Reply to: Europe protects freedom of British

[Purple Dalek]

Changing the subject slightly, what's the chances some techie who has access to this DNA data will be copying it across to a memory stick (or 5) and flogging it to a private company for ad-hoc tests.

Too late the UK government are already giving it away to the American government who then sell it onto private companies.

They do much the same thing with a collection of your data whenever you take a flight, anywhere (doesn't have to be to America).

[TheFaQQer]

Changing the subject slightly, what's the chances some techie who has access to this DNA data will be copying it across to a memory stick (or 5) and flogging it to a private company for ad-hoc tests.

leaving the memory stick on the train

[KentPhilip]

Changing the subject slightly, what's the chances some techie who has access to this DNA data will be copying it across to a memory stick (or 5) and flogging it to a private company for ad-hoc tests.

[expat]

From Schama's TV series, and from his book where he did a comparison of the french and english peasantry pre-revolution, I got the impression he followed that viewpoint too.

You would get that impression, Ibeji produced it.

[Purple Dalek]

Not such as Hobsbawm, Taylor, Trevelyan, Toynbee, Schama then?

From Schama's TV series, and from his book where he did a comparison of the french and english peasantry pre-revolution, I got the impression he followed that viewpoint too.

[expat]

It's the consensus viewpoint of many historians such as Dr Mike Ibeji you imbecile.

HTH

Not such as Hobsbawm, Taylor, Trevelyan, Toynbee, Schama then?

[Ruprect]

It's the consensus viewpoint of many historians such as Dr Mike Ibeji you imbecile.

HTH

I heard that he's got $12,000,000 inheritance money that he needs to transfer to the UK - if you can provide him with an account to facilitate the transfer there is 10% in it for you....

[Purple Dalek]

Bollocks. Why don't you start another identity and have him talk sense?

Naaaah.

It's the consensus viewpoint of many historians such as Dr Mike Ibeji you imbecile.

HTH

[deano]

What the Government will do will be to extend ANY crime to be covered by mandatory DNA sampling. Get flashed for speeding or put the wrong waste into your dustbin and you will not only receive a letter with a fine in, but you will be told to report to your local cop-shop for a sample to be taken.

All legal because you have broken the law and therefore not innocent and the vast majority of the country will be covered at some point.

[tim123]

I didn't exactly say that, it wouldn't get to court if there were not some circumstancial evidence, but that would not be enough without the DNA. Therefore you knew the guy was there, you knew his DNA was found about your sisters person but you would be unhappy if he was convicted by DNA obtained under a breach of his human rights?

No, No, No.

The point here (claim by plod) is that the perp wouldn't even be identified if they aren't allowed to keep "non convicted" DNA.

Once you have got to the point of identifying your suspect, the DNA database is completely irrelevent. (as you can take new DNA from him/her now).

[lilelvis2000]

How many times has Europe saved English business and English people's Asses?

I bet even Kilroy himself was jumping up and down. The BNP only did a half jump because they figured out this would also affect ethnics..

[OwlHoot]

.. I don't know whether to be happy (that the judgement was made) or sad that the only way to get the government to listen to the people is to sue them. And the human rights act too, oh the irony. And may I also say well done Europe

It's the oldest trick in the book, and probably planned to turn out this way from the start to try and put the EU in a good light for once.

Mr Nasty replaced by Mr Nice, simply retreating (temporarily) from a situation that should never have occurred in the first place, and wouldn't have done a few years ago.

But I bet there are long-term plans for DNA to be included in the biometrics stored in the ID card database, and I doubt the EU will quibble with that once they think people are used to using ID cards.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

You are comparing apples with oranges. If arrested they collect your fingerprints and store them and have done so for over 100 years, so why not your DNA? What exactly is the difference?

I think you have your "facts" wrong about fingerprint collection and retention on arrest, too - we have records going back a long way for convicted people (which I have no problem with) but the law on keeping innocent people's prints is quite recent.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

You are comparing apples with oranges. If arrested they collect your fingerprints and store them and have done so for over 100 years, so why not your DNA? What exactly is the difference?

They shouldn't be keeping either if you are not convicted - they don't in Scotland.

[Bagpuss]

The argument about wives, mothers and sisters being murdered is interesting if only to highlight its weakness.

Personalising the issue in that way will always generate the outcome to reduce civil liberties. For example, to stop your wife, mother, children, sister being murdered, wouldn't it be best if we...

1) Brought in a ID card scheme
2) Stop the sale of axes, screwdrivers and knives
3) Stopped and searched all males over 12 at any time, day or night

or again, to stop your children dying in a road accident, shouldn't we remove all vehicles from the roads.

People cannot think logically about these issues when they focus on the victim. It's too emotive, which is why we ask our legislators and judges to be disinterested.

It's a good decision for civil liberties, which affects more people than have had their loved ones murdered and the offender not caught.

You are comparing apples with oranges. If arrested they collect your fingerprints and store them and have done so for over 100 years, so why not your DNA? What exactly is the difference?