DNA Database - what's the problem?

[HecatesTwopenceworth]

After being unable to understand why ID cards/database are a problem/dangerous and currently waiting for someone to explain it to me I thought I'd ask about a story I saw on the news today.

DNA database - previously the dna taken from people arrested has been kept, now there will be time limits set on how long it can be kept.

I don't see the problem with a dna database. In fact, I don't see why we don't take a sample at birth - when the midwife does the heel prick etc and record it then.

I can hear you gasping in horror because I understand most people are outraged at the thought of such info being held. What I don't get, is why. The reasons do not seem logical to me at all.

It's only to be a record, not an actual sample, isn't it? Unless people think that the police will recreate the dna and plant it at crime scenes or something, I just don't see why it is frightening.

All I can see is the benefit of being able to match dna from crime scenes, of no more paternity disputes... I don't understand why it's a threat to anyone.

Interesting stuff by IWantedThatName

I'm like Lenin - I know I'm supposed to object, but I don't. Particularly as this database would go a long way towards solving almost all stranger rape (wouldn't it?). And anything that addresses the shameful scandal of the low rape conviction rate seems important to me. (I know stranger rape is a low proportion of all rape, but in numerical terms you're still talking about thousands of cases.)

I guess a lot of the objections rest on people simply not trusting the government. By and large, I do trust the government with this sort of information. I trust them with my health, with my child's schooling, with national security - why wouldn't I trust them with this stuff?

I understand the argument that one day we might have a totalitarian government that would make sinister use of this info, but I think this is a pretty weak argument tbh.

I am not a conspiracy theorist at the best of times, but the argument 'The innocent will have nothing to lose having this DNA database' just doesn't hold up to scrutiny for me...

I don't trust the govt with my health or my children's education or pension - there is a big market and a good reason why many are making their own plans ...

Ok - so if you had your DNA on the database what do you think you would lose/what would be the risks to you FleshWound?

1. If you were an innocent party?
2. If you were guilty of an unrelated crime

Jonathan Myerson wrote a piece along the lines of the OP in the Grauniad yesterday.

There are several pages of FURIOUS comments

IWanted... if you have about an hour spare , it would be interesting to hear what you think of some of the more technical DNA arguments in the Comments section under the piece - it was all too far over my head.

I may have an hour or so later...leave it with me!

I suppose it is just the risk of exposure - I don't use cookies and ensure that my bank details are only given out when absolutely necessary - I supply the same principles to any personal information - DNA included ...

I suppose it is just like the CRB checks - they aren't exactly failsafe and I don't trust anybody with anything ...

But your DNA being on a DNA database isn't really information...it is worthless except in a criminal case (or paternity test). OTOH cookies and bank details contain information which is valuable to other agencies.

it isnot the same.

Probably isn't the same,

But if I don't intend to commit a crime (and leave reasonable DNA to be traced) it is also useless to the govt so why do they need it and pay to have this information safeguarded ??

The SA govt has a full set of my fingerprints on file (somewhere), yet SA visitors to the UK have to get a visa to visit because of lapses in security in issuing SA passports ... the innocent SA traveller off to see their grandchildren are treated as guilty parties by the UK govt ...

but if you don't ever get arrested your DNA will never (as it currently stands) have your DNA profile on file so you have nothing to worry about - and based on the current Euopean rule someone would only have DNA profile on records for a maximum of 12yrs if they are not charged.

We are not talking about a compulsary all in database - so stay away from the police and you will be fine.

Oh and one other point - I am sure that most people would say "I don't intend to commit a crime"...so that statement carrys no weight IYSWIM

But the goal posts move constantly what about those people throughout Liverpool and Manchester that were arrested as terrorists and then released without charge, I bet they intended to stay away from the police too.
My husband, the most mild mannered man you could hope to meet was arrested at a football match once for looking at the policeman who was arresting somebody else, released without charge but these days he'd have had his DNA taken, really you do not have to do much these days to get arrested.

IWTN - I can see that perhaps a DNA database is not the all-evil thing is is made out to be... but it just implies a whole lot of joined up thinking, money, time, effort and fancy computer work ...

Pretty law abiding here - and intend to stay this way thanks !!

Perfectly innocent people going about their perfectly innocent business could be stopped and have their DNA taken. Like peaceful protesters on a demo (or even planning a demo, these days).

There is a crucial democratic principle at stake here - that the state serves us rather than controls us. We are free to do what we want as long as it doesn't break the law, rather than being servants of the state who are only free to do those things that the state allows us to do.

well DNA - I don't have a problem with

ID cards - don't even get me started

edam - but how does the state's possession of a DNA sample exercise control over us?

The state (via its various agencies) knows my blood group, my birth date, my address, how many children I have, my entire medical history, where I was educated, who my partner is, my household income, etc etc. Why does this one extra piece of info make any difference?

I mean, I see (and agree with) your point about indiscriminate policing - but this is a problem with the way the police approach peaceful protesters, not a problem with DNA collection per se.

"edam - but how does the state's possession of a DNA sample exercise control over us?

The state (via its various agencies) knows my blood group, my birth date, my address, how many children I have, my entire medical history, where I was educated, who my partner is, my household income, etc etc. Why does this one extra piece of info make any difference? "

And TBH (unless they want to match you to a sample taken at a crime scene all that other info is a whole lot more useful to them).

A DNA profile id just a pretty picture

It makes a huge difference as DNA is the ultimate identity. It's so unique that if Watson/Crick didn't discover it, there would be ethical debates about it...

The state has control as very few people understand the science behind DNA, so in this respect the State has the upper hand. How would anyone challenge DNA evidence? what is the process of appeal?

Most people accept that DNA is an absolute science and in this respect, is dangerous imho....

So what if a Hitler type got into power and at the touch of a button could have a list at their finger tips of all the people they want to exterminate ?
How would you feel about the database then ?

Sorrento - but that argument works against all forms of state power. I wouldn't want such a government to have access to the addresses of practically everyone in the country, but it would. I wouldn't want it to be in charge of educating my child, but it would.

I do understand that there are some people who are just wary of state power in all its forms, and for those people, opposing the DNA database is a no-brainer - fair enough. But those arguments don't work for those of us who are quite comfortable with the state having a big finger in our individual pies

FWIW, I think that the chances of an extremist government getting in are very remote anyway. It's big news when the BNP wins a council seat. I can't see us turning fascist at any point in the forseeable future. I confidently predict that we will continue to be a slightly-right-of-centre country for a long time to come yet.

it's not on...sorry just feels wrong what does anyone need my finger-prints, DNA for?..seriously?..why?..unless I commit a crime..The government knows enough about me already thanks...

With respect I imagine most people did not vote for Hitler.
But it happened.
Just imagine if Mengele had at his finger tips all the details required to wipe out a whole race with each and everyone's address and where abouts.
More worrying though is if we accept this as the norm and then we accept ID cards, what next bar coding ? Micro chipping, for normal people going about their daily lives, is that what we want for our children under the guise of protecting them ? I'd rather take my chances with the "terrorists"

a-HA!

More to the point, why does DNA need to be on a datebase?

I wouldn't object to it being stored for medical purposes, but am not happy for the police to have access to it.

what I don't like about this debate is that there hasn't been a case made for keeping DNA profiles, rather it was challenged via the ECtHR and found to be incompatible with Art 8, rather than the police, government etc making an actual coherent case for having a DNA database...

Yes, I see your point Ilove... - I haven't heard a strong case made for it either.

My feeling is that it would solve a lot of crimes - but looking at some of the online debates, this is very contested. That's why I want IWantedThatName to look at that Guardian debate I linked to.