panorama last night covered this subject (although rather weakly).

 

evidently there are 3 times as many convictions using the dna database then without. so surely thats a good thing! it highlighted the case where this bloke in lincoln was caught and convicted for the murder (a very gruesome affair it was too, dismembering the corpse). without the dna he would still have been free to commit more crimes, this wasnt the only case.

 

however they use 18 points of id in the dna and in rare circumstances 2 people can have the same dna (well, pointers anyway). as technology increases these should be raised as dna IS unique to the individual once ALL the pointers can be identified and logged.

 

i see no reason why a national database shouldnt be enforced, for the greater good.

Panorama for anyone who missed it -> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/7010509.stm

 

 

i see no reason why a national database shouldnt be enforced, for the greater good.

 

Ah, yes, that term "the greater good".. Mate, you sound like a Party Political broadcast.. Or else you've just seen "Hot Fuzz" too many times.... :lol: :lol:

 

Sorry, I dont buy it. Sure maybe it might secure more convictions, BUT you cannot get round the whole civil liberties/human rights argument... A SEVEN MONTH old baby ended up on the Police criminal DNA database... This is surely fukkin' madness... What bloody "crime" does a bloody baby commit then mate, tell me that... What possible reason could the cops have had to put the DNA of a newborn infant on their sodding database?????

 

Orwellian fukkin' Police State this country's turning into..... <_< <_< ONLY people who have been tried and CONVICTED of a criminal offence should be put on a fingerprint/DNA database. End of story......

 

Ah, yes, that term "the greater good".. Mate, you sound like a Party Political broadcast.. Or else you've just seen "Hot Fuzz" too many times.... :lol: :lol:

 

Sorry, I dont buy it. Sure maybe it might secure more convictions, BUT you cannot get round the whole civil liberties/human rights argument... A SEVEN MONTH old baby ended up on the Police criminal DNA database... This is surely fukkin' madness... What bloody "crime" does a bloody baby commit then mate, tell me that... What possible reason could the cops have had to put the DNA of a newborn infant on their sodding database?????

 

Orwellian fukkin' Police State this country's turning into..... <_< <_< ONLY people who have been tried and CONVICTED of a criminal offence should be put on a fingerprint/DNA database. End of story......

 

but it wouldnt be a CRIMINAL database as it is now. it would be a national one . we already have identities, names, addresses, certificates, we are registered... the dna database would simply be bringing it into the 21st centuary and in my mind would be a step foreward. babies are registered, named, certified at birth (or soon after) so why not? id suggest that if theres a threefold increase in prosecutions, difficult ones at that, then civil liberties will be IMPROVED. who but a complete re**** would contemplate a crime knowing that their very presence will leave their dna behind thus incriminating them?...

 

"Orwellian fukkin' Police State this country's turning into..... <_< <_< ONLY people who have been tried and CONVICTED of a criminal offence should be put on a fingerprint/DNA database. End of story......"

 

bollox!..... them 2 examples on panorama last night were ONLY convicted through dna, ONE WASNT A KNOWN CRIM and would have got away with it , possibly to re offend.

 

the ONLY people who are affected by this would be criminals, i think law abiding peoples civil rights come before theirs.

 

You are forgetting that in the episode they wrongly accused people too.

bollox!..... them 2 examples on panorama last night were ONLY convicted through dna, ONE WASNT A KNOWN CRIM and would have got away with it , possibly to re offend.

 

the ONLY people who are affected by this would be criminals, i think law abiding peoples civil rights come before theirs.

 

That just aint true, and we both know it... DNA evidence can be planted mate, it's a really good way to set someone up.. all you need is a hair, a skin scraping, anything, plant it at a crime scene. Hey, it's DNA evidence, must be true eh....? And, frankly, it's not as 100% accurate as the authorities claim that it is....

 

What did police do before DNA databases mate...? Murderers weren't caught, crimes weren't solved...? Bollocks they weren't, coppers had to rely on their wits and intellect to solve crime back then, not technology.... You watch all this CSI-type sh!t and think that it's the be all and end all, it aint, evidence can be manufactured, medical and scientific 'facts' can be proven wrong further down the line.....

 

And Clare points out a HUGE flaw in the Pro-DNA database argument, not only the guilty get accused through this "evidence".....

 

And you've not answered the fundamental point - how can the Govt be trusted to run this whole shebang efficiently and without error, when they cant even keep track of a couple of thousand immigrant ex-cons, or manage to NOT give innocent people criminal records (and indeed not let convicted criminals slip through the net..) when CRB checks are done, or come up with a national NHS IT system that actually works properly....?

That just aint true, and we both know it... DNA evidence can be planted mate, it's a really good way to set someone up.. all you need is a hair, a skin scraping, anything, plant it at a crime scene. Hey, it's DNA evidence, must be true eh....? And, frankly, it's not as 100% accurate as the authorities claim that it is....

 

What did police do before DNA databases mate...? Murderers weren't caught, crimes weren't solved...? Bollocks they weren't, coppers had to rely on their wits and intellect to solve crime back then, not technology.... You watch all this CSI-type sh!t and think that it's the be all and end all, it aint, evidence can be manufactured, medical and scientific 'facts' can be proven wrong further down the line.....

 

And Clare points out a HUGE flaw in the Pro-DNA database argument, not only the guilty get accused through this "evidence".....

 

And you've not answered the fundamental point - how can the Govt be trusted to run this whole shebang efficiently and without error, when they cant even keep track of a couple of thousand immigrant ex-cons, or manage to NOT give innocent people criminal records (and indeed not let convicted criminals slip through the net..) when CRB checks are done, or come up with a national NHS IT system that actually works properly....?

 

yep it can be planted, but it can also be compelling and in cases such as rape conclusive. ... ok lets throw out new technology and live in the past... cos everything in the past was so bloody marvelous and accurate wasnt it!!!! <_< ludite! youre romantic portrayal of the 'good old fashioned bobby ala dixon of dock green' is largely fiction. coppers were more bent then as there were no repercussions as there is now... civil rights :P

 

innocent people can get accused everyday, with or without dna. fact is that dna will reduce the number of false accusations!

 

the government has to be trusted, but then again you dont trust them with anything anyway.

 

the government has to be trusted, but then again you dont trust them with anything anyway.

 

Because they've proven time and time again that they cannot be trusted... They certainly cant be trusted to actually manage something on this scale effectively as the examples I gave in the previous post prove...

Because they've proven time and time again that they cannot be trusted... They certainly cant be trusted to actually manage something on this scale effectively as the examples I gave in the previous post prove...

 

but they are running the country!!! ffs! if they can do that.. (OK NOT PERFECTLY) then this can be undertaken without any problems. you seem to forget... governments are ELECTED and can just as easily be un-elected. sure they aint perfect, but the benefits of this database FAR outweigh the negatives.

the benefits of this database FAR outweigh the negatives.

 

Well, let's see if you feel that way when your DNA details get mixed up with that of a serial rapist then mate.... Because that will happen to somebody simply because the Govt are incompetent at keeping accurate records, as has been proven time and time again, there are thousands of examples of people being given a criminal record when in fact they've never spent a day in prison in their lives, and it ONLY comes to light when CRB checks are done.. People have been denied jobs because of the Home Office's "mistakes".... If they make a mistake with this ruddy database, it'll cost someone a damn sight more than just a job application....

 

You are forgetting that in the episode they wrongly accused people too.

Quite.

 

It seems to me DNA can only effectively be used to disprove a match, anything else is in my view misguided ignorance.

No way. It should be on a volunteer basis only. I don't trust the police to remain impartial when they've been given that much power. They'd set people (black and Muslims especially) up and that would be the end of it. If I've done nothing wrong, why take my DNA?

Well, let's see if you feel that way when your DNA details get mixed up with that of a serial rapist then mate.... Because that will happen to somebody simply because the Govt are incompetent at keeping accurate records, as has been proven time and time again, there are thousands of examples of people being given a criminal record when in fact they've never spent a day in prison in their lives, and it ONLY comes to light when CRB checks are done.. People have been denied jobs because of the Home Office's "mistakes".... If they make a mistake with this ruddy database, it'll cost someone a damn sight more than just a job application....

 

oh per-leeze! it can be checked and double checked, mistakes might well happen but can easily enough be sorted!

 

yes it would cost someone more then a job.. THEIR FCUKIN LIVES <_< if that scumbag hadnt been caught by dna, he would have been free to kill again.

 

youre just moaning about the government again, fair enough, but this technology is a step foreward and we should embrace it as yet again i repete... three times as many convictions is far better for society and law abiding peoples civil liberties. it aint foolproof, there will be mistakes, but there will be far more good done getting rid of crims...

Quite.

 

It seems to me DNA can only effectively be used to disprove a match, anything else is in my view misguided ignorance.

 

........then how come that murderer was caught by dna proving a match?

No way. It should be on a volunteer basis only. I don't trust the police to remain impartial when they've been given that much power. They'd set people (black and Muslims especially) up and that would be the end of it. If I've done nothing wrong, why take my DNA?

 

if the police were so intent on stitching you up, theyd do it anyway with or without dna.

DNA does not really solve rapes, 90% of people who claim to be rape know the person they accused.

 

All DNA does is identify the person they have slept ,it does not resolve wether the person was raped or not, otherwise the 5% of rape claims that currently end in conviction would be 99%-100%.

 

DNA solves no crime it only indicates a person was in the area, or had contact with the 'victim', it doesn't answer the question, it only adds another layer of evidence.

 

The general public have been led to believe that DNA is the be all and end all of crime fighting, when in fact it is only one more clue

DNA does not really solve rapes, 90% of people who claim to be rape know the person they accused.

 

All DNA does is identify the person they have slept ,it does not resolve wether the person was raped or not, otherwise the 5% of rape claims that currently end in conviction would be 99%-100%.

 

DNA solves no crime it only indicates a person was in the area, or had contact with the 'victim', it doesn't answer the question, it only adds another layer of evidence.

 

The general public have been led to believe that DNA is the be all and end all of crime fighting, when in fact it is only one more clue

 

rape is a very difficult crime to nail... but the cases i mentioned were raped then murdered. these 2 murderers were caught before they could possibly re-offend and they are paying for their crime (if being locked up is 'paying' for the life they took)

 

yep, its a tool, a bloody GOOD tool. it would be utterly riddiculous to ignore it.

if the police were so intent on stitching you up, theyd do it anyway with or without dna.

 

But a national database is gonna make it soooooo much easier for them to do that though innit....?

 

DNA solves no crime it only indicates a person was in the area, or had contact with the 'victim', it doesn't answer the question, it only adds another layer of evidence.

 

The general public have been led to believe that DNA is the be all and end all of crime fighting, when in fact it is only one more clue

 

Spot on, and it's these fantasy-dressed-up-as-scienctific-fact TV dramas like "CSI" that have led to that totally false perception.... The Govt and the Police are using these totally false arguments as a basis for controlling and cataloguing us.... Britons are THE most spied upon people in the so-called "free world", this is a FACT.... This is just another method to spy on us and invade our lives along with biometric ID cards and CCTV....

 

People who dont see the inherent dangers in all this are living with their heads buried in the sand....

 

But a national database is gonna make it soooooo much easier for them to do that though innit....?

 

in theory yes.... but on the other hand just how many people will be wrongly stitched up and how many villains will be caught? the negatives here are a minor point in comparison to the overwhelming benefits.