Is it right to have a national DNA database to tackle crime?

talla10 · 01-05-2011 12:22pm

Of course such a database should be set up. I think we're years behind every other country in the world in this regard. If people aren't involved in crime why would it bother them??

And how would you feel if you were a victim of crime and they caught the offenders with the assistance of this database. If it's me i'd be thinking thank god for that database and i'm glad we didnt listen to the PC brigade who opposed such database being set up.

IMO the only reason people would oppose this is because they have something to hide. Or else their just idiots who like giving out.

unknownlegend · 01-05-2011 12:24pm

k_mac wrote: »

A DNA database can be used for anyone not just criminals. All it would require is for the government to ammend some laws and voila, DNA for everyone.

I sort of agree with this. Very often the extreme case (criminals, sentence > 5 years) is used to introduce something. Then, after a few years, it's any criminals. For example in the UK already anyone arrested and detained at a police station now has to provide DNA. Note, you could be 100% innocent and still have to give DNA. For me, this is a worry.

Gummy Panda · 01-05-2011 12:24pm

unknownlegend wrote: »

To name a few;
Insurance company gold mine
Genetic profiling
Employers, schools, adoption agency selection processes
Selection for visas for other countries/border patrol (see biometric chips which are being considered)
Genetic/hereditary disease detection
Mental health markers adding you to a watch list of 'unstable' people
Various minorities who would love to get a hold of this info.
down the line consider cloning, designer babies, and a two tiered society (super dna vs ordinary dna)
Etc etc etc.

This is a country where the implementation of an evoting system was an unmitigated disaster, does that inspire confidence for them to hold and protect your dna pattern?

Edit: again in principle I think it could be good, but it isn't a matter of just lashing ahead with in an ad hoc manner.

I liked the film Gattaca too

Einhard · 01-05-2011 12:25pm

unknownlegend wrote: »

Are people naive enough to think it'll only be used for this purpose?

In principle it's got merit but it'd never be ethically correct.

I'm naive enough. The state has a duty and responsibility to its citizens, and unlike in the movies, we have the means to ensure they meet their obligations.

unknownlegend wrote: »

This is a country where the implementation of an evoting system was an unmitigated disaster, does that inspire confidence for them to hold and protect your dna pattern?

Hold up a mo. Did you complete the census? There's enough personal information there to keep identity thieves happy for years. But people still completed it, and sent it back to the state. Every day, thousannds of Irish people hand personal info over to the state, and thusfar, there has been very little evidence of the massive breaches of privacy that you envisage in such scenarios.

Also, every state fucks up now anw then. Irish people go on as if the e-voting debacle was the greatest disaster to every hit a country, when in reality, it was a pretty minor slip up, and certainly no reason to abandon all trust in the state.

unknownlegend · 01-05-2011 12:30pm

Einhard wrote: »

I'm naive enough. The state has a duty and responsibility to its citizens, and unlike in the movies, we have the means to ensure they meet their obligations.

Hold up a mo. Did you complete the census? There's enough personal information there to keep identity thieves happy for years. But people still completed it, and sent it back to the state. Every day, thousannds of Irish people hand personal info over to the state, and thusfar, there has been very little evidence of the massive breaches of privacy that you envisage in such scenarios.

Also, every state fucks up now anw then. Irish people go on as if the e-voting debacle was the greatest disaster to every hit a country, when in reality, it was a pretty minor slip up, and certainly no reason to abandon all trust in the state.

Good points, and I agree. I'm playing devils advocate a bit, it's one thing to hand over information but quite another when you're in the situation of potentially being compelled to hand over your DNA. Of course this may never come to pass, and hey, if you trust the system you've got nothing to fear

Edit: this being AH and all I wonder if they'll let me profile these DNA databases to locate all the hot wimminz and find out what their weakness is, red roses, chocolates, rohypnol...!

AaronEnnis · 01-05-2011 12:30pm

unknownlegend wrote: »

To name a few;
Insurance company gold mine
Genetic profiling
Employers, schools, adoption agency selection processes
Selection for visas for other countries/border patrol (see biometric chips which are being considered)
Genetic/hereditary disease detection
Mental health markers adding you to a watch list of 'unstable' people
Various minorities who would love to get a hold of this info.
down the line consider cloning, designer babies, and a two tiered society (super dna vs ordinary dna)
Etc etc etc.

This is a country where the implementation of an evoting system was an unmitigated disaster, does that inspire confidence for them to hold and protect your dna pattern?

Edit: again in principle I think it could be good, but it isn't a matter of just lashing ahead with in an ad hoc manner.

I believe the database in question involves a DNA profile obtained from 8/11/13 specific regions of DNA, used for matching profiles to one another mainly in criminal cases - I dont think the Gardaí would have much use for disease markers. You may be thinking of genome sequencing.

In any case, a database like this would have huge implications for juries in understanding the whole process of DNA profiling, i.e. 'what can it prove'. Also, the potential for 'planting' DNA samples at a crime scene, or finding a false match in the lab, and conveniently arriving at a match for someone with previous convictions has to be considered, however unlikely the circumstances. This was the main concern a few years ago when the talks of this database last resurfaced.

I expect the Jim Corr fanatics to be out in full force on this thread, so that's all Im going to say on it.

RichieC · 01-05-2011 12:31pm

Its a good idea... though it would seem to layman that it's first time non career offenders that receive the harshest penalties in this country. So it it really that useful?

Lu Tze · 01-05-2011 12:39pm

Bosco boy wrote: »

Law biding people have nothing to fear, why protect criminals and perverts?

Indeed - law abiding people have nothing to fear - as they wouldn't for random house searches/phone tapping/internet monitoring.

Bring it all in i say publish whatever you find in the local paper as law abiding citizens have nothing to hide!

Capt'n Midnight · 01-05-2011 12:40pm

Newborn infants have a blood sample taken. ye olde heel prick test.

In Holles Street there are cards with this drop of blood for everyone born here since 1984, they had everyone since 1966 but they were damaged in a flood.

At present it would be too epensive, but DNA sequencing prices are dropping all the time and within the next then years it would be possible to do full sequences for a few hundred million.

/Removes thin foil hat.

At present much of DNA matching is a trade secret, we don't know exactly which enzymes are used , so we don't know the true likely hood of a false positive. With full genome sequencing the chances of adefinitive match are that much higher. Still doesn't solve the problem of accidental continamition or coincidence or pure dumb luck of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

update - more to show that the umbilical cord is a ready source of DNA
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/main-hospitals-veto-lifesaving-cordblood-bank-1085759.html

The Coombe, the Rotunda and the National Maternity Hospital at Holles Street have agreed on a policy of not carrying out routine collection and storage of umbilical cord blood, which contains valuable cells for use in the treatment of such illnesses as leukemia and cystic fibrosis.

Capt'n Midnight · 01-05-2011 12:50pm

k_mac wrote: »

They take the DNA of the mother and child to confirm that they are in fact mother and child. You don't get welfare payments unless you submit to the test.

In stupid White Men Micheal Moore stated that several million children dissapeared in the US at the stroke of midnight at year end. It happened because the IRS asked for the social security numbers of dependent children from then on.

In France they trialed a fingerprint reader instead of chip and pin. As you'd imagine credit card fraud plummeted, but chip and pin was cheaper, especially since the banks have dumped all risk onto the customer.

WindSock · 01-05-2011 12:50pm

It would be too easy to set someone up with it though.

PeakOutput · 01-05-2011 12:53pm

WindSock wrote: »

It would be too easy to set someone up with it though.

I hadn't actually thought of this, that is a pretty good point

In general though I am fine with national id cards for everyone and dna databases for everyone. the prerequisite is you hav to trust your goverment which a lot of people in this country don't seem to

orourkeda · 01-05-2011 12:54pm

I'd have no problem if it is purely and simply a means of solving crime.

However, like a lot of other things in life, it may open to abuse.

Sonnenblumen · 01-05-2011 12:54pm

Compulsory DNA register of everyone convicted of serious crime.

orourkeda · 01-05-2011 12:55pm

WindSock wrote: »

It would be too easy to set someone up with it though.

Set up could happen anyway. Where there's a will there's a way.

Einhard · 01-05-2011 12:56pm

WindSock wrote: »

It would be too easy to set someone up with it though.

The same could be said about fingerprints. OIr even witness evidence.

I don't think DNA should be used as the only factor in a conviction, but it has an important role to play as a supplementary factor.

MagicDave · 01-05-2011 1:02pm

I completely disagree with a national DNA database. If it was only used to track murders that would be one thing, but really it'd be used for lesser crimes including ones involving protest. It would be used to keep people under control more than it would to protect them.

orourkeda · 01-05-2011 1:06pm

Einhard wrote: »

The same could be said about fingerprints. OIr even witness evidence.

I don't think DNA should be used as the only factor in a conviction, but it has an important role to play as a supplementary factor.

There was a recent radio documentary casting doubt over the use of fingerprints as evidence. There was a recent case in the U.S linking a muslim to the train bombing in Madrid. His fingerprints were found in the area at the time. Turns out he was never in Madrid and it was a serious case of mistaken Identity.Just highlights your point.

Biggins · 01-05-2011 1:07pm

MagicDave wrote: »

I completely disagree with a national DNA database. If it was only used to track murders that would be one thing, but really it'd be used for lesser crimes including ones involving protest. It would be used to keep people under control more than it would to protect them.

The important word above should be the underlined one.
If you are not breaking the law - what the hell have you got to worry about?
If your breaking the law, well ye reap as ye sow!

orourkeda · 01-05-2011 1:08pm

MagicDave wrote: »

I completely disagree with a national DNA database. If it was only used to track murders that would be one thing, but really it'd be used for lesser crimes including ones involving protest. It would be used to keep people under control more than it would to protect them.

But a crime database wouldn't have to be set up. If the use of DNA is to be used as a means of controlling masses of people surely theres an easier way. Besides not everyone will go through the criminal justice system.

old_aussie · 01-05-2011 1:08pm

Dave! wrote: »

I'll just quote the article from thejournal.ie:

So Dave, what are you actually contributing to this thread you started?

What is your opinion on this DNA database?

amen · 01-05-2011 1:09pm

You should only have DNA taken if you are convicted of a crime not arrested.

If you've nothing to hide what's the problem

If you really believe this then a sample of everyones DNA should be taken at birth and then if there is a crime matched. After all if you are innocent then you have nothing to hide.

orourkeda · 01-05-2011 1:13pm

amen wrote: »

You should only have DNA taken if you are convicted of a crime not arrested.

If you really believe this then a sample of everyones DNA should be taken at birth and then if there is a crime matched. After all if you are innocent then you have nothing to hide.

Wouldnt the presence of your DNA at a crime scene be used to imply or suggest guilt regardless of whether you were there or not. There could be any number of reasons your DNA got there.

old_aussie · 01-05-2011 1:15pm

amen wrote: »

You should only have DNA taken if you are convicted of a crime not arrested.

Therefore, people who are driving and have a crash and kill someone should only be asked to have an alcohol test after they are convicted??? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Lu Tze · 01-05-2011 1:18pm

Biggins wrote: »

The important word above should be the underlined one.
If you are not breaking the law - what the hell have you got to worry about?
If your breaking the law, well ye reap as ye sow!

Presumably you are also then in favour of random house searches, phone tappings and internet monitoring?

After all - if you arent breaking the law what the hell would you have to worry about!?

aN.Droid · 01-05-2011 1:26pm

weldoninhio wrote: »

I'd go even further and have it so that anyone that is arrested has their DNA taken and held on file. If you've nothing to hide what's the problem??

I would go even further and have it so everyone that is arrested has to wear a monitored camera 24/7.If you have nothign to hide what's the problem? :rolleyes:

Dave! · 01-05-2011 1:28pm

old_aussie wrote: »

So Dave, what are you actually contributing to this thread you started?

What is your opinion on this DNA database?

I'm all for it. I'm happy to give up a bit of personal freedom/integrity because in the grand scheme of things I think that crime is more of a threat to me than 'Big Brother'. If it makes it easier to secure prosecution against murderers, then happy days. I don't buy the slippery slope argument that, if we allow this, then we're heading towards an Orwellian situation! We can say 'enough', we still live in a democracy.

I would expect that prosecution wouldn't be possible based on DNA evidence alone, but it could be used as another factor along with fingerprints, eye-witnesses, etc. If several lines of evidence converge on the same person, then we can be pretty confident. DNA can just be another line of evidence to use.

MagicMarker · 01-05-2011 1:30pm

Lu Tze wrote: »

Presumably you are also then in favour of random house searches, phone tappings and internet monitoring?

After all - if you arent breaking the law what the hell would you have to worry about!?

Lame argument. We're talking about a DNA database for convicted criminals and for people arrested for specific crimes. You're talking about something completely different.

Fremen · 01-05-2011 1:34pm

Biggins wrote: »

If you are not breaking the law - what the hell have you got to worry about?
If your breaking the law, well ye reap as ye sow!

The law is so complicated that we have a whole industry dedicated to interpreting it. During a protest there's often a very large grey area.

I don't really buy the "what have you to worry about" argument. I've never committed a major crime, but I've committed plenty of minor ones. I'm betting everyone who reads this has too. I never intend to commit a major crime, but someday I might. Besides, as a citizen in a democracy, it's my responsibility to see that criminals get treated fairly (I'm talking in generalities here, not in regard to a DNA database). Not all laws are just, and someday I may have to disobey one on those grounds. The government makes laws - it's trustworthy now, but history shows just how badly things can turn out if the wrong people are elected into power.

No-one has really explained what's involved in a DNA database so far in the thread. It's not clear what is stored, or what the advantages would be, or what the potential for abuse is (there are some more far-out claims, but it's impossible to say how such a database could be abused until you actually know what's in it).

Until you know these three things, it's impossible to come to a rational decision.

Biggins · 01-05-2011 1:38pm

Fremen wrote: »

The law is so complicated that we have a whole industry dedicated to interpreting it. During a protest there's often a very large grey area.

Which is why we have courts and juries to decided upon whats a crime and how guilty a person is.
...And if your found guilty, guess what? The consequences are imposed upon you.
Thus your details then might be further taken and input into a DNA database!
Subsequently, if you have previously been up to no good - expect to be possibly be caught out.
If you have done nothing bad previously - you have nothing to fear! End of story.

Is it right to have a national DNA database to tackle crime?

Comments