There is a heated debate about the compliation of the above. Some want it to be extended to a national register where everyone would give a sample. The other camp are those like the European Court of Justice, who would like to ban it altogether as they see it as an infringement of Human rights.
To me, it is an invaluable tool in catching criminals, who would not have been caught by other means. What did they care about the human rights of their victims?
It could be seen as parallel to the introduction of the fingerprint database. There was a similar furore then, but now fingerprints are an indispensable tool in crime detection.
Who is to say that a national DNA database would not act as a deterrent to crime.
It might give rise to second thoughts if a would-be crimainal knew he/she would be caught.
DNA database
DNA database
I concur.
If any one organization needs a DNA database its Forum Garden.
Since I have the lab in my basement Ill be collecting specimens.
Everyone send me their blood and hair samples.
Spock....no semen. I insist !
If any one organization needs a DNA database its Forum Garden.
Since I have the lab in my basement Ill be collecting specimens.
Everyone send me their blood and hair samples.
Spock....no semen. I insist !
I AM AWESOME MAN
DNA database
Im not totally opposed to ID cards but a national register no way. Every piece of info about one person held in one place,no thanks. The government **** up enough private and confidential data, never mind cocking up a whole persons dna plus.
I reckon it would do more harm than good, in the wrong hands major catastophe's will occur.
Just my opinion.
I reckon it would do more harm than good, in the wrong hands major catastophe's will occur.
Just my opinion.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
DNA database
Orley;782589 wrote: There is a heated debate about the compliation of the above. Some want it to be extended to a national register where everyone would give a sample. The other camp are those like the European Court of Justice, who would like to ban it altogether as they see it as an infringement of Human rights.
To me, it is an invaluable tool in catching criminals, who would not have been caught by other means. What did they care about the human rights of their victims?
It could be seen as parallel to the introduction of the fingerprint database. There was a similar furore then, but now fingerprints are an indispensable tool in crime detection.
Who is to say that a national DNA database would not act as a deterrent to crime.
It might give rise to second thoughts if a would-be crimainal knew he/she would be caught.
The Air Force ordered me to submit a DNA database in case I died they could identify the remains. Now that I'm out, I wish I could get it back. They don't need it anymore and I feel vulnerable.
Parents can and should have their childrens' prints & DNA on file in case of the unimaginable, but it should not be made part of a permanent database. Parents or adult children should be able to permanently remove such information from government files.
I can understand taking a DNA sample from convicted criminals in case of recidivism, but that's as far as I'm willing to go. If someone like you, Orley, voluntarily contributes to the database then you should be able to, but don't require everyone simply because you think it's not an unreasonable violation. We don't know what some future government official might decide to use it for.
ETA: WELCOME!! :-6
To me, it is an invaluable tool in catching criminals, who would not have been caught by other means. What did they care about the human rights of their victims?
It could be seen as parallel to the introduction of the fingerprint database. There was a similar furore then, but now fingerprints are an indispensable tool in crime detection.
Who is to say that a national DNA database would not act as a deterrent to crime.
It might give rise to second thoughts if a would-be crimainal knew he/she would be caught.
The Air Force ordered me to submit a DNA database in case I died they could identify the remains. Now that I'm out, I wish I could get it back. They don't need it anymore and I feel vulnerable.
Parents can and should have their childrens' prints & DNA on file in case of the unimaginable, but it should not be made part of a permanent database. Parents or adult children should be able to permanently remove such information from government files.
I can understand taking a DNA sample from convicted criminals in case of recidivism, but that's as far as I'm willing to go. If someone like you, Orley, voluntarily contributes to the database then you should be able to, but don't require everyone simply because you think it's not an unreasonable violation. We don't know what some future government official might decide to use it for.
ETA: WELCOME!! :-6
DNA database
Chezzie;782626 wrote: Im not totally opposed to ID cards but a national register no way. Every piece of info about one person held in one place,no thanks. The government **** up enough private and confidential data, never mind cocking up a whole persons dna plus.
I reckon it would do more harm than good, in the wrong hands major catastophe's will occur.
Just my opinion.
Chez its non negotiable. Send me some fluids.
I reckon it would do more harm than good, in the wrong hands major catastophe's will occur.
Just my opinion.
Chez its non negotiable. Send me some fluids.
I AM AWESOME MAN
DNA database
Nomad;782672 wrote: Chez its non negotiable. Send me some fluids.
always willing to share some fluids with you gorgeous:-4:-4:wah:
always willing to share some fluids with you gorgeous:-4:-4:wah:
DNA database
Chezzie;782626 wrote: I reckon it would do more harm than good, in the wrong hands major catastophe's will occur. That's the key sentence so far. Describe the major catastophes.
The benefits balancing them are that (if the police would just get off their sad asses, put their weaponry out of reach and do some work instead of strutting their egos) all known crime would be traceable within minutes to the perpetrator if the current generation of forensic tools (of which DNA profiling is one) were fully put in place. Combine that with a prospect of total apprehension and conviction and I think you'd see a fall in criminality to unimaginably low levels. I think that's a worthwhile objective. So, what we need is to know the down-side you can foresee.
The benefits balancing them are that (if the police would just get off their sad asses, put their weaponry out of reach and do some work instead of strutting their egos) all known crime would be traceable within minutes to the perpetrator if the current generation of forensic tools (of which DNA profiling is one) were fully put in place. Combine that with a prospect of total apprehension and conviction and I think you'd see a fall in criminality to unimaginably low levels. I think that's a worthwhile objective. So, what we need is to know the down-side you can foresee.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
DNA database
spot;782713 wrote: That's the key sentence so far. Describe the major catastophes.
The benefits balancing them are that (if the police would just get off their sad asses, put their weaponry out of reach and do some work instead of strutting their egos) all known crime would be traceable within minutes to the perpetrator if the current generation of forensic tools (of which DNA profiling is one) were fully put in place. Combine that with a prospect of total apprehension and conviction and I think you'd see a fall in criminality to unimaginably low levels. I think that's a worthwhile objective. So, what we need is to know the down-side you can foresee.
Spotting trends among criminals and common inherited traits, then judiciously preventing crime.
The benefits balancing them are that (if the police would just get off their sad asses, put their weaponry out of reach and do some work instead of strutting their egos) all known crime would be traceable within minutes to the perpetrator if the current generation of forensic tools (of which DNA profiling is one) were fully put in place. Combine that with a prospect of total apprehension and conviction and I think you'd see a fall in criminality to unimaginably low levels. I think that's a worthwhile objective. So, what we need is to know the down-side you can foresee.
Spotting trends among criminals and common inherited traits, then judiciously preventing crime.
DNA database
Accountable;782730 wrote: Spotting trends among criminals and common inherited traits, then judiciously preventing crime.
That's a down-side?
if it is then make it illegal. If the legislature refuses to allow it then the investigative agencies can't do it and the judiciary can't act on such information.
That's a down-side?
if it is then make it illegal. If the legislature refuses to allow it then the investigative agencies can't do it and the judiciary can't act on such information.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
LilacDragon
- Posts: 1382
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:23 am
DNA database
I imagine that Hilter would have had a great time had he had access to a DNA database.
While I agree that it is important that a database be kept of people who have committed heinous crimes, I certainly don't think that it should include people who have either not broken the law or have misdemeanor issues (speeding tickets, stuff like that.)
While I agree that it is important that a database be kept of people who have committed heinous crimes, I certainly don't think that it should include people who have either not broken the law or have misdemeanor issues (speeding tickets, stuff like that.)
Sandi
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
DNA database
spot;782736 wrote: That's a down-side?
if it is then make it illegal. If the legislature refuses to allow it then the investigative agencies can't do it and the judiciary can't act on such information.
Gee, ma'am. Research shows that your fetus has recessive gene SB26-r which shows a 15% chance of moderate to high anger levels. You'll have to come with us for preventative procedure. Don't worry, National Health will pick up the cost. Better luck with the next pregnancy.
......... Nah, you're right. No down-side at all. :rolleyes:
if it is then make it illegal. If the legislature refuses to allow it then the investigative agencies can't do it and the judiciary can't act on such information.
Gee, ma'am. Research shows that your fetus has recessive gene SB26-r which shows a 15% chance of moderate to high anger levels. You'll have to come with us for preventative procedure. Don't worry, National Health will pick up the cost. Better luck with the next pregnancy.
......... Nah, you're right. No down-side at all. :rolleyes:
DNA database
Accountable;782759 wrote: Gee, ma'am. Research shows that your fetus has recessive gene SB26-r which shows a 15% chance of moderate to high anger levels. You'll have to come with us for preventative procedure. Don't worry, National Health will pick up the cost. Better luck with the next pregnancy.
......... Nah, you're right. No down-side at all. :rolleyes:
Legislate against it. If it weren't for laws the government would have us building pyramids while they pay the guys with the lashes out of our own tax returns.
......... Nah, you're right. No down-side at all. :rolleyes:
Legislate against it. If it weren't for laws the government would have us building pyramids while they pay the guys with the lashes out of our own tax returns.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
DNA database
spot;782765 wrote: Legislate against it.
Good! We agree. No global comprehensive DNA database.
Good! We agree. No global comprehensive DNA database.
DNA database
ok spot just some points for my opinion to be against. Some are "out there" and may not happen but weho knows. Im sure theirs more but its Sunday and im chilling lol:wah:
1] Terrorism.......Person gets a job in DNA database and leaks vital info or deletes info.
2] Private health insurance usually bases how much you pay on how likely is the
risk of your needing health care in future. Using genetic information private
insurers, unless heavily regulated, could exclude benefits from policies, increase
premiums (rendering them unaffordable for many) or simply refuse to insure
people.
3] Genetic databases that included those people that were arrested, but not
convicted, for a crime would discriminate against minorities.
3] Computer databases can be hacked (your fav word there spot, used in the correct manner :sneaky:) into or used for commercial purposes.
4] People could be discriminated against by insurers and employers.
5] DNA information could be used to stigmatise entire populations. If researchers
study ‘Jewish’ diseases, does this reinforce anti-Semitism? Should they have
‘community consent’?
6] What if a parole board knows that a person has a gene that predisposes them
to violence? Would they then be treated differently?
7] Say 50 years down the road scientists discover a gene for violent behavior. The government then passes a law that, in the name of preventing crime, all people with this gene are to be rounded up and put into detention camp.
Only convicted criminals should have their DNA stored, not people whose DNA is collected as part of a criminal investigation. For example, if your wife is killed and you submit to a DNA test which proves your innocence, that DNA record should be discarded.
Out of interest, would you hand over a DNA sample to visit another country so if you committed a crime there you could be caught? Do you think people coming into the UK should submit a DNA sample?
1] Terrorism.......Person gets a job in DNA database and leaks vital info or deletes info.
2] Private health insurance usually bases how much you pay on how likely is the
risk of your needing health care in future. Using genetic information private
insurers, unless heavily regulated, could exclude benefits from policies, increase
premiums (rendering them unaffordable for many) or simply refuse to insure
people.
3] Genetic databases that included those people that were arrested, but not
convicted, for a crime would discriminate against minorities.
3] Computer databases can be hacked (your fav word there spot, used in the correct manner :sneaky:) into or used for commercial purposes.
4] People could be discriminated against by insurers and employers.
5] DNA information could be used to stigmatise entire populations. If researchers
study ‘Jewish’ diseases, does this reinforce anti-Semitism? Should they have
‘community consent’?
6] What if a parole board knows that a person has a gene that predisposes them
to violence? Would they then be treated differently?
7] Say 50 years down the road scientists discover a gene for violent behavior. The government then passes a law that, in the name of preventing crime, all people with this gene are to be rounded up and put into detention camp.
Only convicted criminals should have their DNA stored, not people whose DNA is collected as part of a criminal investigation. For example, if your wife is killed and you submit to a DNA test which proves your innocence, that DNA record should be discarded.
Out of interest, would you hand over a DNA sample to visit another country so if you committed a crime there you could be caught? Do you think people coming into the UK should submit a DNA sample?
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
DNA database
Everyone in the EU should be required to submit a DNA sample..... and have random urinalyses to check for excess vitamin D supplements.
DNA database
Chezzie;782784 wrote: Only convicted criminals should have their DNA stored, not people whose DNA is collected as part of a criminal investigation. For example, if your wife is killed and you submit to a DNA test which proves your innocence, that DNA record should be discarded.
Everything in your list is true Chezzie. Is it worth all that to bring crime levels down to, say, 5% of current levels? Which (if the police did their job adequately) the changes I outlined would achieve? Obviously if they wouldn't achieve it then the question's pointless, but assuming I'm right (and pilot schemes could check whether I'm right) is it worth the costs you've listed? I think it is.
As for only storing criminal DNA, every single criminal out there was once a law-abiding citizen who committed a crime. That's why you need all the law-abiding citizens in the database.
Everything in your list is true Chezzie. Is it worth all that to bring crime levels down to, say, 5% of current levels? Which (if the police did their job adequately) the changes I outlined would achieve? Obviously if they wouldn't achieve it then the question's pointless, but assuming I'm right (and pilot schemes could check whether I'm right) is it worth the costs you've listed? I think it is.
As for only storing criminal DNA, every single criminal out there was once a law-abiding citizen who committed a crime. That's why you need all the law-abiding citizens in the database.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
DNA database
spot;782830 wrote: Everything in your list is true Chezzie. Is it worth all that to bring crime levels down to, say, 5% of current levels? Which (if the police did their job adequately) the changes I outlined would achieve? Obviously if they wouldn't achieve it then the question's pointless, but assuming I'm right (and pilot schemes could check whether I'm right) is it worth the costs you've listed? I think it is.
As for only storing criminal DNA, every single criminal out there was once a law-abiding citizen who committed a crime. That's why you need all the law-abiding citizens in the database.
Yes it would be worth it but I cant see our Police Authority ever doing their job even remotely adequately.
I see the police breaking their own laws to suit themselves, saw it just yesterday and my youngest was in the car with me, shes 8 years old. When she saw what this plonker was doing (reversing up a dual carraige way on the wrong side ) she said, thats against their policies (hand on heart..her words). What's that teaching our children. So in an ideal world Spot, yes it would most definately be the right way to go about it.:-6
As for only storing criminal DNA, every single criminal out there was once a law-abiding citizen who committed a crime. That's why you need all the law-abiding citizens in the database.
Yes it would be worth it but I cant see our Police Authority ever doing their job even remotely adequately.
I see the police breaking their own laws to suit themselves, saw it just yesterday and my youngest was in the car with me, shes 8 years old. When she saw what this plonker was doing (reversing up a dual carraige way on the wrong side ) she said, thats against their policies (hand on heart..her words). What's that teaching our children. So in an ideal world Spot, yes it would most definately be the right way to go about it.:-6
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
DNA database
spot;782830 wrote: As for only storing criminal DNA, every single criminal out there was once a law-abiding citizen who committed a crime. That's why you need all the law-abiding citizens in the database.
I prefer allowing law-abiding citizens their privacy, otherwise why not just jail everyone until they prove they don't deserve it? That would take care of crime, too.
I prefer allowing law-abiding citizens their privacy, otherwise why not just jail everyone until they prove they don't deserve it? That would take care of crime, too.
DNA database
Accountable;782844 wrote: I prefer allowing law-abiding citizens their privacy, otherwise why not just jail everyone until they prove they don't deserve it? That would take care of crime, too.
I hate the word "it". When I said "Legislate against it" I meant legislate against the highlighted downside you'd brought up, not against the DNA register.
"why not just jail everyone" is a complete non sequitur, it has nothing to do with what we're discussing, nobody's proposed it, it's not necessary. It has nothing to do with building a complete DNA register to identify perpetrators. Without law-abiding citizens in it all those first-time criminals will go undetected, and there are more first-time criminals than there are second-time or third-time or fourth-time.
I hate the word "it". When I said "Legislate against it" I meant legislate against the highlighted downside you'd brought up, not against the DNA register.
"why not just jail everyone" is a complete non sequitur, it has nothing to do with what we're discussing, nobody's proposed it, it's not necessary. It has nothing to do with building a complete DNA register to identify perpetrators. Without law-abiding citizens in it all those first-time criminals will go undetected, and there are more first-time criminals than there are second-time or third-time or fourth-time.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
DNA database
spot;782860 wrote: I hate the word "it". When I said "Legislate against it" I meant legislate against the highlighted downside you'd brought up, not against the DNA register.
"why not just jail everyone" is a complete non sequitur, it has nothing to do with what we're discussing, nobody's proposed it, it's not necessary. It has nothing to do with building a complete DNA register to identify perpetrators. Without law-abiding citizens in it all those first-time criminals will go undetected, and there are more first-time criminals than there are second-time or third-time or fourth-time.
Which boils down to our fundamental and unchanged disagreement about the balance between security and freedom. You & I have done enough laps around this track. I'll sit in the audience for a bit.
"why not just jail everyone" is a complete non sequitur, it has nothing to do with what we're discussing, nobody's proposed it, it's not necessary. It has nothing to do with building a complete DNA register to identify perpetrators. Without law-abiding citizens in it all those first-time criminals will go undetected, and there are more first-time criminals than there are second-time or third-time or fourth-time.
Which boils down to our fundamental and unchanged disagreement about the balance between security and freedom. You & I have done enough laps around this track. I'll sit in the audience for a bit.
DNA database
But you do agree, just on a point of information, that there are more first-time criminals than there are second-time or third-time or fourth-time criminals? And that at the point immediately prior to committing this first crime they're law-abiding citizens?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
DNA database
spot;782888 wrote: But you do agree, just on a point of information, that there are more first-time criminals than there are second-time or third-time or fourth-time criminals? And that at the point immediately prior to committing this first crime they're law-abiding citizens?
Absolutely. And they should be treated as law-abiding citizens and not subjected to any accusatory nonsense such as a mandatory DNA test without probable cause.
~~~~~
And just for the record:
spot wrote: Everything in your list is true Chezzie. Is it worth all that to bring crime levels down to, say, 5% of current levels? Which (if the police did their job adequately) the changes I outlined would achieve?No. Absolutely not.
Absolutely. And they should be treated as law-abiding citizens and not subjected to any accusatory nonsense such as a mandatory DNA test without probable cause.
~~~~~
And just for the record:
spot wrote: Everything in your list is true Chezzie. Is it worth all that to bring crime levels down to, say, 5% of current levels? Which (if the police did their job adequately) the changes I outlined would achieve?No. Absolutely not.
DNA database
Accountable;782898 wrote: accusatory nonsense such as a mandatory DNA test without probable cause.
It's not accusatory in the slightest. It's a record which allows automated matching to forensic evidence. Nobody's name pops out of the database unless there's a match with crime scene evidence.
It's not accusatory in the slightest. It's a record which allows automated matching to forensic evidence. Nobody's name pops out of the database unless there's a match with crime scene evidence.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
DNA database
spot;782913 wrote: It's not accusatory in the slightest. It's a record which allows automated matching to forensic evidence. Nobody's name pops out of the database unless there's a match with crime scene evidence.
... until some future law enforcer finds other uses for the information and convinces some other legislature that laws should be changed for the common good.
No thank you.
... until some future law enforcer finds other uses for the information and convinces some other legislature that laws should be changed for the common good.
No thank you.
-
LilacDragon
- Posts: 1382
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:23 am
DNA database
How about this - we can start taking DNA from infants as they are born, inject one of those equally controversial GPS tracking chips in them at the same time and do away with police departments as we know them!
Sandi
DNA database
It needn't be an active powered chip and it needn't be injected, but yes the tracking technology is there as well. The sooner we destroy police departments as we know them the better, they are pits of corruption and duress.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
DNA database
"It could be seen as parallel to the introduction of the fingerprint database. There was a similar furore then, but now fingerprints are an indispensable tool in crime detection"
It seems Orly that you are unaware of the police woman Shirley McKie case of 1997.
WPC McKie became the first person in the world to be found not guilty where there was fingerprint evidence
In 1997 fingerprint evidence was exposed for what it is, a complete myth, in the same case David Asbury was convicted on "infallible fingerprint evidence" of murder and subsequently had his conviction quashed
As leading barrister Michael Mansfield said "I dread to think how many thousands of innocent people in this country alone have been convicted over the last 90 years on the strength of this pseudo science"
It seems Orly that you are unaware of the police woman Shirley McKie case of 1997.
WPC McKie became the first person in the world to be found not guilty where there was fingerprint evidence
In 1997 fingerprint evidence was exposed for what it is, a complete myth, in the same case David Asbury was convicted on "infallible fingerprint evidence" of murder and subsequently had his conviction quashed
As leading barrister Michael Mansfield said "I dread to think how many thousands of innocent people in this country alone have been convicted over the last 90 years on the strength of this pseudo science"
DNA database
I appreciate the overall fears in relation to privacy, but who are we kidding? We are video tapes everywhere we go, are credit cards and bank transactions are recorded, our mobile phones track our locations already (in Ireland recently a guy was found guilty of murdering his wife, his alibi of his location was found to be a lie as his mobile phone put him in the area of his house at the time of the murder). We have already sacrificed most of our ‘freedoms’ for the luxury of the convenience that we want. We are already slaves to the system, if DNA helps with the management of criminal movement and crime solving, I would have no issue giving samples.
We surrendered to Big Brother a long long time ago¦
We surrendered to Big Brother a long long time ago¦
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
DNA database
mikeinie;843484 wrote: We surrendered to Big Brother a long long time ago¦
Note to self: don't move to the UK.
Note to self: don't move to the UK.