've let your obviously fervent imagination run riot. There is no logical connection whatsover between "if you have nothing to hide" and accepting the 3 draconian scenarios you postulated. Where has [MENTION=21578]Worthingite[/MENTION] suggested that he would want DNA to be recorded without any safeguards; he's referring to the principle not it's implementation.

and whats the difference in principle between DNA and RFIDs? in fact the later is more usful as it would determine not only a persons presence but time of presence at a crime scene. it would also help with missing persons, it might help avoid a crime even occuring if someone is noted out of the normal environment. a much better solution. there would of course be infallible safeguards, so i'll put you down as a trialist?

Diego Napier · Oct 24, 2014

beorhthelm said:
and whats the difference in principle between DNA and RFIDs? in fact the later is more usful as it would determine not only a persons presence but time of presence at a crime scene. it would also help with missing persons, it might help avoid a crime even occuring if someone is noted out of the normal environment. a much better solution. there would of course be infallible safeguards, so i'll put you down as a trialist?

Another one who makes his own extrapolation, poses a question and answers it himself and posits the warped result on me in a triumphantalist fashion.

Limp logic, limp brain; try harder.

beorhthelm · Oct 24, 2014

Diego Napier said:
Another one who makes his own extrapolation, poses a question and answers it himself and posits the warped result on me in a triumphantalist fashion.

Limp logic, limp brain; try harder.

you might like to answer the question posed, rather than dodge it. i didnt make any extrapolation, i ask whats the difference in principle between the ideas and propose that in fact RFIDs have some significant advantages over that which you advocate.

Diego Napier · Oct 24, 2014

beorhthelm said:
you might like to answer the question posed, rather than dodge it. i didnt make any extrapolation, i ask whats the difference and propose that in fact it has some significant advantages over that which you advocate.

Don't twist what you posted, you answered your own question and your final sarcasm told me all I need to know about your intent.

beorhthelm · Oct 24, 2014

Diego Napier said:
Don't twist what you posted, you answered your own question and your final sarcasm told me all I need to know about your intent.

intent is to get an answer to the question. ok, try this (doesnt need a new thread):

Would you be in favour of RFID tagging and tracking? This would help identify criminals quicker. arguments for and against?

Diego Napier · Oct 24, 2014

No, because it is too intrusive and a step, probably several, too far.

There are lots of ways to identify individuals but when seeking a criminal they are very hit-and-miss.

Ostensibly, everyone is identified at birth, when they have a medical problem, when they start work, when attain the age of majority, when they learn to drive, when they travel abroad. There are also lots of less significant events that create even more means to identify an individual (Credit reference, fingerprints, Bank account, temporary DNA sample, Credit card, tissue typing, Mobile phone, CCTV, Donor card etc.). There are therefore many Dbs (all with their differing primary/foreign keys) that contain a considerable amont of data relating to a person.

A single unified DNA Database (with appropriate safeguards) would provide an efficient and workable mean of identification that is only a small step from what already exists.

beorhthelm · Oct 24, 2014

Diego Napier said:
A single unified DNA Database (with appropriate safeguards) would provide an efficient and workable mean of identification that is only a small step from what already exists.

as would a RFID tag. just one small step. my line is before the DNA database, your is apparently after. in *principle* there is little difference and it doesnt take fervent imaginations to make those small steps.

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Would you be in favour of a national DNA database ?

Are you in favour of a national DNA database?

Yes

No

Active member

New member

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch

New member

Silly old bat

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Sexy Pete... :D

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch

New member

New member

A. Virgo, Football Genius

Well-known member

A. Virgo, Football Genius

Well-known member

A. Virgo, Football Genius

Well-known member

A. Virgo, Football Genius

Share this page