DNA Database - Would You Be Happy To Be On It?

[malfunction]

I think an anonymous register of DNA samples for scientific purposes would be great... Which I believe is the underlying (original) idea of the census - for research / statistical purposes and not for marketing. It would also help if DNA patents were banned.

[smargh]

I wouldn't mind in theory, but secondary transfer of low level DNA from individuals to inert surfaces seems all too possible to me. You just have to cough into your hands before getting onto a bus, someone touches the same hand rail as you, then either that person kills or is killed and kerblam, there's your DNA on either the murder weapon or the victim's hands. Then you're reliant on the bus camera working and recording you after the ToD.

[Hunain]

I wouldn't mind in theory, but secondary transfer of low level DNA from individuals to inert surfaces seems all too possible to me. You just have to cough into your hands before getting onto a bus, someone touches the same hand rail as you, then either that person kills or is killed and kerblam, there's your DNA on either the murder weapon or the victim's hands. Then you're reliant on the bus camera working and recording you after the ToD.

Scary

[Saracen]

Absolutely not.

If, repeat IF there was a local incident and I was asked for my DNA as part of a local sweep for elimination purposes, then I would comply if and only if I was given a credible guarantee, and believed it, that it would be destroyed once tested.

Otherwise, I will not willingly provide this government or any other with my DNA, under any circumstances.

And a national database? Hell will freeze over first.

The reasons? Numerous.

First, I don't trust government intentions.

Second, I don't trust competence.

Third, while it might provide help to police in some cases, it is subject to manipulation in others. All it needs is for an enterprising crook to carefully seed crime scenes without someone else's data, and such a DNA database goes from a tool for catching criminals to a tool for diverting police time and resources away from the real criminal onto others.

Fourth, I can see it rapidly turning into a situation where if a DNA profile (which is subject to interpretation, by the way, and experts don't always agree) is used for confirmation or elimination, into a scenario where the police get some DNA, assume that that means you did it and leave you (or me) to convince them we didn't. That attitude might not go as far as a courtroom, but I don't want to end up as the subject of a police investigation for months because some database went ker-ching! and popped my details out.

Fourthly, as someone pointed out, government (and it's civil servants) have comprehensively proven that they can't secure a ham sandwich.

Fifth, such government IT projects rarely if ever come in on schedule and on-budget. It'll cost vast amounts.

Sixth, governments have a disgraceful track record of flogging my data, and yours, to commercial interests. This database might start out as for "police and security services" only, but based on historical precedent, i do not believe for an instant that it would stay that way.

Seventh, any such database is only as secure and the integrity of the individuals responsible for running it. Do we trust government to preclude the possibility that a trusted individual could make unauthorised amendments? I don't. After all, government (or the people it employs) are stupid enough to send vast amounts of our personal data around the country without even taking rudimentary encryption precautions .... such as the ones I've been using for a decade or more on sensitive personal financial and business data. If I can do it, why can't government?

We have already had substantial proportions of our civil liberties eroded by the pillocks currently the asylum, in the form of surveillance, CCTV, ever-more draconian laws and so on, all in the name of security. Yet they can't even stop protesters getting onto the roof of Parliament for a protest.

DNA database? Gimme a break.

I'll say this. If this ever comes in, it will be the point at which I seriously, very seriously, consider emigration.


So .... that'll be a "no" from me, then.

[Blitzen]

If, repeat IF there was a local incident and I was asked for my DNA as part of a local sweep for elimination purposes, then I would comply if and only if I was given a credible guarantee, and believed it, that it would be destroyed once tested

If they didnt they may clone your DNA and creat Saracen II

[nichomach]

If they didnt they may clone your DNA and creat Saracen II

[Sinizter]

Why would I want my DNA on storage somewhere ? I want as little information as me wandering about as possible.

[Wyoming]

I said yes; but let me qualify that. What I say may as well make my answer an outright no. I would agree to my DNA being on a National Database if this database could only be accessed by the police and justice system.

I do not support a DNA register where one is forced to supply DNA however; I think a voluntary system would work very well. You can supply your DNA if you agree with the idea; and if you don't agree you don't have to! Although anyone not submitting may have their motives questioned as if they did want to engage in nefarious activity.

[JoeDaStudd]

No, after the last lot of security leaks I wouldn't trust them with one of my email addresses and password let alone my DNA.

[directhex]

I do not support a DNA register where one is forced to supply DNA however; I think a voluntary system would work very well. You can supply your DNA if you agree with the idea; and if you don't agree you don't have to! Although anyone not submitting may have their motives questioned as if they did want to engage in nefarious activity.

you are acting suspicious, citizen! please report to your local police station for processing, so we can determine your intentions are benign

[G4Z]

Totally agree with the comments here, I think its disgusting that you only have to be arrested for your DNA to be irrevesably (or at least near enough) impossible to remove once it goes on there.

Has anybody seen Gattaca? I could well imagine that when (not if) its possible to determine things like intelligence, cancer risk, addiction risk etc from DNA the government would be quite happy to sell that data to insurance companies for example.

If I ever get arrested I will resist them taking my DNA, I have never been arrested before so I hope it never comes to this. but I would imagine they can force you. In that case I would just have to make it as difficult as possible and that includes twatting the gimp trying to swab me, morally I don't think there is anything wrong with that stance. I am sure the courts would disagree however, but how else can you stand up for your rights if they are going to physicaly force you?

[Lucio]

I'm far less concerned with a national DNA register, than say their current plans for passports and ID cards, after all, your DNA is fairly unique, is a pain to synthesise, and the scanning techniques take a few hours to complete. There's not a lot they can do wrong with the data basically. Insurance companies are perhaps the worst case scenario, as there's definate comerical benefit to being able to find out if you're genetically predisposed to certain conditions, but on the flip side, that could mean cheaper insurance for people who aren't.


Compared to say, detailing your entire physical and psychological profile as seems to be the goal of ID cards, I'd not be that concerned.

[G4Z]

Lucio, that may be the case now but after 20 or 30 years of use what do yout hink that technology is going to look like?

[Lucio]

Lucio, that may be the case now but after 20 or 30 years of use what do yout hink that technology is going to look like?

Well, for starters they might have improved scanning techniques to produce DNA verifiers, it's certainly a popular sci-fi idea, but even so they'd have to extract a sample and that's hard to do without a person's knowledge when they're out and about so it wouldn't exactly be a covert survellance method.

Anyhow, if the technology grows that far advanced, the people and their government might just decide that maintaining the register is too risky. Just because a law was bought into force in 2010, doesn't neccesarily mean it's still used in 2050.

[Betty_Swallocks]

Isn't it a shame that the police and the government are so untrustworthy?

I think the concept of a national dna database is an excellent one in principle.

It would almost completely eliminate the crime of rape for example. I would hazard a guess that it would be virtually impossible to rape someone and leave no trace of your dna behind.

DNA is a useful tool in the detection of all sorts of crime and a record of everyone in the country would make commiting a crime so much more risky for the criminal that it would probably put many of them off from even starting on a criminal career.

But like most people here I really don't trust the governments intentions. Even if you trust this present government not to abuse it (and I don't know why you would given their record for honesty so far) you can't say what sort of government we are going to have in 10 or 20 years time.

As as for the police. Well. With the record they have of fitting up the nearest likely suspect just to get the case closed and the statistics down I really don't want them to have any more ammunition than they already have.