'Nation of suspects' fear on DNA - David Davis

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by Karma, Feb 24, 2008.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. It's not often I have much alignment with the Tories, but David Davis was speaking some sense this morning. Reported on the BBC.

    A DNA database containing details on all people in the UK would create a "nation of suspects", the Tories say.

    Shadow home secretary David Davis said allowing the state to hold profiles would be "incredibly intrusive" and called for an "effective" debate.

    I've got to say that I'd be happier if they came down firmly on the side of telling the state to feck right off though.
  2. It's right up there with National ID cards - Can just imagine the furore when the ethnic lesbian prostitute from 3 stops past Barking gets threatened with being thrown out of the country because her DNA has been linked with an Axe murderer and besides she was an illegal immigrant anyway! .. or at least they would only the CD with all the National DNA database has gone missing and suddenly re-appeared in the Child Support Agency office!

    edited for missing words and dyslexic fingers
  3. <----- Will not subcribe to a DNA database, will not carry an ID card.
  4. But Oil Slick, you're a man of law 'n' order. Hang em high and all that.
    Think of all those lovely scrotes banged up thanks to DNA evidence.
  5. The lack of personal liberty is something of a shock for those of us that return to the island from time to time, or, as in my case several times a month.
    Arriving at the immigration (still necessary for EU citizens?) at LGW you are met not by smiling faces, but miserable sods surrounded by signs warning you not to dare to step out of line. The airport itself is scruffy and dimly lit which doesn't help matters.
    It really is getting very bad indeed, and for what in a country with lower crime rates than many of its neighbours?
    I honestly fear for the future of freedom in the UK; and yet the citizens seem so complacent, almost wandering into this without question, so open to abuse by the powers that be.
    A very long and hard look in the mirror is required.

  6. Treating your citizens as 'property of the State' is what a DNA database and compulsory ID cards represents.

    DNA databases, ID cards and RFID tagging has NOTHING to do with 'Law and Order' and everything to do with rendering your population as vassels of the State that only have as much 'freedom' as the Authorities permit them.
  7. The first words of the Spanish constitution, a new one from 1976:
    'The power of the state lies with the people'. No such statement is present in any document in the UK.
    In the UK the state is now starting to rule supreme and heaven help anyone who steps out of line.
    However we do have ID cards in Spain, and need when driving a vehicle to have at least four or five documents with us; more fool you if you argue with the Guardia (now no longer a force in Catalunya).
    Despite this there are few ccctv cameras and I feel so much more free than in the UK.
    Can anyone explain this?

  8. Ah, but your Spanish ID card is an identity document, it's purpose is to allow you to prove who YOU are…

    Now the problem we have in Britain is that the Great British Sheeple can't understand the subtle but VERY importance difference between an Identity Document and an Identity Card.

    UK Gov want's to introduce a card with your entire life history on it, without it you would become a 'Non Person', unable to access even your own bank account. And that's the FUNDEMENTAL difference the fools in this country who spout the 'if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear about ID cards' shiite don't understand.

    The Spanish, French or whoever cannot use their ID system to shut down the country by remote… the UK ID card system would allow the UK Gov to shut down the entire country into 'lockdown' with the flick of a switch.
  9. Britain's opt out of Schengen means that EU citizens have fewer access rights than they do in the Schengen compliant countries such as Germany.
  10. Is it members of parliament exempt ? :pukel:

  11. BINGO!!!!!

    Of course them and their familes are exempt from all this database stuff for their 'safety'…
  12. Oil Slick,

    So you're quite happy for the State to execute criminals even if there's a possibility that they might be innocent (a possibility given the legal system's less-than-100-per-cent success rate), but you won't give them the power to issue ID cards and a DNA database.

    You can't have it both ways. Alles oder nichts.

    Personally, despite being a "pinko liberal lefty" I'm not opposed to ID cards and a DNA database per se... I just don't trust the data to be securely held and not lost on a CD by Postman Plod. :w00t:

  13. That's because you are not, and never where a citizen of Constitutional Republic.

    When your're living in your post 1984 Database Society nightmare, I'll be thinking about you as I board a flight back to a free country. :thumright:

    Oil_Slick passing through Airstrip One border control.
  14. wet_blobby

    wet_blobby War Hero Moderator

    They got my DNA, never charged with anything, never taken off the list. Wonder how much I'm worth to a medical company........information is power.
  15. Blimey a few more pies and the 'Immigration Officer' will be able to do a spot on Goering impersonation. The pride of the Wehrmact I'm sure. Living history my a r s e they just like dressing up as Nazis.

    Sorry back on thread now.
  16. I watched David Davis and I think he was talking garbage, merely taking an opposite stance for political advantage.

    Having a DNA profile on a database does not make everyone a suspect, it merely allows much quicker identification of possible suspects. The argument that DNA is a flimsy method of identifying suspects needs to be had much more openly, but there are so many other good reasons for such a store of information.

    As medical science catches up with genetic work, there is massive potential benefit to disease recognition and potential treatment. There is, of course, an argument that this information could be gleaned by holding a medical DNA database, but anyone who thinks that medical confidentiality would prevent others gaining access to such information is living in a slightly rarified atmosphere.

    It's a bit like the development of the atom bomb, it cannot be un-invented so we have to accept the science and learn to live with it. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater is not the answer.
  17. You haven't actually de-constructed what DD said, only taken an opposing standpoint for the sake of arguing against the Conservatives....

    The threat comes from an inept government (and I pointedly include the public sector in this) mishandling the data, either losing it, using ineffective processes to identify people, or placing too much reliance on it. Then there's the threat of having an instrument that can be misused deliberately by a more fascist government in the future. So rather than sleep-walk ourselves into a police state, I'd rather preserve my liberties. And I'm speaking as one who did live in an actual military dictatorship for over 10 years, with compulsory ID cards (only had parents names, thumb print and photo on them) and compulsory social security cards (used to guarantee cheques, compulsory for buying property and vehicles). Salami slicing our freedoms will only lead to our destruction (dun, dun, duuuuuun!)
  18. I haven't deconstructed somebody's opinion of what DD said, but I watched the interview with Andrew Marr and have therefore commented on what I saw and heard. I believe that his point on "a nation of suspects" was garbage as previously said.

    I understand your reference to sleepwalking into a police state, but I'm afraid it's too late, the genie is out of the bottle, so the sooner we accept that the technology exists and is not going to go away, the easier we will find it to accept that we're all going to have to live with it!
  19. Each advance in forensics has failed to actually deliver on the detection promises it first had, partly because it was over sold and partly because many criminals are not as stupid as we would like them to be. I have often argued that detection and conviction are very potent disuaders for criminals but even so false accusation is also a great destroyer of lives and there are still questions over some of the methods used to recover DNA related to crimes. For this reason alone I would be against a universal database, even if we could trust the government to look after our 'personality' it had stored. Right at the moment I would suggest that that trust does not simply exist.

    So I both question the ultimate utility and accuracy of such a database until we undestand it better and can improve the odds of not pulling in wrong suspects., and I equally question the security of such information.

    My vote for the time being is NO.
  20. We can live with the technology without exposing the individual to the level of intrusion, and personal information risk, that a single database implies.

    I would agree with your previous point that delivery of government service would be made easier with something like this, but the potential for compromise is huge and to me that risk far outweighs the potential benefits.

Share This Page