Speaking of the law

this makes me a bit angry (taken from an article on the BBC website):



"The National DNA Database was set up in 1995.
Before 2001, the police could take DNA samples during investigations but had to destroy these, and records derived from them, if suspects were acquitted or charges were not proceeded with. The law was changed in 2001 to remove this requirement, and changed again in 2004 so that DNA samples could be taken from anyone arrested for a recordable offence and detained in a police station."

I'm completely against the idea any law that could enable the police to hold DNA information of an individual that has been acquitted of an offence and has no previous convictions. Kinda smacks of a police state and I *really* hate the argument, "If you've done nothing wrong you've nothing to fear", if I've done nothing wrong I should be treated like a law abiding citizen. Not a potential criminal.

Wonder if they took dna from that Tomb Raider bloke?

Oh this is the topic that really turns me into a rabid badger. Yes, you can be DNA tested for just about any arrestable offence, man woman or child, and even if you're subsequently and rapidly found to have no connection to the offence in question and released without charge, your DNA will still be on the database for the rest of time.

Oh, and at the end of 2005 (ie. two years ago, it'll be a lot more by now) there were over half a million children on the database. Oh, and 37% of all black men were on it, which understandably raised some concerns.

I think its a jolly good idea, if it helps track down one of lifes scum any quicker im all for it!

Thought ths thread was about the Stealthster!

And lets look two years down the road, the DNA database will be tied into the Automatic Numberplate Recognition database, and the ID card database, and lets not forget the facial recognition CCTV network. Your every movement is tracked, and recorded. For all time. Whether you've done anything wrong or not.

But of course, if you've got nothing to hide....

(sorry, rabid badger something of an understatement)

hmmm, i understand your concerns on this one, and realise that some people who are acquitted are innocent. however this isn't always the case, maybe they were let off due to lack of evidence for example.
so weighing up the benefits (e.g. greater chance of convictions for crimes) vs the cons, I'm afraid i come down on the side of the DNA database...

*prepares for onslaught*

I don't really understand what all the fuss is about.

Tbh I wouldn't mind being on a database if it meant they could identify me from a dismembered toe or something because the rest of me was vapourised... or unrecognisable mush, which in light of 9/11 isn't such an impossible thing these days...

Originally Posted by Ping

I don't really understand what all the fuss is about.

Tbh I wouldn't mind being on a database if it meant they could identify me from a dismembered toe or something because the rest of me was vapourised... or unrecognisable mush, which in light of 9/11 isn't such an impossible thing these days...

+1

Where do I send my sample to?

I have no problems with my DNA being on the DB, so long as they comply with DPA Section 6 (ie, don't spam mail me!)

Lets take it to an extreme. Say someone accuses me of rape, and they get DNA from that person. The database could easily rule me out without them having to so much as knock on my door!!

Originally Posted by Ping

I don't really understand what all the fuss is about.

Tbh I wouldn't mind being on a database if it meant they could identify me from a dismembered toe or something because the rest of me was vapourised... or unrecognisable mush, which in light of 9/11 isn't such an impossible thing these days...

But 9/11, toe dismemberment etc is not a normal everyday occurance. It's a one in a billion event.

I'm sure that if it was an identification thing then a comparison could be made with my immedaite family.

There was a girl murdered down the road from me ages ago (A terrible incident) & the police started going round the houses collecting dna from everyone. I was really unhappy about this for 3 reasons:

1. It wasn't me, innocent till guilty
2. Collecting dna at times like that is a bit wrong - the neighbourhood was in shock & it seemed like the police were obtaining dna by stealth as everyone wanted to do their bit ro help OR be seen to do their bit to help.
3. The samples wouldthen be recorded on a database somewhere for all time. They would not be removed after innocence had been PROVEN.