Another Reason Not to Move to the UK

(not that I was in any danger of that anyway)

DNA database 'should include all'

Tony Blair called yesterday for the national DNA database to be expanded to include every citizen.

He said there should be no limit on the development of the database because it was vital for catching serious criminals.

The Conservatives accused him of attempting to expand the DNA database by stealth and called for Parliament to vote on whether details of people who were innocent or not charged should be included against their wishes.

The Prime Minister said the public backed the extended use of DNA and urged police forces across the country to make use of technological advances to reopen thousands of unresolved "cold cases".

I do not quite know why you think you COULD move to the United Kingdom anyway , Wolf ?

What skills do you have ?

Why is this a bad thing? I think it's a long overdue improvement over fingerprinting (which should be a national database including everyone). Lets not get into conspiracy theory bullshit on this one though, it's an IDENTIFIER.

9th Engineer wrote:

Why is this a bad thing? I think it's a long overdue improvement over fingerprinting (which should be a national database including everyone). Lets not get into conspiracy theory bullshit on this one though, it's an IDENTIFIER.

If I leave my DNA someplace, and a crime is committed there later by someone else, then I will be an instant suspect. At a minimum, that will be a hassle for me.

9th Engineer wrote:

improvement over fingerprinting (which should be a national database including everyone).

HORSESHIT!

lumberjim wrote:

HORSESHIT!

You said it better than I did.

They would be able to tell you had been there, but unless it's somewhere where you either shouldn't have been or very few other people had been I don't think you'd have to worry about being hassled. Logistics alone probably guarantees that they won't put every person who leaves their DNA in a public place through the rigmorol of official suspect-hood.

Care to explain why LJ?

glatt wrote:

If I leave my DNA someplace, and a crime is committed there later by someone else, then I will be an instant suspect. At a minimum, that will be a hassle for me.

Not sure where I stand on this one, but think I'm with 9th Engineer.

Why would it be any different than your fingerprints being found at a crimescene? Unless you specifically denied being there and had some other tie to the crime I can't see you'd have anything to worry about. If you are convicted on that evidence alone then it's the justice system you need to worry about, not the method for obtaining evidence.

In a perfect world, this would be a good idea. But how hard would it be for someone to get a sample of someone else's DNA (blood, urine, sperm, etc.) and leave it at a crime scene?

I begin to see the difference between subject and citizen.

You know, this is just to get people used to the idea, because they think it is somehow reasonable or helpful ... like EZPass and OnStar with the locator transponders ...

Buddug wrote:

I do not quite know why you think you COULD move to the United Kingdom anyway , Wolf ?

What skills do you have ?

I'm not a real doctor, but I do have a Master's Degree.

Sundae Girl wrote:

Not sure where I stand on this one, but think I'm with 9th Engineer.

Why would it be any different than your fingerprints being found at a crimescene? Unless you specifically denied being there and had some other tie to the crime I can't see you'd have anything to worry about.

My fingerprints aren't in any databases. So they can't find me even if I leave fingerprints for them. They can only use the fingerprints to match me after they find me by other means.

Having my fingerprints in a database or my dna in a database makes it too easy for the government to track me.

I have a right to privacy.

Sundae Girl wrote:

If you are convicted on that evidence alone then it's the justice system you need to worry about, not the method for obtaining evidence

Have you seen the justice system in action? I am worried about it. The government's job is to send people to jail when it is able to, not to send the right people to jail. They assume the court and jury will sort it all out. I'd rather not find myself relying on a court and jury in the first place.

Sunday Girl, how can you be in favor of having your DNA in a government crime database and also make this post in another thread?

Sundae Girl wrote:

I put up with being on CCTV in the city centre and outside banks - partly because I have nothing to hide and partly because I simply have no choice. But I don't want to be watched any more than is necessary, and I don't see that it is necessary to film me sitting there picking peanuts out of my teeth and failing to get the foil lid off my breakfast orange juice.

Don't you see that both are an invasion of privacy?

@sundae girl

I was just reading the european hijacking thread and you were saying you didn't want to be on CCTV.

But you think it is OK for mandatory dna sampling?

Aren't these viewpoints contradictory?

Well, glatt noticed it the same as me.

You're right of course - they are totally contradictory points of view. It doesn't mean I can't hold both. I do try to admit if I'm posting on gut instinct and emotion - although sometimes I back it up with references by people with better logic than me.

I can see the benefit in having a DNA database. It's open to misuse, but evidence can be planted even at present. I can't see the benefit of filming passengers.

I also approved of an ID card scheme. Then I found out how much I'd have to pay to carry one. I'm now against it :)

9th Engineer wrote:

Care to explain why LJ?

not really. see glatt's posts.

I don't have ANY faith in our justice system, which is exactly why I want more databases and tracking methods which can provide evidence instead of relying solely on the opionion of a jury. Do you really think the government is going to 'track' you through a DNA database? Come on, really that's absurd. Why bother with wiping your snot off a railing when they could track you through things like phones or purchases if they wanted to? We are one of the most crime tollerant societies on Earth, and I think that since our justice system is as overloaded as it is we need more databases like this. Do you have a cell phone, use credit cards or turnpikes Glatt? How can you dismiss the clear benefits of something like this for the illusion on anomimity you don't have anyway?

9th Engineer wrote:

Do you have a cell phone, use credit cards or turnpikes Glatt? How can you dismiss the clear benefits of something like this for the illusion on anomimity you don't have anyway?

Any identifying behaviour that I may engage in is by choice. I don't have to do it. This proposed DNA database is not by choice.

It won't happen. And neither will the 'biometreic' ID cards.

The Blair government (in it's haste to pally-up with GeorgieBoy) has forgotten that an awfull lot of UK cits are less than enamoured with the US pre-occupation with 'the war on Terra' and are quite prepared to demonstrate the
in-alienable right to be bloody-minded and say 'sod off' to such proposals.

9th Engineer wrote:

Do you really think the government is going to 'track' you through a DNA database? Come on, really that's absurd.

Why is that absurd? The state of PA has a huge, make that humongous, fingerprint file, they can search completely, for a match, in 8 minutes.....remotely..... from every county.

Why bother with wiping your snot off a railing when they could track you through things like phones or purchases if they wanted to?

Whenever I rob a convenience store I try not to make any credit card purchases there first...or call home and check my answering machine on their phone.

We are one of the most crime tollerant societies on Earth, and I think that since our justice system is as overloaded as it is we need more databases like this.

They wouldn't be so overloaded if they got their collective butt in gear before 9/10am, didn't take 2/3 hours for lunch and didn't knock off at 3pm. Didn't call people to miss work and show up in court then postpone for a month because the court steno's cat had kittens and he/she is the only one that can read their notes.
I'll spare you the thirty-teen paragraphs I could write on this subject. You're welcome.

Do you have a cell phone, use credit cards or turnpikes Glatt? How can you dismiss the clear benefits of something like this for the illusion on anomimity you don't have anyway?

You're confusing tracking a known individual's movements with prosecuting (persecuting)someone based on railing snot.
Trusting the legal system is something you'll hopefully outgrow before it bites you in the butt.;)

umm.....yeah...like, if you're innocent you have nothing to fear:P

Okay, I am wholly against this idea. I am also wholly against ID cards. That said:

I begin to see the difference between subject and citizen.

Wolf, are you saying the US is not engaged in curtailing the civil liberties of its citizenry at the present time?

This has nothing to do with the fact that the Uk is a Monarchy. The Monarchy is virtually toothless and to all intents and purposes laws such as these are civil in nature. The only role the Monarchy plays is to give its 'Royal Consent' to a bill prior to its passing into law.(as a point of interest this is done in Norman french :P) That consent is not in question; its a rubber stamp. The decision making process is at a civil level, governed (primarily) by democratically elected ministers.

I'd love to blame this on the monarchy.....I'd love to blame the very fact that such a law could be considered, on us being 'subjects' not 'citizens'. But the reality is we are both 'citizens' and 'subjects'. We are citizens of the country and 'subjects' of the Queen and the power lies in our status as citizen not in our status as subject.

Truly, we have nobody to blame for the current and planned infringements of our civil liberties, but the Government and ministers we elected to serve us. In other words, we have nobody to blame but ourselves:P

Oh, and I am with Jay on this. Clearly the Government has forgotten to take into account our nation's record on sheer bloody-mindedness. Its time to don our collective dressing-gown, put an apple in the pocket and lie down in front of the Bull-dozer.

I can't speak for wolf, but I think what she might have been getting at is that our country was formed during a violent rebellion against the crown. So we hold things like privacy and freedom to be very important. It's part of our being. Or at least it was. The times are changing when people like 9th will happily give up privacy and freedom in exchange for the false promise of some extra security.

I can't speak for wolf, but I think what she might have been getting at is that our country was formed during a violent rebellion against the crown. So we hold things like privacy and freedom to be very important

I understand that. I do however, disagree with the idea that we as a nation do not hold those same concepts dear to us. We as a nation have been formed by invasion, rebellion and civil war. The term 'anglo-saxon values' springs to mind. The idea of personal independance and freedom of the individual is paramount to our nation's sense of self. 'An Englishman's home is his castle', speaks volumes about how we view our relationship with both the crown and our government.

Where after fighting a bloody and difficult war against the Crown, your nation chose independance from it; ours, after fighting a bloody and difficult civil war between Royalists and Parliamentarians, chose independance with the Crown.

Whenever I rob a convenience store I try not to make any credit card purchases there first...or call home and check my answering machine on their phone.

Obviously, but if you are worried about being tracked then commiting an armed robbery isn't the greatest way to fly under the radar.

Why is that absurd? The state of PA has a huge, make that humongous, fingerprint file, they can search completely, for a match, in 8 minutes.....remotely..... from every county.

Which they should. If they have your fingerprints in connection with something they should have the ability to asertain who's they are and find you with a minimum of hassle.

I make no pronouncements as to the sorry state of all aspects of the judicial system, my original point was in fact that I want to remove as much chance from the equation as possible. DNA evidence is just like a fingerprint, only better in some ways since it offers information on what the person was doing at the time (difference between a hair, skin scrapings, and semen say more than just 'he was here'). If you're worried about someone being convicted based on just DNA evidence then you should also be biting your nails over the fingerprint database, even I could break a case that offers nothing except 'we know this person passed through the crime scene at some point in the last month'.

The times are a chang'in, yep, I don't think that we need to protect the annonymity of criminals under the premise of protecting some bizzare idea that privacy and freedom mean being able to break the law and get away with it 80% of the time. Armed rebellion? Give me a break, you would really deny evidence that can convict criminals over the idea that we should be ready to forcefully overthrow our government at any time? I suppose efforts to curtail people making homemade bombs get you up in arms as well.
This is not a false promise of security any more than cancer research is a false promise of hope to cancer patients.

You probably think people are innocent until proven guilty, too...right?

If your snot on the railing makes you a "person of interest", it's going to cost you, tens of thousands of dollars, likely your job, possibly your home and even your marriage....unless they can find someone of more interest, to pin it on. Good luck. :headshake