national DNA database

[Darth Vodka]

the UK national DNA database contains over 4 million UK citizens' DNA

the recent convictions of Steven Wright and Mark Dixie (Suffolk Strangler & the one who murdered the maybe-a-model Sally Anne Bowman) were because their DNA was on record from other crimes (nicking from the till and having a fight during the World Cup)

civil liberties' groups object to more people being on the database, but i think, **** 'em, as far as i'm concerned the only reason not to have almost everyone on the database is cost...

i say stick everyone arrested on

be interested to hear others' thoughts...

especially as Leicester is the home of DNA fingerprinting and the first conviction from it...

oh and how big is that database? 4*10^6 * 3*10^9 = 12 PetaBytes

PETABYTES!!

oh and another thing, ten years from now, we will have the first conviction because someone's dad or uncle is on the database (we've already had someone caught because their brother was on)

 

[Han]

i'm all for it. there's no reason why they shouldn't have everyone's DNA. at least stick all criminals on there.

 

[Trifull]

i'm all for it. there's no reason why they shouldn't have everyone's DNA. at least stick all criminals on there.

Why not, because if you haven't commited a crime why should you be treated as though you have, or as though you might be going to. I know some will say if ''if you've nothing to worry about, why worry''. Well, because I still believe there are certain people who will 'fit you up'. It's very easy for me to get hairs of another person and plant them at the scene of a crime ... and because it's dna evidence you must have been there and therefore you must be guilty !

 

[Steven]

Only if you have been convicted of a serious crime.

 

[Scarby]

i agree put them on it

 

[Steven]

Why not, because if you haven't commited a crime why should you be treated as though you have, or as though you might be going to. I know some will say if ''if you've nothing to worry about, why worry''. Well, because I still believe there are certain people who will 'fit you up'. It's very easy for me to get hairs of another person and plant them at the scene of a crime ... and because it's dna evidence you must have been there and therefore you must be guilty !

That is a good point however a little inaccurate. Whereas fingerprint evidence is a clear indicator of presence at the scene of a crime that is not necessarily true of DNA evidence.

 

[The Major]

If you've never committed a crime why should you be treated like a potential suspect. Not only that, but a DNA finger print tells you so much more than if you were at the scene of a crime. It can tell who you're are related to and what hereditary conditions you are prone to, information that the government shouldn't need to know.
Lastly with this governments record on computerised data, would you trust them with any information about you?

 

[Matt_B]

my sole concern at the minute with having this sort of information stored is that you simply can't seem to trust the current government not to lose it, and in the hands of the wrong type of people it could potentially be dangerous.

 

[Macky]

If you can't trust your government with a record of your National Insurance number, can they really be trusted with an individual map of your genome?

I may be guilty of simplistic logic but it would make me very nervous to think that I was required to submit my DNA in order to be a legitimate citizen.

 

[spionfox]

i'm all for it. there's no reason why they shouldn't have everyone's DNA. at least stick all criminals on there.

Let's not forget potential criminals too. They're the worst kind because you never know when the bastards will turn.

 

[Bezu Fache Fox]

Why not, because if you haven't commited a crime why should you be treated as though you have, or as though you might be going to. I know some will say if ''if you've nothing to worry about, why worry''. Well, because I still believe there are certain people who will 'fit you up'. It's very easy for me to get hairs of another person and plant them at the scene of a crime ... and because it's dna evidence you must have been there and therefore you must be guilty !

As far as I'm aware, other evidence is normally needed to secure a conviction, not just DNA based.

I agree with it in principle, but hate it when people complain that this and the I.D card would take our identities away from us. Poncey feckers, feck off, balls would it you soft bastards. Go and recycle your sandals.

I do share some of the concerns of others on here ie in terms of cost and blunders.

 

[Cate Fox]

I dont have any objections to having my DNA on record, as long as I could trust the Government of the time not to balls it up and lose it somewhere. Would certainly help to solve serious crimes alot more quickly and I'm all for that.

 

[Darth Vodka]

good points made, even the hardcore calling for a full national database (which i'm not) would have to admit:-

1) the government is hardly covering itself with gold as regards personal data loss
2) it'd cost a bloody fortune = more tax

ID cards...oh my god would they mess that up. at least the DNA database started organically (no pun intended organic chemistry fans)
a completely new system would never get implemented on time or on budget by the civil service muppets

i say again PETABYTES, the mind boggles on what system they store it...and the back up tapes...

 

[Hazzman]

especially as Leicester is the home of DNA fingerprinting and the first conviction from it...

I met the bloke behind that the case last year.

If you can't trust your government with a record of your National Insurance number, can they really be trusted with an individual map of your genome?

I wonder how much is brought on by ourselves at times though. At work on Friday, we were ordered to delete all shit off our computer cos the servers were at 98%, some well-meaning chap found someone's NI number, tax code and personal details all on a word document! The bloke concerned was 83 years old, some daft bastard left a relative's info on some where for all to see......

 

[Boy Genius]

Be better still if the OB got of their fat arses and did some proper police work.

 

[Trifull]

As far as I'm aware, other evidence is normally needed to secure a conviction, not just DNA based.

I agree with it in principle, but hate it when people complain that this and the I.D card would take our identities away from us. Poncey feckers, feck off, balls would it you soft bastards. Go and recycle your sandals.

I do share some of the concerns of others on here ie in terms of cost and blunders.

Why do we need I.D. cards ? I have a passport, a driving licence and a photo card licence for work. Most people under the age of 25 carry I.D. to get served in pubs .. and now also to buy fags. I don't know where you get the bit of 'taking away our identities' from, but may certainly take away some of your freedom. First come the I.D. cards, the comes carrying them 24/7 which then becomes a finable offence not to carry it. Why do the government need my DNA on file ?
The poncey ones aren't those who complain about it, the poncey ones are those people who accept without questioning the reasoning.

 

[Bezu Fache Fox]

The reasoning is pretty simple, or so I thought. If done properly the DNA database would help to catch criminals faster, reducing their potential to commit more crimes.

 

[spionfox]

If done properly the DNA database would help to catch criminals faster, reducing their potential to commit more crimes.

Only if they are courteous enough to leave a bit of their DNA behind.

 

[Darth Vodka]

Only if they are courteous enough to leave a bit of their DNA behind.

it's pretty hard NOT to leave your DNA behind, it's in every cell in your body (except red blood cells)

you'd have to be very forensic aware to leave no trace

 

[Chuck T Masala]

Everyone in the UK DNA stored on Computer? This is all powerful information. All sorts of people want to use it for commercial reasons, e.g. life & health insurance, mortgages, loans, etc. No Goverment should be trusted with such data, no matter how vital it may be to criminal investigations. It would be done on the cheap and there would be so many fingers in the pie that it could never be secure. Irrespective of party, Governments lie to the public when it serves their interests. ID Cards I am not arsed either way. the DNA of every man women and child in this country held on a computer is something I do not want.

I can't see criminals, paedo's, terrorists, hooligans and the like queuing up with their true identities outside Boots (or anywhere else) to provive their DNA swab.