Heard it on Radio 4 this morning and found it later on regular news and MCN …
No-one seems to be bothered are you?
The power to do this has been around for a while. Personally, I think we should get everyone on the National DNA Database.
Enough serious criminals have been caught out by them driving carelessly or getting in a pub fight to justify the sampling of more minor crimes.
I agree with Madblondie. TPTB can find my blood type and dental records, I’d be fine with them having my DNA as well. I am hugely against invasions of privacy, I don’t see this is one - you leave your DNA everywhere you go, you’re not exactly keeping it secret.
IMO if you have nothing to hide where is the problem?
Its true, but how many times have the authorities “got it wrong”
I’m sure Jean Charles de Menezes was a mistake, but you see if things like that can happen with our oh so perfect and reliable authorities, including the ensuing ass-covering campaign in light of the screw up, then how soon before Mr Smith the pediatrician is jailed for life on the evidence of Mr Smoth’s DNA results, whose a confirmed podiatrist or even a paedophile…
Til I’ve actually done something wrong, I’m NOT providing evidence.
And ok, if I was caught speeding then I’d provide evidence…PERTINENT TO THAT CRIME ONLY. Innocent until proven guilty is what our legal system is built upon, not you’re all guilty, its just a matter of time til we find the most efficient way to get at you…
I think its Machiavelli and John someone or other or just look up “social contract” in google…
There has to exist a system of checks and balances between the state and the individual. You give up some of your freedoms and accept the “higher authority” of the police to wield power you have relinquished when soceity as a whole is faced of transgressors. But its all BASED on TRUST…ie our politicians won’t lie and we’ll tell the truth too.
So if they’re flat out saying they can’t trust you, you’re
ALL lying to us, then where’s the trust, the system fails. Its one of the fundamental corner stones of “Being British”
I think this is a serious attact on our freedom, there is absolutely no need to create this database and in fact it is more likely to lead to an increase in the number of false arrests and miscarriages of justice. Just another excuse the govt has to collect and contol information about us which it will then make available to insurance companies and anybody wanting to sell crap to us. It will also be made available to the Merkins, how frightening is that ! 
This is all in the pipeline and I’m sure it will be denied right now but give it 5 or 10 years 
Its like charging people to park bikes.
Ok now it seems fair, but once its introduced, how long before a parking your bike in central London for a day costs you £20…
Thin end of the wedge folks…if they only reason we’re all gonna be tested is because the current database of DNA is unbalanced, maybe they should redress that…not target speeders…what’s that got to do with DNA evidence…
Anyone who wants to know more about the National DNA Database… and learn fact rather than scare stories… come and ask me about it at BMM
Naah, don’t tell anyone after all, it will spoil the conspiracy theorists who reckon that the Goverment / Police / MI5 / 6 / Men in Black / Aliens etc / etc / etc actually are interested in where Joe Bloggs goes to and what he does for every second of every day.
what is this BMM you speak of
The govt has a terrible record of abusing the personal information it holds, I’m sure the DNA database is a noble and potentially very effective tool but in reality it will become another piece of income for the govt as it sells the information to anybody who asks just like it does DVLA data, electorial role information etc.
In reality it’s gone the other way. When the Gov took the 1st step to privatising the FSS (which was fundamental in the creation of the NDNAD and custodian of it) and made it a GovCo, control of the Database was removed as they were worried about it being in the hands of what could become a private company.
The information in a DNA profile would be of no use to insurance companies etc as the DNA targeted is ‘junk’ DNA that has no purpose - the only thing it would tell them is that someone has been sampled and that means nothing nowadays, as profiles from volunteer samples can be added if consent is given.
I don’t trust the government anymore than the next person (probably less given that I work for them) but I do know what can and cannot be done with the Database and the information contained within a DNA profile. Also it’s bl00dy difficult to change the legislation surrounding the Database (when the Asian tsunami happened the legislation did not allow for the deceased’s profiles to be searched in an attempt to aid identification for the Coroner, as they had not died as the result of a crime… it took a long time for that to change)
I guess it’s not too bad now then, how about the future, legislation coud be amended ?
Now, how about my other question ? 
My only concern is that DNA fingerprinting is not the perfect science the press and authorities would have you believe. It is possible for an innocent person to match a criminal’s DNA, there have been cases where it has happened. Also, DNA only provides evidence a person was present, and does not prove they committed a crime, again, despite what the media would like you to think. There have been false convicitions overturned on appeal where DNA provided the evidence for conviction, although I accept that DNA evidence has probably helped more appeals succeed than it has helped false convictions. However, think about this - if you are innocent, and you give up your DNA, you will be offering yourself up as a suspect at any crime committed at any place where you have been. As someone who has twice been a police suspect because I was seen at the location of an officence I did not commit, and in one case was activly trying to prevent, I would never willing give up my DNA as I don’t want to go through any of that again - it is an unpleasant and life changing experience.
No, it’s not perfect but there is a far greater understanding now than there was a few years ago.
Huge numbers of people are eliminated as suspects using DNA profiling, but you will never hear about it.
A matching profile does not show someone was present, that is a different consideration to whether a profile matches and the probability of it matching by chance alone. To explain any more fully will start to sound like a lecture in forensic science… and that’s too much like work for a Saturday 
Go on do a lecture,inform the masses!
Nope, shan’t! It’s more than just a lecture, it’s a whole course… and that’s before you even get onto the specifics of how it relates to DNA profiling!
That’s why I said DNA had probably helped more innocent people stay free - becasue it is best used wen someone does not matach. When someone does match there are complex issues of probablility and causation - why is the DNA there and how likely is it that it belongs to the person who is matched to it. If it takes a whole course to understand it there are bound to me problems using it in court. I am not saying it shouldn’t be used in court, but the media and politicians think it is perfect, when it isn’t, and giving up your DNA should only be done voluntarily when you are alrady a suspect for the reasons I gave.
The courses are designed so that the scientists understands concepts in detail, but also how to explain it to non scientists. That’s why they take so long. It is all very well understanding the overall concept of something, but forensic scientist are expected to be able to explain it to the nth degree - hence being an area of expertise.
The National DNA Database helps by providing a name… it then takes a lot of police work to build a case. A matching DNA profile alone is not enough!