DNA made compulsory?

[kwicky]

The police have now 5 million UK citizens tested for DNA. Do you believe that the rest of the country should be tested and stored? Do you think it should be done at birth so there would be no breaches?

If it could save just one life including the killings of these prostitutes it would prove its worth!

[Theland]

I agree. The civil liberties folks will probably object however. But whatever worries they have, I'm sure that a national DNA profile would be worthwhile.

[zimzam]

I think it would be an eccellent idea. The people who are maimed in accidents or the people choped up by murder could be identified. Those committing crimes would be more easily identified. People arguing against it have things to hide and to have individual DNA stored will (long term) stop crime. For the innocent peoples point of view, should anything happen to them they would know that their name could be traced via dna records. I'm all for it.

[vehelpfulguy]

It may be a start, but not 100% foolproof.

It may be someone who was not born here.

Maybe a long distance lorry driver going past Ipswich after arriving on a ferry.

Or an illegal immigrant that we do not even know about.

Or a person from abroad here on a visit, or at college or university.

[Loosehead]

No I do not trust the authorities with this kind of power. Do not be seduced by the "inncoent nothing to fear" argument. The scope for misuse is staggering.

Despite what people have been led to beleive DNA evidence does not prove guilt it only proves presence. Imagine one of your hairs was found on one of the recent murder victims. You may have been a customer of hers earlier in the night, you didn't murder her but your DNA is present. Now try and convince the police, not to mention the "no smoke without fire" mentality of the public and media.

DNA is a useful tool, I don't want it to become a mis used one.

[suffragette]

I disagree. A free and democratic state relies on the state trusting the majority of citizens to act in a responsible and reasonable manner, which most people do.

DNA collection could lead to abuses as yet unforeseen. For example, what would happen if a major political figure became ill and your child's DNA held the key to a cure. Would it be right of the state to hound an individual, or even compel an individual to assist in the medical treatment of the 'worthy' individual at the possible expense of the 'lesser' citizen.

I accept my example is an extreme one, but I have always believed people have a responsibility to limit, whenever possible, the intrusion of the state into our lives. I am also against the use of cameras in all High Streets and would rather see a more focussed use in high crime areas. If the crime moves, so should the cameras.

My viewpoint may appear naive in a modern world, but I would rather fight and struggle against a '1984' scenario where people sheepishly accept the slow transformation of government from a legitimate voice of the people into a clandestine spy upon the people.

[suffragette]

Sorry, I was disagreeing with the question, not Loosehead. This is one of the few areas where I stand shoulder to shoulder with him.

[Theland]

Which is going to be more intrusive in our lives? The state or the criminals? Is this not a "lesser of two evils" scenario?

[Ctrak]

Loosehead's actually right about this one- these things always have an element of function creep.

[suffragette]

No, I do not believe it is a lesser of two evils scenario, Theland. We all fear crime, but it is incumbent upon us all as rational people to keep things in perspective. We must all be vigilant, but not fearful; we must be supportive of necessary security measures when necessary, but not relinquish the very freedoms that make this nation one worth fighting for. I'm not suggesting that is an easy balance and the parameters may fluctuate, but wholesale surrender to the authority of the state is too akin to Soviet authority for my liking.

[unruliejulie]

I think its an excellent idea. It would make things so much easier on lots of counts if DNA is readily available not just for criminals but for identification purposes.

[Theland]

If it was a voluntary data base, I would most certainly volunteer. Then when the police began searching for a suspect, they could disregard me and look only at those who had not registered. That would save some time.

[Loosehead]

Well then Theland, the police are always keen to take samples so just walk into your local cop shop and I'm sure they'll take your DNA for you!

[noxlumos]

No terrible idea. I value my freedom to exist without state intrusion and should this ever become compulsary,or ID cards, then I'll damn well move somewhere I can live without the feeling that the State is spying on me.

[Carby]

Since having my DNA and finger prints taken by police for minor offences I have since commited 3 armed robberies, and 2 murders and have never been caught.

[OBonio]

No, I do not trust this government, or any government for that matter, to a) gather the information correctly, b) secure the information and c) not abuse the information or sell it to 3rd parties (insurance companies would pay very very handsomely).

I can't believe the number of people here who DO trust the government.... naive is all I can think.

[Llamatron]

Zimzam, you say those opposed have something to hide.
I presume you have curtains on the windows of your house. Why? Do you have something to hide?

It's called privacy.

[jump79]

No, it shouldn't as others have already stated earlier, I along with them do not trust the govt. enough to not misuse the DNA sample in future.

[scotstone]

You need to think carefully before sacrificing freedoms, against state intrusion, which have been fought for over centuries. Reasonable arguments could be made for inserting computer chips at birth so the state has information on our whereabouts at any time. The government is going to do this to our cars so it is only a short step to our bodies.

I wouldn't trust any government not to abuse any information they collect and store. The insurance companies and prospective employers would pay well for this sort of information.