Police had another wonderful idea

J

julian

Member
Messages
515
Reaction score
0
Location
London
Am I the only one to be absolutely pukified by this? (Sorry, I'm so disgusted that I had to make up a new word.)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4752566.stm

Ok, maybe not as disgusting as retaining a DNA database of children, but doesn't this amount to: "We can't do our job, so we presume a whole community guilty until proven innocent"?
Does this have a precedent?
Note the bogey man wording of the inspector: "Obviously if someone does refuse then each case will be reviewed on its own merits. [...] I'll look at the evidence available, how their name entered this murder inquiry and obviously we'll give careful consideration to whether someone should be arrested for Sally Anne's murder."
 
So would you have your DNA sample taken? Perhaps on the basis that you have "nothing to hide"?
 
The problem is that this is just another stealth technique of DNA harvesting. the people they test ranfdomly without any shred of suspician will have their DNA kept on file permanantly. They want a DNA database and they want it soon. The problem with this is that it allows the authorities to easily identify race and ethicity. Soemthing we should all fear. Had the nazis had this technology at their disposal things woul have been one hell of a lot worse. In time wehn we have an ever more totalitarian government this is osmething we should ll be verys suspicious of and reist wherever possible. IMHO.

The nothing to hide, nothing to fear argument is alright until the governemtn decides that what you are is illeagal and then they know how to find you.

Say for example if we got a government that decided to round up all the pople with the gay gene.

Half the hard house crowd would disappear overnight and their only crime is liking Lisa lashes.

Hangon. I'm talking myself into this idea!! :Smile3:

(Pleeeaaase have a SOH here. I am taking the pee.)
 
AcidTrash said:
The nothing to hide, nothing to fear argument is alright until the governemtn decides that what you are is illeagal and then they know how to find you.
Click to expand...

Blimey I actually agree with you on something, I've used the same argument when discussing ID cards..."the only people who need to be bothered are the ones with something to hide" they say, "yes but every future government will then have the same technology" I say, "who knows what they will decide to use it for?"
 
The problem with the police having a huge DNA and fingerprint database of anyone they arrest (even if proven innocent) is that if they find your DNA or fingerprints at a crime scene, you will then immediately be located and contacted by the police, and essentially you are no longer innocent until proven guilty, but GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT, as you will have to account or your NDA and or finger prints being at the location of the crime scene.

Is this not going against the whole way our justice system works ?
 
Zero-G said:
The problem with the police having a huge DNA and fingerprint database of anyone they arrest (even if proven innocent) is that if they find your DNA or fingerprints at a crime scene, you will then immediately be located and contacted by the police, and essentially you are no longer innocent until proven guilty, but GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT, as you will have to account or your NDA and or finger prints being at the location of the crime scene.

Is this not going against the whole way our justice system works ?
Click to expand...

if you were seen leaving a crime seen, you would have to account for your being there, why shouldnt you have to account for it? if your innocent, whats the problem?
 
Zero-G said:
The problem with the police having a huge DNA and fingerprint database of anyone they arrest (even if proven innocent) is that if they find your DNA or fingerprints at a crime scene, you will then immediately be located and contacted by the police, and essentially you are no longer innocent until proven guilty, but GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT, as you will have to account or your NDA and or finger prints being at the location of the crime scene.

Is this not going against the whole way our justice system works ?
Click to expand...

Yes. This is the way justice is going anyway in europe at the moment. With or without DNA profiling. They havent twigged that swift justice is no justice at all.
 
miszt said:
if you were seen leaving a crime seen, you would have to account for your being there, why shouldnt you have to account for it? if your innocent, whats the problem?
Click to expand...

But this scenario is a little different, don't you think? We are talking about 4000 people here. Were they all seen leaving a crime scene?
And let's assume in a month's time they come back and say: "Ok, so all 4000 cleared their name, but we still haven't got the faintest clue. However we are pretty sure that the killer lives in Greater London. Can the 12million people leaving there please come and clear their name? Come on guys, it's a good cause, this girl has been raped and stabbed. And for extra incentive, if you don't cooperate in this completely voluntary scheme... well you may get arrested you know? But it's up to you."

Is there a precedent for this?
 
I simply do not believe the protestations that the DNA will not be kept on file, this is so clearly a way of getting a load of DNA off people. Let's face it, the killer is not going to step forward and offer it up, and there's no way that every single bloke in that area is going to volunteer, so it's a huge waste of time, and won't actually prove anything at all.
 
AcidTrash said:
Yes. This is the way justice is going anyway in europe at the moment. With or without DNA profiling. They havent twigged that swift justice is no justice at all.
Click to expand...

The worst proponent of this mentality are the Yanks though, with their frightening-sounding Total Information Awareness and Department of Homeland Security.

You're so busy trying to diss Europe that you're blind to the flaws of your heroes.

J.
 
ok, I agree, they are more than likly gonna keep the dna on file, but imo it doesnt matter, I think we have more important things to worry about than the government keeping records on us, which they do anyway.

there are so many other things we could put our energy into rather than these consipiricy theories, which imo dont really have any real impact on our lives, like mayb we could spend a little less money on drugs and give it to good causes, recyling, energy saving, conscious living, eg respecting the people and things around us
 
dont wana sound like a xianist, but a wise man once said, 'dont try to point out the splinter in the eye of your brother, untill you have removed the plank from your own eyes'

jesus had some very good things to say (mixed in with all the bollox about mustard trees and heaven)
 
miszt said:
dont wana sound like a xianist, but a wise man once said, 'dont try to point out the splinter in the eye of your brother, untill you have removed the plank from your own eyes'

jesus had some very good things to say (mixed in with all the bollox about mustard trees and heaven)
Click to expand...

Was it not Jesus in fact who said " don't try to remove the speck rom your brothers eye....."

So the Government know exactly what our DNA is.... Big deal.

P.S. Our Justice system works? So why can't you prosecute for assault unless you've got a good two years to hang about? Hmmmmm......:irazz:
 
miszt said:
if your innocent, whats the problem?
Click to expand...

Multifarious privacy issues. For me, our rights and pivacy are one of the biggest issues right now. If you can discount it all as vague conspiracies theories that won't impact our life (ahaha) without doing some proper research then be my guest. I'll be the one saying I told you so in 20 years' time.

Giving to charity is irrelevant but most privacy campaigners do more for good causes than a lot of other people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top