State now want everyones DNA on file

AlanG · 24th October 2006, 07:43 AM

http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=1571422006

Quote:

Blair calls for everyone to record DNA on databases
JAMES KIRKUP POLITICAL EDITOR

MILLIONS of people should have their genetic details recorded on government DNA databases, regardless of whether they have ever been convicted of a crime, Tony Blair said yesterday.

Continues at link...

Well, it looks like the slow creep has begun. Short recap

They want everyones DNA on database:
Gov: but its only for criminals
people start objecting about slide ot a police state
Gov: but if we cnat keep it then paedophiles blah blah (think of the children!!22)
papers reveal DNA of innocent people is being kept including children
Gov: nothing to fear, besides what if a child gets kidnapped (think of the children!!11)
Gov: everyone should have DNA on file

----
Given the police stitch ups that have been revealed, never mind the ones which havent came to light we're expected to trust them?

thomasjmaccoll · 24th October 2006, 08:04 PM

what will happen if there is a mass refusal to go and get your dna taken? they're not going to take thousands of peoples' dna by force are they? if reasonable minded people were making their points as the government stormed houses to take samples, they wouldn't look too good...

amateurviking · 4th November 2006, 10:39 PM

Your DNA is a fundamentally personal thing. Frankly I think it's a bit debatable that a record should be kept of even a criminals DNA after it's been used.

A national database (of everyone) is open to abuse by private companies and the the public sector alike ('sorry no life insurance for you: you have a genetic predisposition to cancer/strokes/whatever'). Fundamentally, and unlike fingerprints, DNA samples can be copied, amplified and distributed - which could also lead to abuse.

If this goes ahead it will be another massive blow to civil liberties in this country

Red_Baron · 5th November 2006, 11:21 AM

I do not see this as a negative step at all.

I do not see it having any impact on civil liberties at all.

The point raised about insurance is irrelevant as you get asked about family history, current conditions etc.... However insurance companies would not be able to look at it. They can't look at medical records so I see no reason why some insurance bod would be able to access DNA records.

I think there are benifits too: Easier identification of bodies, if technology advances we could maybe use the DNA to look for donor matches, less doubt in criminal cases (although in the case if identical twins you need the RNA for a positive match)

At national store would also allow better studies into genetic conditions as it would give a national picture of DNA in the country.

it would be easier for couples to check for any possible genetic conditions that may arise in their child without resorting to invasive procedures.

I'm sure there are more bonuses but at the end of the day storing DNA it does not have any negatie impact on a person's freedom and right to go about their business.

Rotting Remains · 5th November 2006, 02:19 PM

they aint getting mine !!

chuckwasgod · 5th November 2006, 03:11 PM

if it involves looking at dirty ladies and wanking into a cup im in! none of this swabbing pish!

Rotting Remains · 5th November 2006, 03:17 PM

hahaha

edit... shit i cant spam serious discussion can i ?
err... im for the cup !!

amateurviking · 6th November 2006, 01:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red_Baron

I'm sure there are more bonuses but at the end of the day storing DNA it does not have any negatie impact on a person's freedom and right to go about their business.

Certainly.

The issue is when that information is abused (or more likely simply mismanaged) by it's custodians.

I'm not saying never take a DNA sample from anyone ever...what I'm saying that a permanent database for everyone is at best unnecessary and at worst (especially when its imposed or taken without consent) a massive breach of privacy - something which is increasingly given up altogether too easily these days.

and considering the government can't make the national insurance database secure and even halfway functional, what they'd do with 65 million DNA samples let alone making the IT work...well it'd be a total mess imo

Fundamentally the state should never hold any more information about an individual than is absolutely necessary

The Pumpkin · 6th November 2006, 10:00 AM

I can see what Red Baron is saying, DNA is incredibly useful in the ways you mentioned but in the case of medical research etc i dont see why you cant just take the DNA from the patients there and then instead of always having a store of it, its not difficult to obtain DNA, a swab of your cheek cells normally suffices.

Does that make sense? I think what im trying to say is only take it if you need it rather than keep a nationwide store of it. The potential for mismanagement and abuse is too risky.

Genetics at present is a touchy subject anyway is it not? Regards to its uses and potential. I remember a research paper i read not long ago for my uni course that mentioned chimeras. Chimeric individuals have two sets of DNA, usually they live and die without even realising it. Because of that no-one can guess how many there may be out there, surely that would cause problems with a national database. Has the government taken issues like this into consideration?

neilcoalesce · 6th November 2006, 05:36 PM

More info:

http://www.forensic.gov.uk/index.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_profiling
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...?artid=1408072

Was trying to think what to add to the discussion on this issue. I can see both sides but I do think it needs sensible, informed public debate. I have a feeling the government are going for the easy headlines on this. It shows a "look we're being tough on crime" without doing anything to tackle the root cause of crime or how to deal with and rehabilitate criminals.

Rotting Remains · 6th November 2006, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by amateurviking

and considering the government can't make the national insurance database secure and even halfway functional, what they'd do with 65 million DNA samples let alone making the IT work...well it'd be a total mess imo

Fundamentally the state should never hold any more information about an individual than is absolutely necessary

thats a damn fine point and one i agree with strongly
i still fail to see how they would aquire peoples dna that refused.

5th November 2006, 02:19 PM	#5 (permalink)
Rotting Remains Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 2,011	they aint getting mine !! __________________ We Are All Prostitutes !!

5th November 2006, 03:17 PM	#7 (permalink)
Rotting Remains Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 2,011	hahaha edit... shit i cant spam serious discussion can i ? err... im for the cup !! __________________ We Are All Prostitutes !!

6th November 2006, 10:00 AM	#9 (permalink)
The Pumpkin Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: id like to be in Camden Town Posts: 3,325 Band: Spengler	I can see what Red Baron is saying, DNA is incredibly useful in the ways you mentioned but in the case of medical research etc i dont see why you cant just take the DNA from the patients there and then instead of always having a store of it, its not difficult to obtain DNA, a swab of your cheek cells normally suffices. Does that make sense? I think what im trying to say is only take it if you need it rather than keep a nationwide store of it. The potential for mismanagement and abuse is too risky. Genetics at present is a touchy subject anyway is it not? Regards to its uses and potential. I remember a research paper i read not long ago for my uni course that mentioned chimeras. Chimeric individuals have two sets of DNA, usually they live and die without even realising it. Because of that no-one can guess how many there may be out there, surely that would cause problems with a national database. Has the government taken issues like this into consideration? Last edited by The Pumpkin : 6th November 2006 at 10:09 AM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Post your 'Ctrl - V'	njw	Bollocks	113	1st December 2007 05:05 PM
UAL to file reorganization plan early Aug	KayleighA	Bollocks	0	4th July 2005 01:24 AM
Problem an .avi file	Rich	Information Technology	26	12th August 2004 10:47 PM
After a spot of help with programming Net Yarozee!	RealR	Information Technology	9	18th May 2004 03:50 AM
Curly`s Battle of the Bands. State of Affairs, Cupid Stunt, Allergo and 4Star	kj	Reviews	0	22nd March 2004 07:20 PM

24th October 2006, 08:04 PM	#2 (permalink)
thomasjmaccoll Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: 47 millbank, cupar, fife Posts: 1,109	what will happen if there is a mass refusal to go and get your dna taken? they're not going to take thousands of peoples' dna by force are they? if reasonable minded people were making their points as the government stormed houses to take samples, they wouldn't look too good...

4th November 2006, 10:39 PM	#3 (permalink)
amateurviking Registered User Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Liverpool Posts: 25 Band: open to offers	Your DNA is a fundamentally personal thing. Frankly I think it's a bit debatable that a record should be kept of even a criminals DNA after it's been used. A national database (of everyone) is open to abuse by private companies and the the public sector alike ('sorry no life insurance for you: you have a genetic predisposition to cancer/strokes/whatever'). Fundamentally, and unlike fingerprints, DNA samples can be copied, amplified and distributed - which could also lead to abuse. If this goes ahead it will be another massive blow to civil liberties in this country

5th November 2006, 11:21 AM	#4 (permalink)
Red_Baron Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Dundee/Alyth hybrid Posts: 1,504 Band: 15 Minutes	I do not see this as a negative step at all. I do not see it having any impact on civil liberties at all. The point raised about insurance is irrelevant as you get asked about family history, current conditions etc.... However insurance companies would not be able to look at it. They can't look at medical records so I see no reason why some insurance bod would be able to access DNA records. I think there are benifits too: Easier identification of bodies, if technology advances we could maybe use the DNA to look for donor matches, less doubt in criminal cases (although in the case if identical twins you need the RNA for a positive match) At national store would also allow better studies into genetic conditions as it would give a national picture of DNA in the country. it would be easier for couples to check for any possible genetic conditions that may arise in their child without resorting to invasive procedures. I'm sure there are more bonuses but at the end of the day storing DNA it does not have any negatie impact on a person's freedom and right to go about their business.

5th November 2006, 03:11 PM	#6 (permalink)
chuckwasgod Registered User Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 85 Band: -	if it involves looking at dirty ladies and wanking into a cup im in! none of this swabbing pish!

6th November 2006, 05:36 PM	#10 (permalink)
neilcoalesce Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Muppet Labs Posts: 1,409	More info: http://www.forensic.gov.uk/index.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_profiling http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...?artid=1408072 Was trying to think what to add to the discussion on this issue. I can see both sides but I do think it needs sensible, informed public debate. I have a feeling the government are going for the easy headlines on this. It shows a "look we're being tough on crime" without doing anything to tackle the root cause of crime or how to deal with and rehabilitate criminals.