An idea that might reduce 99.9% of all murders/rape

daveg

With all the DNA testing carried out during the Madeleine McCann case I started thinking why not take a DNA sample from everyone at birth, across the globe which would feed into a global database. If a crime is then committed DNA could be extracted from the scene and the culprit could be prosecuted.

It seems that DNA samples are already collected from sex offenders. According to http://science.howstuffworks.com/dna-evidence.htm, In the US by law, authorities in all 50 states must collect DNA samples from convicted sex offenders for inclusion in CODIS (Database of DNA samples).

I realise that this “infringes” on our human rights but in the grand scheme of things is this not a good idea?

Dragan

daveg wrote: »

I realise that this “infringes” on our human rights but in the grand scheme of things is this not a good idea?

Not really.....how would you feel if you were strolling down the road and the cops pulled you in to fingerprint and photograph you "in case you do something in future".

Balls to that.

digitally-yours

CCTV

If the GOV has the money for this

Hagar

Double plus good idea.

Sabre0001

When freedom of speech is taken away, only the criminals will complain.........


An interesting book to read is "The Traveller" by John Twelve Hawks.

You really have to look at who is managing the data and for what purpose...How intrusive will things actually get? What consequences could there be for actions, etc...

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

dame

Dragan wrote: »

Not really.....how would you feel if you were strolling down the road and the cops pulled you in to fingerprint and photograph you "in case you do something in future".

Balls to that.

If you're not planning to do anything in the future and have no crimes in your past then why should it bother you? Would you not be happy that you're ruled out immediately if say, ten women in your immediate neighbourhood got attacked?

Dragan

dame wrote: »

If you're not planning to do anything in the future and have no crimes in your past then why should it bother you? Would you not be happy that you're ruled out immediately if say, ten women in your immediate neighbourhood got attacked?

The whole "if your not planning to do anyting why would it bother you" argument holds no water with me to be honest.

Thats simply not the point. It's right up there with the whole "every man is a potential rapist" thing.

It's like the Church and it's "original sin" bull****. Just another way to have people agree to further control based on fear.

seamus

Sabre0001 wrote: »

You really have to look at who is managing the data and for what purpose...How intrusive will things actually get? What consequences could there be for actions, etc...

This is really the main thing. I'm fairly liberal with my personal data and not overly concerned with people "knowing things" about me for the most part. But when it comes to complete genetic profiles it's crossing a line.

Would you be happy knowing that our Government rife with corrupt politicians knew absolutely everything about you? In fact, would be happy knowing that *any* Government, police force or other authority figure had that kind of information on file, "Just in case"? Every organisation has its corrupt individuals and no matter what checks you put in place, there are people who will view/use the information just because they can.

robinph

daveg wrote: »

I realise that this “infringes” on our human rights but in the grand scheme of things is this not a good idea?

No.

http://www.no2id.net/

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

dame

A now, everyone knows that not every man is a rapist or even a potential rapist, but seriously, if there was DNA evidence left behind after somebody close to you was harmed, wouldn't you prefer if the police could quickly catch the culprit and get them convicted?

Do those who would object to this, object to Biometric passports or even to having to have a passport at all? Would you object to giving personal details to open a bank account or dvd rental account and having those details stored? It's not much different really to storing DNA, (depending on how it's secured and what it's used for).

dame

daveirl wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

No that would be more invasive (surgery) and then there would also be the problem of viscious people-traffickers cutting out the tracking device, much like dog-nappers will remove the chip from pure-bred dogs. Taking a swab from inside a baby's cheek isn't going to cause the same pain.

HelterSkelter

Do you trust the people taking the DNA to only use it for the purpose they say it will? How would you feel if VHI refuse to renew your cover next year because they found out from your DNA that you have a defect that makes you more prone to getting cancer/heart attack/whatever? Or what if you are refused a mortgage for the same reason? It's a very bad idea.

robinph

dame wrote: »

Do those who would object to this, object to Biometric passports or even to having to have a passport at all? Would you object to giving personal details to open a bank account or dvd rental account and having those details stored? It's not much different really to storing DNA, (depending on how it's secured and what it's used for).

I do object to having a biometric passport that is then transmitting that data freely to anyone who passes by with a reader device, I'm also not too keen on that data then being stored by any foreign country that I happen to pass through. I'd also object to anybody else having access to biometric details the government might then have stored about me be it a bank or dvd rental shop.

dame

Would VHI refuse to renew your cover or banks refuse to give you a mortgage if you ticked "yes" in a box to say you smoke? There are more than genetic factors that can put your health at risk. Should VHI ask everyone How much do you drink? Do you ever walk along a road without a footpath? Do you ski? Do you drive? Do you travel as a passenger in any form of transport? Do you use sharp knives to prepare your dinner? Do you clean your home with chemicals?

Of course, there's an issue with what the data can be used for, but there's plenty of other instances of that: How often have you gotten unsolicited calls/texts/emails from companies who have gotten your details from another company you signed up to?

HelterSkelter

robinph wrote: »

I do object to having a biometric passport that is then transmitting that data freely to anyone who passes by with a reader device, I'm also not too keen on that data then being stored by any foreign country that I happen to pass through. I'd also object to anybody else having access to biometric details the government might then have stored about me be it a bank or dvd rental shop.

That reminds me, I was doind a bank transfer with National Irish Bank internet banking to the UK the other day and saw this notice:

US requirements on cross-border transfers

Please be aware that, when you transfer funds abroad, the information may be passed on to US authorities.

SWIFT required to deliver information
SWIFT, which executes cross-border payments, may be required to deliver information if there is a suspicion of financing of criminal activity or terrorism (according to US law). SWIFT may pass on information that appears in the payment instructions.

About SWIFT
SWIFT is a Belgian data network that transfers payments between countries. Some 8,000 financial services businesses in 206 countries are registered with the network, which has data centres in Europe and the US. SWIFT stands for Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication.

Questions
If you have any questions, you can always contact Customer Support.

I mean for fúck sake, what right have a foreign state got to inquire into my personal bank transactions???? Using terrorism as an excuse to do whatever they like.

HelterSkelter

dame wrote: »

Would VHI refuse to renew your cover or banks refuse to give you a mortgage if you ticked "yes" in a box to say you smoke? There are more than genetic factors that can put your health at risk. Should VHI ask everyone How much do you drink? Do you ever walk along a road without a footpath? Do you ski? Do you drive? Do you travel as a passenger in any form of transport? Do you use sharp knives to prepare your dinner? Do you clean your home with chemicals?

The difference are those are all questions you can choose not to answer truthfully. If they have your DNA they can tell you things about yourself you don't even know.

Now answer my original question, would you be happy about companies having access to your DNA on file and making decisions like this which affect your life in a massive way?

seamus

dame wrote: »

(depending on how it's secured and what it's used for).

I wouldn't trust any security on such information, basically. There is no such thing as a perfect security system.

Look at it this way:
Wealthy politician murders his wife and her lover in anger. Makes it look like a burglar.
Heads off to his local civil servant with access to the national DNA database. Hands over a hefty sum of money to jiggle with the figures - switch his DNA profile with that of a petty criminal, or even just some local man at random.

Local man/petty criminal goes to jail permanently - it's DNA right, can't be beaten?

A global database would be even more troublesome. In some of the more corrupt countries, you'd probably find a culture of visiting foreigners being jailed for crimes purely because the criminal had enough money to buy someone off.

Outer Bongolia

What about if DNA was only taken once you had been convicted of a serious offence like assault or sexual misconduct.

HelterSkelter

dame wrote: »

Do those who would object to this, object to Biometric passports or even to having to have a passport at all? Would you object to giving personal details to open a bank account or dvd rental account and having those details stored?

It's not much different really to storing DNA, (depending on how it's secured and what it's used for).

Are you serious? Is it possible to clone someone from the details they gave to open a DVD rental account?

humanji

The government already knows everthing about you. Every detail of your lives can easily be recorded and used in any way, so I don't have any real objections to having my DNA stored. As pointed out, one problem would be with insurance etc, but that's only if they get their hands on it which, if it's done right, won't happen.

A lot of the arguments against are just scare mongering. In fact the same tactics are used by those who want to force biometric passports etc on us.

orestes

Hagar wrote: »

Double plus good idea.

Hahaha!

Clever bugger!

Dinxminx

That's not exactly a foolproof method. Can you imagine the amount of people that would get framed for crimes they didn't commit based on DNA samples? Someone would scatter some hair cuttings on the scene of the crime and two weeks later a woman's pulled in for questioning when all she did was get her hair cut (its just a -very bad - example, bear with me!) at the place where the murderer worked?

Latchy

On Dna -It seem English police have a suspect in the murder of schoolgirl Lesley Moiseed who was murdered in 1975 .DNA recovered from the 11 year old girl murdered in a frenzied sex attack more than 30 years ago exactly matches that of a man accused of killing her .

As for reducing rape crimes , it seems in a lot of cases of rape ,the victim was walking home alone down a lane way ,across a field/park or in a dimly lit street late at night. Now in a perfect world any womon should be able to walk anyere at all times of the day or night alone ,but it puzzles me as why time and time again womon still go walking alone home by themselfs? This is what the potential rapist wants ....

humanji

Dinxminx wrote: »

That's not exactly a foolproof method. Can you imagine the amount of people that would get framed for crimes they didn't commit based on DNA samples? Someone would scatter some hair cuttings on the scene of the crime and two weeks later a woman's pulled in for questioning when all she did was get her hair cut (its just a -very bad - example, bear with me!) at the place where the murderer worked?

People are already being framed for crimes. And nobody is going to be convicted through a DNA sample alone.

seamus

latchyco wrote: »

As for reducing rape crimes , it seems in a lot of cases of rape ,the victim was walking home alone down a lane way ,across a field/park or in a dimly lit street late at night. Now in a perfect world any womon should be able to walk anyere at all times of the day or night alone ,but it puzzles me as why time and time again womon still go walking alone home by themselfs? This is what the potential rapist wants ....

"Alone" and "dimly lit" are incidental. It's fair to say that when a woman is with someone who wishes her no harm, someone else is unlikely to attack her. Attackers will also use dimly lit areas so they can't be seen.

You'll find that most of the time, women are raped/attacked by someone they know. The incidence of random rape is quite low. So quite often because the woman isn't alone, she walks through dimly-lit areas which is where the attacker decides he's going to do it.

HelterSkelter

humanji wrote: »

As pointed out, one problem would be with insurance etc, but that's only if they get their hands on it which, if it's done right, won't happen.

What if the Govenment partially own a health insurance company...like....erm....the VHI for example?

Tzetze

Hagar wrote: »

Double plus good idea.

Well said, brother Hagar!

humanji

HelterSkelter wrote: »

What if the Govenment partially own a health insurance company...like....erm....the VHI for example?

They're already screwing people over, so it wouldn't make a difference

Latchy

Quote =seamus;Alone" and "dimly lit" are incidental. It's fair to say that when a woman is with someone who wishes her no harm, someone else is unlikely to attack her. Attackers will also use dimly lit areas so they can't be seen.

You'll find that most of the time, women are raped/attacked by someone they know. The incidence of random rape is quite low. So quite often because the woman isn't alone, she walks through dimly-lit areas which is where the attacker decides he's going to do it.

Thats my whole point , you are less likley to be attacked if your with sombody but watching crimewatch over the years it does seem that the victims of rapes were in isolated areas, with the chance of any assistince slim to nothing .
In a lot of cases women are attacked in day light to .

Nevyn

latchyco wrote: »

As for reducing rape crimes , it seems in a lot of cases of rape ,the victim was walking home alone down a lane way ,across a field/park or in a dimly lit street late at night. Now in a perfect world any womon should be able to walk anyere at all times of the day or night alone ,but it puzzles me as why time and time again womon still go walking alone home by themselfs? This is what the potential rapist wants ....

oh for fúck sake, most rape is not stranger rape at all, but the person is known to the victim but those cases are hard to prosecute and few of them are taken by the dept of public prosecution.

Go away and learn the truth about the facts of rape and sexual assulat in this country and stop spouting myths which are harmful.

baztard

Why stop at the government knowing just our dna?

Why not have the gardai search through all our bank statements so make sure we haven't stolen any money or search through our houses once a month to see if you've stolen anything else.

Or maybe they should have a list of every persons' family, friends and aqaintances so that if someone is murdered they can arrest everyone who is close to them straight away.

But sure if I didn't commit a crime I've nothing to hide right?

Nevyn

As for the topic of the thread, ever seen gattaca ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gattaca

There were calls to do this and to do automatic paterinty testing when a child is born.

seamus

latchyco wrote: »

Thats my whole point , you are less likley to be attacked if your with sombody but watching crimewatch over the years it does seem that the victims of rapes were in isolated areas, with the chance of any assistince slim to nothing .

Well, the only ones that make it onto crimewatch and the news are the cases where the person was randomly attacked. When the person is attacked by someone they know, it's not reported - because nobody is looking for the rapist, they have him. I think what you're asking is "Why do people walk down dark lanes?". Basically because the chances of anything happening to you are slim to none. When these things are reported, you don't get told, "This woman has walked down the laneway every night for the last 15 years without seeing so much as a mouse", instead you just get a picture of a dark and ominous laneway with some stupid caption like, "Laneway of horror".

This is why it appears that so much of this random stuff goes on - because only the random stuff gets reported in the media. Non-random stuff (i.e. where the perp is known to the victim) doesn't get reported because there's nothing to report.

"Woman raped by her husband on Saturday night" -v- "Woman attacked by unknown assailant in public park while children played nearby".

Which one looks better on the front of a paper?

Latchy

Quote =Thaedydal;oh for fúck sake, most rape is not stranger rape at all, but the person is known to the victim but those cases are hard to prosecute and few of them are taken by the dept of public prosecution.

Go away and learn the truth about the facts of rape and sexual assulat in this country and stop spouting myths which are harmful.

well jezzz excuse my iggnorence i suppose all those women who have gone mssing in ireland over the years were raped and buried by people they knew..hmm .. maybe ... and you know all about the rapes of women by strangers to ? do you live in a country ara or city ...........for fcuks sake ?

Latchy

Quote Seamus - Well, the only ones that make it onto crimewatch and the news are the cases where the person was randomly attacked. When the person is attacked by someone they know, it's not reported - because nobody is looking for the rapist, they have him. I think what you're asking is "Why do people walk down dark lanes?". Basically because the chances of anything happening to you are slim to none.

Thank you , thats what i was saying and remember, the rapist only needs one oppurtunity to rape .I am saying to women anywere/everywer if possible , dont walk alone anywere late at night

Woman raped by her husband on Saturday night" -v- "Woman attacked by unknown assailant in public park while children played nearby".

Which one looks better on the front of a paper?

I was thinking more the public place scenario late at night ....

humanji

baztard wrote: »

Why stop at the government knowing just our dna?

Why not have the gardai search through all our bank statements so make sure we haven't stolen any money or search through our houses once a month to see if you've stolen anything else.

Or maybe they should have a list of every persons' family, friends and aqaintances so that if someone is murdered they can arrest everyone who is close to them straight away.

But sure if I didn't commit a crime I've nothing to hide right?

I hate this bull****. Who said it'd escalate? And it's not like they can just do it and everyone wouldn't have a say! This isn't 1984!!!! The point being made is that having a register of peoples DNA would help with solving crime, and the arguments for and against. Is the best argument against that some people here can come up with really to just make up crap about it becoming some sor tof facist state? It's like Indymedia have taken control of boards!

humanji

humanji wrote: »

I hate this bull****. Who said it'd escalate? And it's not like they can just do it and everyone wouldn't have a say!

You'd think so, but that's what's happening in America, with their awful terrorism bill
and someone posted up about how some bank here have to show our bank records to them?
Starting off with a good principle is great but it's not like the govt are never ever corrupt

HelterSkelter

humanji wrote: »

I hate this bull****. Who said it'd escalate? And it's not like they can just do it and everyone wouldn't have a say! This isn't 1984!!!! The point being made is that having a register of peoples DNA would help with solving crime, and the arguments for and against. Is the best argument against that some people here can come up with really to just make up crap about it becoming some sor tof facist state? It's like Indymedia have taken control of boards!

Typical response, call someone a socialist or indymedia reader to try to discredit their genuine concerns.

Krieg

Id be in favour of it

There was a docu on BBC some months ago (Not sure if it was prime time or something...) They asked some politician about this and he said that it was considered but rejected on the grounds that it would take years to complete and cost billions, but they would visit the idea again sometime in the future.

Dinxminx wrote:

That's not exactly a foolproof method. Can you imagine the amount of people that would get framed for crimes they didn't commit based on DNA samples?

Aye that would be a big one id say. I guess it would mean that in order to convict someone, you would need a LOT of evidence to prove that they were at the scene and not just the DNA evidence. Although even today, I dont think you can be convicted if DNA is the only evidence found (I could be wrong?)

Baztard wrote:

Why not have the gardai search through all our bank statements so make sure we haven't stolen

Actually there was some legislation introduced in the last year that allows this (Basically).

woodseb

seamus wrote: »

Look at it this way:
Wealthy politician murders his wife and her lover in anger. Makes it look like a burglar.
Heads off to his local civil servant with access to the national DNA database. Hands over a hefty sum of money to jiggle with the figures - switch his DNA profile with that of a petty criminal, or even just some local man at random.

Local man/petty criminal goes to jail permanently - it's DNA right, can't be beaten?
.

that might lead to the innocent man's arrest but I think a simple second test of both mens DNA and compared to the sample at the scene would find the real killer

DNA testing wouldn't prevent most murders as most are crimes of passion and not done just cos they think they'll get a away with it

humanji

bluewolf wrote: »

You'd think so, but that's what's happening in America, with their awful terrorism bill
and someone posted up about how some bank here have to show our bank records to them?
Starting off with a good principle is great but it's not like the govt are never ever corrupt

Are we in America? Do we have the same government? The US people don't have a lot of power over what laws get passed. In Ireland we do.

HelterSkelter wrote: »

Typical response, call someone a socialist or indymedia reader to try to discredit their genuine concerns.

It's refering to the way the Indymedia takes a proper issue and then sensationalises it while making out that they exist in a facist dictatorship. We don't, by the way.

seamus

humanji wrote: »

becoming some sor tof facist state? It's like Indymedia have taken control of boards!

Becoming?

Seriously though, may main concern is not necessarily about the information being incorrectly used in a systematic way, rather being exploited by the bad apples in the system that will invariably exist.

You can say that the information won't be used wrongly by legitimate companies, but what about illegitimate ones? The information, if available, will eventually fall into the wrong hands because the wrong hands are determined to get it. That's an undeniable fact.

Nevyn

latchyco wrote: »

Thank you , thats what i was saying and remember, the rapist only needs one oppurtunity to rape .I am saying to women anywere/everywer if possible , dont walk alone anywere late at night


I was thinking more the public place scenario late at night ....

Cos men never get raped....:rolleyes:

I walk where I please at night, saying don't walk anywhere is a heap of bullshít, people should be aware of where they are and make wise decisions but saying don't walk anywhere late at night is scare mongering.

Getting attacked ( not just raped ) is something every person needs to factor in a thread currently in this forum highligths.

humanji

humanji wrote: »

Are we in America? Do we have the same government? The US people don't have a lot of power over what laws get passed. In Ireland we do.

If it's been done once in a place where they pride their freedom, it's not impossible for it to happen again.

robinph

humanji wrote: »

I hate this bull****. Who said it'd escalate? And it's not like they can just do it and everyone wouldn't have a say! This isn't 1984!!!!

Of course it would escalate.

Sure they already have your date of birth and your photo from you passport so why not let them have your fingerprints and some biometric details as well?
...
If they have those details then wheres the harm in having your DNA to add to what they already have?
...
Well they have your DNA now so wheres the harm in letting the bank and insurance have those details as well, it's all to stop "terrorism" you know?
...
Why not do all your shopping using those biometric details they now have, it's only a little different from what they already have access to anyway and will make your life much easier?
...
We may as well have GPS implants now as well, will make things much quicker going through borders and doing your shopping if they know who you are instantly once you land or walk into the shop.
...

It would soon become 1984.

humanji

seamus wrote: »

Becoming?

Quiet you!

seamus wrote: »

You can say that the information won't be used wrongly by legitimate companies, but what about illegitimate ones? The information, if available, will eventually fall into the wrong hands because the wrong hands are determined to get it. That's an undeniable fact.

But what if an illegitimate company got your bank account details? Or your credit card details? Or your social security details? All of these can be useful in the wrong hands yet we don't get too worried about them.

bluewolf wrote: »

If it's been done once in a place where they pride their freedom, it's not impossible for it to happen again.

And conversly, just because it's happened in one place, doesn't mean it must happen everywhere else. The US pride themselves on their freedom, but willingly gave it away. We're not that stupid, are we?

Latchy

Quote =Thaedydal

Cos men never get raped....:rolleyes:

eh ?

I walk where I please at night, saying don't walk anywhere is a heap of bullshít, people should be aware of where they are and make wise decisions but saying don't walk anywhere late at night is scare mongering.

i have a daughter and a son , i or some other family member will either escort my daughter or make sure she is with sombody whenever she is coming or going mainly late at night ......anywere .You seem to be saying that our streets aare safe for women to walk late at night ? maybe some places ,mostly not .

Getting attacked ( not just raped ) is something every person needs to factor in a thread currently in this forum highligths.

Being attacked male or female is one thing yes, in rape cases the rape usually follows the attack :rolleyes:

Nevyn

Are you saying they are not and like in islamic states everywoman should be 'escorted' by a male relative ?

What next will you ask that your daughter wears 'modest' clothing, sure why not get her an abba for christmas.

The chances are statistically in this country that if she is raped it will someone she knows or date rape and that does not happen down darken alleys.

gerky

Maybe some of you who think this is a good idea should read some of the articles here.
http://www.digitalrights.ie/