Compulsory DNA samples

[dannyo]

I watched the documentary last night on Sally Ann Bowman. The young girl who got murdered and raped by some scum bag.

Anyway, the girls family are now fighting to make DNA sampling compulsory as this was key to the case (Otherwise her BF at the time would have had a life sentence).

Now I would totally agree with this and I cannot for the life of me see how anyone could or would object to it. It would make things a hell of a lot easier for the Police and getting justice.

People bang on about human rights, what difference is it going to make to a persons life if a DNA sample is taken when they are born? Surely this would be a massive step forward for the world if this was to happen.

[AnobizII]

I completly agree... I have nothing to hide and don't see me commiting any offences in the future so would have no problem giving a sample...

I think the only ppl that could object are ppl that a) have something to hide b) don't want this on record due to human rights etc...

I can't see how it can possible affect anyones rights due to the fact that if you have nothing to hide you shouldn't really notice any difference...

[Harvez]

to go one step further I would make everyone have a chip fitted at birth like you can with dogs.
you get stopped by the police for what ever reason they run a scanner over your arm beep, they know who you are age etc.

I would have no objections to this personally but those who object will prob have something to hide.

image your in a car accident your knocked out in a coma they can scan ur arm know who you are even your blood type and can then inform the right people to deal with you quicker and perhaps saving your life.

[Gregm]

Originally Posted by harvez

to go one step further I would make everyone have a chip fitted at birth like you can with dogs.
you get stopped by the police for what ever reason they run a scanner over your arm beep, they know who you are age etc.

I would have no objections to this personally but those who object will prob have something to hide.

image your in a car accident your knocked out in a coma they can scan ur arm know who you are even your blood type and can then inform the right people to deal with you quicker and perhaps saving your life.

have a look at this
Revelation, 666, the number of the beast, barcodes, electronic ID's, microchip implants, the Shengen Agreement

[Harvez]

hocuspocus number of the beast wasnt 666 anyway, the real number if you believe all that tripe was/is 616.

[omairt]

The argument that 'you shouldn't have a problem if you have nothing to hide' is probably the worst one. The government isn't transparent on everything it does...

The human rights violation is the invasion of privacy. I don't want random strangers going over my details. If DNA sampling wasn't an option, would you agree to 24/7 video surveillance everywhere you go?

Also, DNA isn't as reliable and accurate as most people think it is. The larger the DNA database, the higher the likelihood of similar genotypes, contamination, etc. Theoretically the chances of getting DNA wrong are 1 in a billion or something like that, but lab environments take this up to about 1 in a thousand. Not exactly an ideal figure if you're looking for a murderer.

I don't think I have anything to hide, yet I don't want my DNA on records. In my opinion, it's wrong that every citizen should be treated like a potential criminal regardless of their history.

As long as I'm obeying the law, the government doesn't need to know who I am or what I'm doing.

[bmh16]

Originally Posted by harvez

hocuspocus number of the beast wasnt 666 anyway, the real number if you believe all that tripe was/is 616.

Apparently that is debatable in the translation but yes 616 is more likely i think.

[dannyo]

Omairt - Put yourself in her BF's shoes. He was the last person to see her alive and had been arguing. All the evidence pointed to him and the police said that had there not been any DNA evidence they would have sent him down for it.

Imagine you were her father, someone had did this to your daughter, they have got his DNA but can't trace him? One scan of the database would tell you exactly who it belonged to.

Its not like they would check the database like they check emails. It would be done securely.

In response to it not being accurate, I am not saying that its the end of the case, they will still need other evidence but it narrows it down a hell of a lot. Even if there are 2 possible suspects, better than 1 million possible suspects living in the area.

[barcelonic]

I have to say im shocked!

Its such a gross violation of privacy and human rights. You lot who agree seem as though you trust your government far too much and are giving them credit they dont deserve. Our personal data such as CCTV footage is ALREADY being abused. Now you want to give them your DNA! Wow!!

Originally Posted by harvez

I would have no objections to this personally but those who object will prob have something to hide.

I have to say I find this rather naive, and its as though you are speaking for the rest of us which i object to.

Do you honestly believe that all of the human rights activists and the ENORMOUS percentage of this country who object to this, are simply "claiming" to object on grounds of invasion of privacy and all in fact have something to hide from the authorities?

This is a very serious issue in domestic politics at the moment, and in my eyes is one very large step closer to chip implants, which a previous poster touched upon already (while wishing it a reality which i find shocking!).

The powers would be are hoping that one day we are all chipped so they can use these chips as currency so that we need to keep credits on it which must be used to pay for things. That way if we ever fell out of line they can disable the chip so that we cannot catch buses, pay for food or anything else in society. This is a long term plan but certainly one that is in action and we should all be extremely wary of.

Crimes such as these are perfect for getting public opinion on their side but don't be fooled. Our rights as humans come first and foremost.

Let it also be mentioned (although this is remarkably trivial given my comments above), that DNA isn't as flawless as people think. And it is the forensic experts themselves who say this!

[dannyo]

What human rights? What difference is it going to make to you? All that would happen is that they can link a name to a crime. Then they look for the name? Easy, simple, harmless.

"Its such a gross violation of privacy" They would not have to look at your details unless it came up as a match on DNA that they have on the crime scene?

[barcelonic]

Originally Posted by dannyo

What human rights? What difference is it going to make to you? All that would happen is that they can link a name to a crime. Then they look for the name? Easy, simple, harmless.

"Its such a gross violation of privacy" They would not have to look at your details unless it came up as a match on DNA that they have on the crime scene?

Thats like saying they could put a camera in your home but wouldnt use it unless you were suspected in a crime.

For me the country I live in and the government that rules it is NOTHING to do with me. If I have a child it is MY child, I shouldn't feel obligated to give the government his DNA or any other information about me. Because we are not animals we are human beings and the government is not our guardian.

[dannyo]

No but the Police are your guardians. Its got nothing to do with the government. What if someone raped and murdered your child and they had DNA of a person. They cant track that person down because they haven't committed an offence (Or been caught) before. Would you still oppose the system that would be able to indentify that DNA?

They aren't going to monitor every day to day activity so it is nothing like having a camera in your house.

[mattyb]

I have to say I'm STRONGLY opposed to the idea of compulsory DNA sampling for reasons outlined above by both omairt and barcelonic.

I have issue as well with the current system whereby if you're arrested for any crime a sample of DNA is taken. If it turns out that you are innocent your DNA is kept for 5 years regardless!! Complete violation.

Arrrrghhh, I've so much to say on this subject because I had an intense debate recently with a friend on it but I can't formulate argument on a forum for some reason.

Sigh.

How about we all have 2 minutes of hate?

[barcelonic]

Originally Posted by dannyo

Its got nothing to do with the government.

They aren't going to monitor every day to day activity so it is nothing like having a camera in your house.

I disagree with both points there. Firstly, its got EVERYTHING to do with the government. Who do you think has access to this? Imagine for a second if Hitler had had access to such a database.

Secondly, it is the same as having a camera in your house. They are both massive steps towards a closed society. It is all too easy to think solely on this one step without seeing the bigger picture - "why not? i have nothing to hide", "its just DNA they dont know where i am".

You also must realise that DNA doesnt just indicate where you may have been, it tells the government whether you have a disease, whether you are likely to be aggressive, your race etc.. This could easily lead to a state security program whereby innocent people are monitored without them having committed a crime. It could also be used to segregate or profile people of a certain ethnicity, personality type etc..

To give a better idea of the basics of privacy, read the section "An Individual Right" at the following page... Privacy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Then you will see it is not just me making this stuff up. Our civil liberties are more important than anything - so much so that this argument isn't just about DNA access. As an individual I have the right to choose when and where to share my personal information and know where it is and what it is being used for at all times.

For those that want to give their DNA, that's perfectly fine but if they tried making it mandatory I would emigrate to a country that still respects its citizens' right to privacy.

Interestingly you should all know that the UK currently has the biggest DNA database in the world! And its not even close -

UK: 5% of population DNA stored,
Austria: 1%,
USA: 1%

So we are MILES ahead, and while other countries are creating legislation prohibiting the state from keeping DNA of people who are not convicted we are going in the opposite direction. Add to that the fact we also have FAR, FAR MORE CCTV than any other country too, and this is a terrible direction we are heading in.

[mattyb]

Originally Posted by barcelonic

Interestingly you should all know that the UK currently has the biggest DNA database in the world! And its not even close -

UK: 5% of population DNA stored,
Austria: 1%,
USA: 1%

So we are MILES ahead, and while other countries are creating legislation prohibiting the state from keeping DNA of people who are not convicted we are going in the opposite direction. Add to that the fact we also have FAR, FAR MORE CCTV than any other country too, and this is a terrible direction we are heading in.

Terrifying isn't it. I'm gobsmacked at the governments attitude towards this under the guise of "making us all safer". We're no f**king safer now with the most amount of CCTV cameras per capita in the world, and the largest DNA database in the world. Utter nonsense.

I also hate the argument about "well if you've nothing to hide then you shouldn't have a problem". My problem is that i SHOULD be able to hide whatever I want - my right to anonymity is being eroded slowly but surely until one day we all live on airstrip one and always been at war with Oceania.

[Larkino]

It is 616 because Stephen Fry said so.