Judge wants everyone in UK on DNA database...

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for DaveMcSavage
DaveMcSavage

7172

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#1 DaveMcSavage
Member since 2005 • 7172 Posts

Seems a bit "1984",doesn't it?

Guardian Unlimited

The entire UK population and every visitor to Britain should be put on the national DNA database, a top judge said today.

Lord Justice Sedley, one of England's most experienced appeal court judges, described the country's current system as "indefensible".

"We have a situation where if you happen to have been in the hands of the police, then your DNA is on permanent record. If you haven't, it isn't ... that's broadly the picture," Sir Stephen Sedley told the BBC.

"It also means that a great many people who are walking the streets, and whose DNA would show them guilty of crimes, go free."

He said that expanding the existing database to cover the whole population had "serious but manageable implications".

But he warned that putting everybody's DNA on file should be "for the absolutely rigorously restricted purpose of crime detection and prevention".

Britain's 12-year-old DNA database is the largest of any country in the world, growing by 30,000 samples a month. According to the Home Office website, 5.2% of the UK population is on the database, compared with 0.5% in the US.

The data is taken from criminal suspects or scenes of crime and there are currently 4m profiles held. Under the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001, police are permitted to retain DNA samples from anyone charged with a crime. Previously, samples and fingerprints taken from those found not guilty, or those who had their charge dropped, had to be destroyed.

Today, Shami Chakrabarti, the director of the human rights organisation Liberty, warned against potential changes to how and when British authorities collected DNA data.

"The DNA debate reveals just how casual some people have become about the value of personal privacy," she said.

"A database of those convicted of sexual and violent crime is a perfectly sensible crimefighting measure.

"A database of every man, woman and child in the country is a chilling proposal, ripe for indignity, error and abuse."

A Home Office spokeswoman said the government had no plans to introduce a universal compulsory, or voluntary, national DNA database.

However, the department is currently undertaking a review of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (Pace) 1984, which sets out the powers to take and retain biometric data.

"The DNA database has revolutionised the way the police can protect the public through identifying offenders and securing more convictions," the spokeswoman said. "It provides the police on average with around 3,500 matches each month."

She said final proposals on the review were due to be published in spring next year and would "take account of the views received during the consultation as well as those of Lord Chief Justice Sedley".

The Home Office minister Tony McNulty told BBC Radio 4's Today programme this morning: "I think we are broadly sympathetic to the thrust of what he [the judge] has said.

"I have said that myself in the past, that there is a real logic and cohesion to the point that says, 'Well, put everybody on'.

"But I think he probably does underestimate the practicalities, logistics and huge civil liberties and ethics issue around that.

"There is no government plans to go to a compulsory database now or in the foreseeable future."

Responding to Lord Sedley's comments, the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, Nick Clegg, said: "Whilst his total disregard for concerns about privacy and civil liberties is misplaced, at least he has the honesty to put forward a suggestion for a universal DNA database.

"This contrasts with the government's cloak and dagger strategy of creating a universal database behind the backs of the British people."

The information commissioner, Richard Thomas, told Today: "I think we have to think very long and very hard before going down the road of a universal DNA database.

"There are some risks involved. This approach can be really intrusive, it raises really fundamental questions about how much the state or the police knows about each of us."

Avatar image for rudyroundhead
rudyroundhead

9612

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#2 rudyroundhead
Member since 2003 • 9612 Posts
Privacy means nothing now adays it seems. Why not just go ahead and RFID chip everyone up like they did to those people in California.
Avatar image for DaveMcSavage
DaveMcSavage

7172

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#3 DaveMcSavage
Member since 2005 • 7172 Posts

Privacy means nothing now adays it seems. Why not just go ahead and RFID chip everyone up like they did to those people in California. rudyroundhead

Sorry,wha'ts that you're reffering to?

Avatar image for pete_merlin
pete_merlin

6098

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#4 pete_merlin
Member since 2007 • 6098 Posts
its DNA. basically makes it harder for criminals to get away with things. ALOT harder actually. the idea is a bit out there but i agree with it.
Avatar image for deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51

57548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#5 deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
Member since 2004 • 57548 Posts
Hmmmm. and people thought fingerprints were bad.
Avatar image for rudyroundhead
rudyroundhead

9612

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#6 rudyroundhead
Member since 2003 • 9612 Posts
engadet article Senate vote to block mandatory rfid in humans bill google rfid and california for more stuff. The majority of it talks about rfid in id's and such though.
Avatar image for hair001
hair001

1202

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 hair001
Member since 2005 • 1202 Posts
Utter madness. They don't need everyone's DNA anyway, he gave no numbers as to how many crimes this would solve, I bet it would hardly solve anything
Avatar image for rudyroundhead
rudyroundhead

9612

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#8 rudyroundhead
Member since 2003 • 9612 Posts
LA TIMES article if engadet isnt' trustworthy on rfids in humans bill Another article Con-SPEAR-UH-SEE! :)
Avatar image for DaveMcSavage
DaveMcSavage

7172

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#9 DaveMcSavage
Member since 2005 • 7172 Posts

engadet article Senate vote to block mandatory rfid in humans bill google rfid and california for more stuff. The majority of it talks about rfid in id's and such though.rudyroundhead

That's insane...mandatory implants?I'd rather have my arm chopped of than be forced to have an implant in it.

Utter madness. They don't need everyone's DNA anyway, he gave no numbers as to how many crimes this would solve, I bet it would hardly solve anythinghair001

I would eliminate all the stupid criminals,leaving only the very clever ones...or at least ones that can afford gloves.

Avatar image for rudyroundhead
rudyroundhead

9612

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#10 rudyroundhead
Member since 2003 • 9612 Posts
^^^agrees with Dave but if you lived in Cali and worked for the state and this had passed then you would have no choice. BIG BROTHER ftw!
Avatar image for DaveMcSavage
DaveMcSavage

7172

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#11 DaveMcSavage
Member since 2005 • 7172 Posts

^^^agrees with Dave but if you lived in Cali and worked for the state and this had passed then you would have no choice. BIG BROTHER ftw!rudyroundhead

ZOMG He's watching meeee! Even in the bathroom! :o

Avatar image for jrhawk42
jrhawk42

12764

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#12 jrhawk42
Member since 2003 • 12764 Posts

its DNA. basically makes it harder for criminals to get away with things. ALOT harder actually. the idea is a bit out there but i agree with it.pete_merlin

not really the only type of crime it might help with is rape, since the victim is in such close proximity to the offender they can scratch a skin, hair or a seamen sample. My guess is that it would only be useful in a very small percentage of cases where the cops have a DNA sample, but nobody to link it to, which is really quite rare.

Avatar image for deshields538
deshields538

8699

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#13 deshields538
Member since 2005 • 8699 Posts

However, the department is currently undertaking a review of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (Pace) 1984

Ironic or what eh?

That probably won't happen for a long time yet (if at all) and by that time Northern Ireland (where I live) may be part of the Republic (but I hope none of that happens).

Avatar image for DaveMcSavage
DaveMcSavage

7172

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#14 DaveMcSavage
Member since 2005 • 7172 Posts

[QUOTE="pete_merlin"]its DNA. basically makes it harder for criminals to get away with things. ALOT harder actually. the idea is a bit out there but i agree with it.jrhawk42

not really the only type of crime it might help with is rape, since the victim is in such close proximity to the offender they can scratch a skin, hair or a seamen sample. My guess is that it would only be useful in a very small percentage of cases where the cops have a DNA sample, but nobody to link it to, which is really quite rare.

Seeing as the main problem with rape cases is just how few of them are reported,I would agree with you there.

Avatar image for DaveMcSavage
DaveMcSavage

7172

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#15 DaveMcSavage
Member since 2005 • 7172 Posts

However, the department is currently undertaking a review of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (Pace) 1984

Ironic or what eh?

That probably won't happen for a long time yet (if at all) and by that time Northern Ireland (where I live) may be part of the Republic (but I hope none of that happens).

deshields538

Against re-unification,eh? Fair enough,but when Roy Keane takes over the national side,don't come crying to us when we shoot up the rankings!:P

Seriously,I don't see how any democratic country could possibly enforce a law like this.

Avatar image for Riley767
Riley767

1687

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#16 Riley767
Member since 2007 • 1687 Posts
yea i agree on that
Avatar image for reddevilyi
reddevilyi

740

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 reddevilyi
Member since 2006 • 740 Posts
It's really no different than having your finger prints on file. Why is everyone acting like this is some huge deal?
Avatar image for deshields538
deshields538

8699

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#18 deshields538
Member since 2005 • 8699 Posts
[QUOTE="deshields538"]

However, the department is currently undertaking a review of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (Pace) 1984

Ironic or what eh?

That probably won't happen for a long time yet (if at all) and by that time Northern Ireland (where I live) may be part of the Republic (but I hope none of that happens).

DaveMcSavage

Against re-unification,eh? Fair enough,but when Roy Keane takes over the national side,don't come crying to us when we shoot up the rankings!:P

That made me chuckle :P. Northern Ireland are pretty good now since Lowrie Sanchez sorted us out and we even managed to beat England in a World Cup qualifier! YAY! :P

Avatar image for Riley767
Riley767

1687

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#19 Riley767
Member since 2007 • 1687 Posts
It's really no different than having your finger prints on file. Why is everyone acting like this is some huge deal?reddevilyi
i didn't make the topic :P
Avatar image for DaveMcSavage
DaveMcSavage

7172

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#20 DaveMcSavage
Member since 2005 • 7172 Posts
[QUOTE="DaveMcSavage"][QUOTE="deshields538"]

However, the department is currently undertaking a review of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (Pace) 1984

Ironic or what eh?

That probably won't happen for a long time yet (if at all) and by that time Northern Ireland (where I live) may be part of the Republic (but I hope none of that happens).

deshields538

Against re-unification,eh? Fair enough,but when Roy Keane takes over the national side,don't come crying to us when we shoot up the rankings!:P

That made me chuckle :P. Northern Ireland are pretty good now since Lowrie Sanchez sorted us out and we even managed to beat England in a World Cup qualifier! YAY! :P

I can definitely agree with those sentiments!

Avatar image for DaveMcSavage
DaveMcSavage

7172

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#21 DaveMcSavage
Member since 2005 • 7172 Posts

It's really no different than having your finger prints on file. Why is everyone acting like this is some huge deal?reddevilyi

I may be wrong,but surely you would only have your fingerprints on file if you had comitted a crime,yes?So I would imagine having your prints on file would be a pretty big deal...

Avatar image for rudyroundhead
rudyroundhead

9612

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#22 rudyroundhead
Member since 2003 • 9612 Posts

It's really no different than having your finger prints on file. Why is everyone acting like this is some huge deal?reddevilyi

You aren't "required" to have your finger prints on file and they usual method of getting them is from criminals not the average law abiding citizen. The worry is this and programs like it can be abused and used for things other than the original intent. I have nothing to hide but I like my privacy or at least my illusion of privacy.

Avatar image for Total-KO
Total-KO

4057

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#23 Total-KO
Member since 2006 • 4057 Posts
A system like that will be abused.
Avatar image for HandsomeDead
HandsomeDead

596

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 HandsomeDead
Member since 2006 • 596 Posts

A system like that will be abused.Total-KO

Precisely. I could understand, say, anyone who had commited a violent crime or something because there's a chance they may reoffend, but having everyone on a database seems a bit controlling.