Police will be able to take fingerprints and DNA from anyone they arrest, whether they are charged or not, under new government plans.
Under current rules, police can only take DNA samples from people once they have been charged with an offence.
Home Office minister Lord Falconer says the new measures could potentially help to crack serious unsolved crimes, such as rape or murder.
But civil liberties groups have accused the government of treating innocent people as "guilty by implication".
Should the police be able to collect DNA and fingerprints from suspects? Or is the idea infringing civil liberties?
Thank you for your e-mails. This debate is now closed. A selection of your comments is published below.
Haven't any of you heard of condoms or gloves? Criminals will always find ways round everything the police do. The push needs to be done at the judicial end. If these criminals aren't allowed back into society then we wouldn't have all the re-offending which constitutes the majority of crime.
I agree with the "three strikes and you're out" policy. If a criminal commits any three crimes, they've lost the right to take a place in our free society. Then the rest of us can start living properly.
Sylvia Painton,
England
This is another attempt to turn this country into more of a police state than it is already. I wouldn't be so hostile if DNA records were trustworthy, but the courts have already quashed a conviction where DNA evidence had falsely matched an innocent man to a serious crime. Luckily, he was able to prove on appeal that it was physically impossible for his to have committed the crime he was convicted for.
Terry Browning, UK
Why do the lunatic civil liberties groups fear DNA testing, fingerprints and CCTV cameras so much? I was the victim of a crime of violence and the only people to offer me any help and support were the Police.
Where were the civil liberty groups to help my civil liberty? Probably protesting against the CCTV camera that caught my attackers.
As long as there are safeguards in place to prevent unauthorised access to data I am very much in favour of DNA/fingerprint records being kept.
Keith, UK
I was treated like dirt and physically restrained for my sample to be taken
|
I had my DNA taken years ago for a crime I was subsequently not convicted for. The police still refuse to destroy the data they hold. Don't be fooled by this, they can do it already.
My crime was threatening behaviour. I am not a terrorist or a rapist and yet I was treated like dirt and physically restrained for my sample to be taken.
Owen, London, England
It's not so much the process that I disagree with as the abuse of it. What is not considered is that people who behave the way they do because they are a result of their society exist. Simplistic maybe, but if we create monsters in society we all have to accept the responsibility for having done so.
Joe, Australia
Of course they should - civil liberties groups are out of their minds. If it catches one rapist or one child killer in 10 years it would be worth it.
Mark Wakeley, UK
What a great idea. I look forward to the day when DNA samples are taken at birth. At least then police would already have a fool-proof record of millions of potential criminals. Of course I would be happy to provide a DNA sample.
Shan, UK
It is ok to take DNA and fingerprints to help solve a crime. It is ok to keep the data of those found guilty on a database. This is not ok for those people found innocent or not charged - this information should then be destroyed.
Penny, UK
In an ideal world we wouldn't need or want CCTV or DNA registers
|
In an ideal world we wouldn't need or want CCTV or DNA registers. Unfortunately, with the high levels of crime that exist, it is probably necessary to enable cases to be solved quickly and efficiently, and so protect the law abiding citizen.
Peter, UK
War - what a great chance to further erode our civil liberties. What'll be next - ID cards? Then maybe the government can make demonstrating illegal rather than poisoning the mind of the nation against us in order to stop us speaking out.
Helen Alford,
England
It is not right for suspects to give DNA samples, if they are found innocent they have the same rights as any other innocent Briton. If DNA samples are to be made available they should be from everyone in the population, not just those wrongly accused of a crime they did not commit.
Steven Pelczer, Wales
Can those who are for this mad and dangerous idea please come up with something more of an argument than the old line "Nothing to hide, nothing to fear". Would those who say that tell it to anyone convicted of a crime that they later proved they didn't commit? I think not.
Mark, England
I for one would be happy to walk into a police station today and give a sample
|
I for one would be happy to walk into a police station today and give a sample. I can think of no better deterrent to sex crimes than knowing you will be caught the minute they find your DNA. Roll on the database.
Steve Webster, England
If the fingerprints and DNA samples are destroyed within a certain period of time if the suspect is not charged then I cannot see there should be a problem. Is it guilty by implication or innocent via elimination?
Melanie, UK
Any selective database is indefensible - a full DNA database of everyone is the only non-discriminatory way forwards.
Mick, UK
This is a really, really difficult issue and I can't say I'm comfortable making a 'yes' or a 'no' response. Rationally, it would undoubtedly help solve a great many serious crimes. But my instinctual reaction is one of horror. I just hate the thought of everyone being logged in this way.
Wayland, UK
I won't trust the police until they learn to trust people like me
|
There are hundreds of thousands of law-abiding people in this country who've been (and still are) the object of unjustified suspicion from the police simply because of their lifestyles. I won't trust the police until they learn to trust people like me.
Alex Swanson, UK
If we have to live with this invasion of our rights, let's have a trade. The government imposes this but gives us a freedom of information bill in order for us to keep our eye on government and its backhanded/under the counter dealings!
Dennis Fawcett, UK
I just don't understand all these civil liberties people. If people have done nothing wrong then they don't need to worry about it!? It's the same with CCTV cameras.
David martin, England
For all those who think this is a good idea, please rush round to your local police station and volunteer to give a sample of your DNA NOW!
Richard,
UK in USA
If you have nothing to hide why should you have cause for concern? If you give samples it should hopefully speed up either release in cases of wrongful arrest, or conviction if guilty.
Emily, UK
There are people in the US who are challenging convictions based on DNA profiling
|
Lots of people seem to be saying "If you're law abiding, there's nothing to worry about." I'm not so sure. Every other method used by the police has proven to be infallible, so why shouldn't this? How many people have been convicted in recent years because of errors in forensic science (eg Birmingham Six)? Even now, there are people in the US who are challenging convictions based on DNA profiling.
Alan, UK
I have much sympathy for the police as they try to cut crime and welcome suggestions that help them. But this is one too far, the idea of someone recording my DNA as I was mistakenly arrested, possibly for a minor offence, is simply unacceptable. We may as well just take DNA sample at everyone's birth. This is too close to big brother.
JP, UK
DNA should be taken at birth and a record kept of every person. If a crime was committed then there would be less chance of catching the wrong person. If there was any doubt then they could just take another DNA sample when the person was apprehended. Those who think it is an infringement on their civil liberty should think about how much information is circulating about them. Bank cards, credit cards, reward cards, passports all contain information about where you have been and what you've spent your money on, not to mention person information about salary, debts, savings etc.
Karen,
London, England
Please don't elevate DNA to a mythical crime elimination level
|
What a horrible idea. We all have scraps and bits of our hair and skin and fingernails in many unlikely places. If I walked past a place where a crime was committed before it was committed, I might be convicted of the crime. Please don't elevate DNA to a mythical crime elimination level.
Ben Langhinrichs, USA
So much effort, violation and attention into catching people. What about the judicial system that fails us, and the police, every day? What's the point of all this technology and data if a judge is just going to give someone a short sentence and then the criminal is out on our streets again in half the time? The focus should be on ridding our society of criminals. If they cannot obey our rules, they should not be allowed to participate in our society and should be kept away from us in prison. Bring us the "three strikes and you're out" policy that they have in America.
Nick, UK
I don't mind the police taking suspects' DNA and fingerprints, BUT, once the person is eliminated then the data should be discarded. Only the guilty should have their data kept. Also, while the police have the data I would not mind them checking it against other crimes, as long as they destroy/delete it after the person is eliminated.
Bob, UK
Bravo, it should have been done years ago along with ID cards and address registration. I want my civil liberty, and not this repression by the criminals who make our lives a misery. I had my motorcycle stolen last night and I'm fed up being a victim of those who laugh at our weak 'justice' system. Let's find them and punish them by all the means at our disposal. Freedom for the innocents!
Ron,
England
Look how many people have been convicted of offences with this fantastic evidence
|
Yes, look how many people have been convicted of offences with this fantastic evidence and the flip side where 'offenders' have proved to be innocent. It is a superb piece of evidence and the only people who should fear it are the criminals. I am sick of these civil liberties groups who decry all these law enforcement measures. I am sure they would change their tune if they had been victims of crime, or had lost loved ones through murder.
Simon Lunn,
UK
I think giving DNA for a database should be entirely voluntary for everyone, unless convicted of a crime. People who do not want to can decide not to give - simple. And there should be one of those tick-boxes with "I do not want to receive any advertising" next to it, or the equivalent.
Jay, UK
Keeping the DNA records of innocent people, as well as those of suspected and convicted criminals will help rule out innocent people in a case (and so help the police narrow their search) as much as it helps highlight a suspect. I think the new measures are a good idea.
Esther,
Scotland, UK
Yes they should. Everyone in UK should have ID books with finger prints also. The only people who would object are the criminals and the human rights people. It would appear that the only people who have human rights are the criminals anyway. No-one every fights for the human rights of the victims so obviously victims don't have any.
Ann Weaver, UK
Surely it is not necessary to take everyone's DNA?
|
Surely it is not necessary to take everyone's DNA? Only those under suspicion would have the tests done. DNA cross referenced with those thought to be involved would help prove/disprove their presence at the crime scene. Take DNA from suspects? Yes. Register newborns' DNA - no.
Alistair, England
I would be happy to provide a DNA sample - it would prove that I had nothing to do with whatever I had been arrested for, and nothing to do with any other crime, and so save valuable police time.
Nicky, England
I have no issue with the authorities having my DNA records in principle, as I have no intensions of wrong doing that I will need to hide my identity. However, I do object on the basis that I have no trust in the authorities to ensure they are secure or that some individuals would misuse them.
CJO, UK
It is another disgraceful infringement of our civil liberties by this government. David Blunkett seems to have no understanding of the concept of freedom. If a government has ever more detailed information about its subjects, this can be open to abuse.
Jane Smith, Telford, England
No problem with it. It should be a matter of routine at birth.
D Brown,
UK
The police should definitely be allowed to collect DNA and fingerprints
Mustafa Yorumcu,
UK/Turkey
|
I want to enjoy my liberty to have a stroll along the street in front of my home after 10pm without any fear of getting mugged or beaten up for a laugh. Could any of those civil liberties group help me?
And no, I am not rich and I can't move to a more affluent area in town.
The police should definitely be allowed to collect DNA and fingerprints.
Mustafa Yorumcu,
UK/Turkey
What's the problem if you've got something to hide or not? If you get convicted of a crime the most you will get nowadays is community service or a fine. Even the 100% guilty then get a chance to sue the authorities once they are released. The thing is they are winning these cases.
Pete,
UK
No, or at least they must delete the record if the person is not charged. At the end of the day the police do not generally have much of a problem identifying the criminals; they have a problem getting enough evidence to convict them. They already have DNA to do this with so how will keeping records on millions of innocent people help?
Ian, UK
Once again the so-called civil liberties groups are criticising these proposals, and I have to wonder whose liberties are they protecting; ours or those of criminals? If you have nothing to hide and have committed no crime then you have nothing to worry about. These are the same people who criticised the introduction of CCTV cameras, which have since proven invaluable in many cases.
Matt Chapman, UK
This debate has nothing to do with having nothing to hide! It's to do with rights, with liberty, with freedom, with privacy.
Would those who approve of this measure like their every move to be filmed by the police? Would they like their lives analysed by the police even when they've done nothing wrong? Come on, if they've got nothing to hide, there's no problem is there?
Fiona, UK
There would be many miscarriages of justice based purely on this type of evidence
|
The technology upon which such a system will be based cannot be 100% error free. It will involve both human and computer error. Additionally, DNA sampling does not examine all your DNA, which is unique, it merely examines a certain, rather restricted, number of markers and looks for matches or differences between them. There would be many miscarriages of justice based purely on this type of evidence.
Claire, UK
If it means that rapists and murderers might be caught than it cannot be wrong. I wonder if any of the civil liberties groups would complain if their family or friends were raped or murdered and the perpetrator was found via this new plan.
Valerie Newby,
England
Why not give DNA samples to the police? Surely it could also be used for identifying bodies too?
Fiona, England
I think DNA samples should be taken from everyone when they are born. That way, finding criminals would be a lot easier. I am so sick of hearing people bleat on about civil liberties and human rights - if people have nothing to hide then I am sure they would not object to it. Criminals waive their human rights when they commit a crime, but it is always the victims who are made to suffer.
Lesley, UK
Being the victim of a crime is a far bigger infringement of your civil liberties than having your DNA stored
Helena,
UK, formerly Austria
|
DNA doesn't have to be the only evidence to find someone guilty, but it could save a lot of time and money in pointing the police in the right direction, leaving them to focus their energy on finding other proof to secure a conviction. Being the victim of a crime is a far bigger infringement of your civil liberties than having your DNA stored on a confidential record ever would be.
Helena,
UK, formerly Austria
Routine taking of DNA samples would: reduce crime in long term, lead to early elimination of suspects where DNA had been detected at a crime and in general help give the general public the knowledge that the law will be upheld with every possibility being taken to ensure perpetrators will be identified and taken before a court of law.
R G Brown,
Scotland
What about the millions who do recreational drugs? They are 'normal' members of society, but could be sent to jail for many years for their choice of lifestyle; a lifestyle that the government see as a crime. With a police DNA database, those people have something to fear, even if they have done nothing wrong apart from smoke a joint or take ecstasy once a month. Some laws are a blatant breach of civil liberties to do what you want behind closed doors without hurting anyone else. Until the law is made fair and just, this DNA database is open to absolute abuse and should be resisted all the way.
Anon, England
We should all be asked to provide DNA samples to build up a national DNA database. This would help not only with the catching of perpetrators, but identification of "missing persons" and unidentified or unidentifiable human remains. Maybe this would constitute an infringement of civil liberties in some instances, but think about it, all those families never being able to be sure who killed, raped etc their son or daughter or never knowing if a body identified as their relative actually is them. A DNA database would go a long way to solving these problems.
Rachel Hives, England
I
I value my privacy and no government agency should have access to such information
|
have nothing to hide, but not in a million years would I volunteer to give DNA to the police. I value my privacy and no government agency should have access to such information - it would be a huge step along the road to a police state. And ask all the victims of miscarriages of justice over the years whether the innocent have anything to fear.
Katherine, UK
An excellent idea that should be extended to all citizens to give us a complete database. In the vast majority of cases, it will lead to innocence being proved, rather than guilt. Let's try to redress the balance towards doing what's best for society rather than constantly kow-towing to the selfish, paranoid, 'civil liberties' minority for a change!
Reg Pither, England
We would all like criminals to be caught more easily, but this would encourage the police to rely totally on DNA evidence to the detriment of other evidence gathering. Then it will only take one person to hack into the database and swap some records to prove reasonable doubt and dozens of convictions could be overturned. So no, take DNA when someone is charged by all means, but not earlier. And the potential for such a database to be misused is too great for it's creation to be justified. The public no longer has that much trust in the authorities and Lord Falconer should wake up to that fact.
Kathy,
UK
If the use of this information is very strictly controlled (e.g. only to be used for investigating crimes), then I don't see the problem. We hear so many instances of young girls and women being abducted and hurt that it seems sensible to have something like this as a way of finding suspects quickly. What really must not happen with this kind of information is for it to find its way into medical databases and insurance companies' systems.
David Hazel, UK
The government are always ready to use scare tactics to get what they want (we just need to turn on the news to learn that). It's no coincidence, and not the first time either, that they are trying to get this past us in the middle of a crisis. Maybe we should ask ourselves just how much control do we want them to have?
Gerry Noble, UK
DNA can prove innocence as well as guilt
|
The police should be able to take DNA samples as and when they deem it necessary. DNA can prove innocence as well as guilt. Those guilty of serious crime should have a hard road and we should sweep away obstacles that frustrate our police. I am quite happy with my civil liberty thank you, but then I'm not a criminal.
R Holland,
UK
Sadly, it will be abused. DNA samples will become the new black market craze and criminals will be implicating the innocent people who had their DNA taken by the police.
People should stop thinking "What's the harm?" and start thinking "How much evil could I do with this if I wanted to?" - this one has plenty of potential for evil.
Michael, UK
Those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear. Apart from incompetence on the part of those administering or using the database(s). Or corruption. Or false positives. Or the data being used for discriminatory purposes. But apart from that, they have nothing to fear.
Jason, UK
If we had this system in place just think how quickly crimes could be solved... whether you are guilty or not!
Andy Bird, UK
Wait until a 102-year-old in a care home will be arrested for car hijacking. Far fetched? Has technology not disappointed us in the past? How about those people who received tickets for driving in Central London when they have not been to London for decades?
Dineo, England
This authoritarian government worries me
|
It is somewhat ironic that as we fight to liberate Iraq from an evil dictator, our government seeks to restrict the right to trial by jury, abolish double jeopardy, allow widespread interception and surveillance of electronic communications, permit the seizure of assets for which there is no apparent explanation, allow bailiffs to break and enter property and the list goes on. This authoritarian government worries me. And I am no liberal; I am a former Army officer.
Chris Klein, UK
For those people that think that everyone's DNA should be on a database. Just how good is yours? The thing is, you may never know.
Gerry Noble, UK
Victims should have consideration of their civil rights too. If you commit a crime, you should pay for it and whether you're nailed for a past one on evidence taken today matters not one jot.
Pete H, UK
My life and how I live it should not be centred around the detection and investigation of those who may or may not have violated the law.
The police have their job to do. Excel in that area and keep us safe. But do not dare to infringe on my liberty or my civil rights when I have done nothing wrong.
Abigail, London, UK
Good idea. There is a pervasive view today that the rights of the individual surpass those of society. This has resulted in a situation where anyone is permitted to do more or less anything, while society is expected to 'tolerate'. Enough is enough - let's get the DNA database going and catch the bad guys (or gals).
Peter Riley, England
"Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance." Albert Einstein
Jon Wylcef, UK
All newborns should registered on a DNA register at birth
|
I think it is an infringement of civil liberties and the big brother is always watching is going a bit far, but having said that, if it is not to be abused and is just to find suspects in cases quicker, then all newborns should registered on a DNA register at birth. This will save a lot of police time. Fingerprints are a little harder to do at birth.
Robert Theobald, Essex
It seems that a lot of people with "nothing to hide" are getting very upset over this scheme. What is wrong in wanting criminals caught, or is civil liberties only about protecting the guilty?
Mick, England
Of course they should. Once a person is in custody for any reason it is a very simple and un-invasive procedure which causes no pain or inconvenience and it will help to detect many of the most serious crimes. If you have not committed a crime then your DNA being on file will cause you no embarrassment at all.
Ray Hollier, England
I am perfectly happy for people who are charged with an offence to have their DNA taken, but to take DNA from people who have merely been arrested does, in my opinion, violate people's civil liberties. It is only a small step from this to taking DNA from all members of the general public on a compulsory basis.
Stuart Austin, England
I doesn't bother me in the slightest. I can't see what all the fuss is about. A database of national DNA could be both a security benefit and quite possibly a medical one.
Ken, England
Maybe some of us do have something to hide after all
|
Can't win on this one, you get the human rights lobby saying 'violation of human rights, innocent until proven guilty' etc. However, shouldn't we ask ourselves, if we are so innocent, why are we frightened of giving our fingerprints and DNA? Maybe some of us do have something to hide after all.
Janet,
England
The move towards a total computer record has to be a good thing in as much as it should make detection that much easier. It all comes down to the authorities and how they use it. The worry is how it could be abused.
Roger Wilson, Britain
I've nothing to hide. I'm not a criminal. I'm not out to give criminals an easy ride - on the contrary I want stronger punishments and greater protection for society. I'm not a do-gooder. I don't want criminals walking the streets. In fact, I and many of those who oppose this proposal are not any of the things said here. But I am 100% against this Orwellian nightmare.
David, UK
If the detainee has done nothing wrong they have nothing to fear
|
Civil liberty groups always seem to overlook the liberty of the majority of the public and their safety from criminals. DNA should be taken. Surely civil liberties implies the liberties of the law abiding public?
Jacqui Carter, England
Privacy and anonymity is the camouflage used by the criminal to hide within society. I would welcome a scheme where DNA was taken and recorded at birth making the job of the police a lot easier and less costly for all of us.
John Norris, London. UK
If we had a complete record of DNA in the UK, think how many crimes would be solved in half the time, saving the police time and money. What a deterrent for criminals as well!
Alice Carr, UK
I'm not sure why people think that DNA profiling will drastically reduce crime. Just because your DNA is found at a scene of a crime does not mean you committed it, or were even there when it took place! People shed hair and skin all the time and they are both light enough to be carried considerable distance by the wind. If the police intend using DNA evidence to convict people I'd would be very worried about giving them my sample. I don't want to get convicted for a crime I didn't commit just because I walked past where the crime takes place a few days before.
Phil, UK
The so-called "liberals" who protest against these measures are just giving criminals an easy ride.
Christopher Howland, UK
Surely we risk tyranny from a future untrustworthy government if we allow this to go ahead?
|
I'm a rape survivor and would like to say to all posters using rape as an example why taking DNA samples are a good idea - most rapists are known to the victim and still most charges do not result in a conviction. The issue of DNA is immaterial because rapists bring other issues, such as consent, into play. Imagine if DNA samples of every citizen in Germany prior to WWII had been on record. DNA can be used to prove people are members of certain racial groups - the science is too complicated for me but surely we risk tyranny from a future untrustworthy government if we allow this to go ahead?
Lucy, UK
The real danger is when a DNA report can be used by an insurance company or a potential employer to determine how healthy or suitable for a role you are. At that point the government could, and probably will, make an absolute fortune out of selling such reports.
Tom,
Slough, UK
I've got nothing to hide, if something happened in my area and they could eliminate me via a DNA record already held then all the better for me. An excellent way to speed up the fight against crime.
Dave Blomfield, England
To all those who are asking 'where is the harm if you're innocent?', the answers are obviously not yet apparent, as the technology of DNA profiling is still very much in its infancy. Possibilities for abuse of the system may not become apparent until the technology evolves further. The question you have to ask is this: do I trust the government not to abuse the information? Frankly, I don't.
Adam, UK
Absolutely not! Civil liberties are taken away from us every day by the state and this is just another nail in the coffin. I too agree with Adam who doesn't trust the government. The idea that only guilty people have something to fear is naïve. Particularly in the current political anti-war movement; most people who have dared to participate in the demonstrations have been photographed, intimidated, arrested and harassed by police. They are not criminals, and the police/state should not be allowed to pry into their lives.
Sofia, London
As a molecular biologist, I clone DNA regularly to enable me to study proteins involved in tumour formation. I could (but would never) amplify a random DNA sequence using PCR cloning, and deposit the DNA at a crime scene to implicate someone else for a crime I committed. Dangerous tool indeed.
Doug Martin, UK
No. Within a few years a large number of people will be in prison due to DNA identity theft. The real criminal or a crooked police officer will seed the crime scene with DNA they have collected from an innocent third party who will then have to try to prove their innocence.
Rob Scott, UK
The aspect that worries me here is why the police should have powers to retain samples taken from people who are not charged. To the "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" crowd: well, people thought it was harmless for the state to know everyone's religion. What's the harm in that you may ask? The Jews in Nazi Germany found out. Seemingly innocent "databases" are open to all sorts of abuse.
Richard Gregory,
UK
I think DNA should be used where possible to solve crimes. I personally do not want criminals walking the streets.
Catherine, UK
The larger the database we have to maintain, the greater the likelihood of errors. Don't imagine for a second that it is possible to keep such a vast database 100% correct. Don't imagine, either, that a DNA profile identifies you uniquely - someone with a similar profile could be
repeatedly accused of someone else's crimes. DNA is best used to eliminate suspects, not to find them.
David Allsopp,
UK
I don't believe that the government should do this - everyone should have the right to anonymity if they are a law abiding citizen.
Louisa Cooper, UK
"Infringe civil liberties?" This is just a bit of an empty phrase
|
What do people mean by "infringe civil liberties?" This is just a bit of an empty phrase. Please could opponents of this initiative identify specific concerns - personally I don't have a problem with it, but it would be great to hear another side to the argument rather than the somewhat meaningless bleating of the civil liberties brigade.
Vernon Bigg, UK
It would seem that DNA evidence could be "planted" with greater ease than fingerprint evidence. I would prefer to trust everybody, including the police, but I don't.
Chris, US
I would object because DNA testing does not uniquely identify an individual. If someone whose DNA profile matches yours commits a crime, but only you are on file, who do you think the police are going to try and convict?
Karen, UK
What is worrying is that people are obviously equating a fingerprint, or DNA match with proof of guilt. It is obviously not, but people are arguing on this premise. Any sane person can only be worried that people should think guilt so easy to prove.
Gabriel Lee, England
Totally in favour - in fact, why not have a DNA register? Think of all the time it could save, like identifying bodies at morgues and DNA testing over disputed parenthood.
Joe Straw, UK
I think Joe Straw's comment sums it up perfectly; today they will use this information to locate criminals, tomorrow for civil matters such as parenthood disputes. What comes next?
Andy, UK
DNA should be taken of any suspects; in fact there should be a DNA bank which eventually includes everyone.
Roy Barratt, UK
If you want to live in a police state, then move to one, don't make it here!!!
|
NO!! Go use the "If your innocent you have nothing to hide" rubbish on all the people who have been sent to prison in the past after supposedly accurate tests. If you want to live in a police state, then move to one, don't make it here!!!
Ian, UK
I wouldn't worry too much about this. It's another small step on the road to having your DNA put on a national database from birth. Mark my words, it will happen.
Anam Jude, UK
The question is how will the authorities and government agencies be using this enormous and ultra personal database in the future? It's a very worrying development in the so called free world.
Tim , France
If all those supporters want the police to hold their DNA if only to eliminate them from suspicion of a crime then I am happy to live in the shadow of maybe have something to hide than have the state hold my most personal information. We must not forget my DNA belongs to me not the state. Many of our ancestors defended the right to the presumption of innocence with their lives, so would I.
Paul Huber, UK
Innocent people could be charged on the basis their DNA (from a stray hair for example) was found at a crime scene.
Richard Acton, England
I have no qualms whatsoever about giving my DNA. Nobody is convicted purely on DNA evidence, so claiming that a single stray hair might result in a false conviction is just naive. However, if the DNA evidence is available and a database to match it against, and it results in murderers, rapists and other criminals being put behind bars before they can commit any more crimes it has to be the best way forward. Surely, at the end of a day, the only infringement of our civil liberties we should be worried about is that of being a victim of crime.
Susan, UK
Miscarriages of justice are not nearly as rare as we would like
|
It is not true that only the guilty need fear these introductions. Miscarriages of justice are not nearly so rare as we would like.
I know that there are times every day when I don't have an alibi, despite not committing any crime. DNA evidence is so widely trusted that it would be easy to wrongfully detain me, either by mistake or design. Such new procedures need to come equipped with clear guidelines. This must be used to revolutionise policing, not simplify it so lazy detectives can grab convenient scapegoats.
Jane, UK
People who say such action is 'wrong' or 'against civil liberties' are either criminals or have never been victims of unsolved crime. Criminals have a frightening invincibility in the UK and it's time we fought for the victims instead of banging on about protecting those who choose a life of crime - I say do it!
Mike,
UK
At this rate we're only a short step from becoming a micro chipped population... A step too far.
Pete, London
Innocent have nothing to hide - only the criminals. Introduction of ID cards should also be done.
Ann,
UK
It's understandable that people are worried about giving so much information away to the police, but it is a logical next step in the fight against crime. This will be a huge deterrent against the vast majority of forms of crime, and should result in lower crime statistics and correspondingly less resources devoted to policing and the legal process.
Will Thomas, UK
The world would be a much safer place if crimes could be solved using accurate DNA technology, the only people who are against this move are people with something to hide, so surly only good can come out of this.
Anna Nicole Houghton, England
My only reservation would be clever criminals cloning DNA from random people, or worse from pre-selected targets which they leave behind at the scene. Then there could be miscarriages of justice.
Henrik Buchleitner,
UK
You don't have to be guilty to be worried about the government being able to trace your movements
|
You don't have to be guilty to be worried about the government being able to trace your movements. Those who seem to want yet another invasion of their privacy should be made to carry tags that record and transmit their every action, word and thought to the government. After all, that is what a police state would really like!
Dave,
UK
I don't see how it can be seen as an infringement on civil liberties; crimes definitely are however. Besides, DNA is never solely used as evidence, if you have nothing to hide then why worry.
Matt, UK
I support this and I suspect that the resistance to DNA testing is down to the potential for human error to produce a wrongful prosecution. As for infringement on civil liberties, I can recall a similar debate on CCTV systems in towns. A policy which is now widely accepted. I say give the police all the evidence they need.
Chris, UK
Absolutely, positively, NO. The police have too many irrelevant powers to pry into peoples lives. Convicted offenders? Yes. People arrested? No.
George Orwell only prophesied the half of it
Bob,
England
It's a great idea. I don't like the idea of a big brother state but why not take DNA sample at birth then at any future crime scenes, where DNA is found, the criminal will always be known.
Rachael, UK
If the police are willing to share the DNA database with the National Health Service, to assist in the identification of potential organ or bone marrow donors, this is a good idea. If they're going to keep all the info to themselves, then obviously THEY have something to hide.
Steve Wehrle, UK
Yes. The police should be given all the support they need in the needless battle against crime.
Alan Paterson, Wales
Given the increasing difficulty which the authorities seem to have in securing court convictions, anything which allows crimes to be precisely and accurately attributed to those who commit them is to be welcomed.
Jim Westhead, England
Try telling a girl who has been raped 'we couldn't take his DNA because it infringed upon his rights.'
|
Try telling a girl who has been raped 'we couldn't take his DNA because it infringed upon his rights.' Forget his rights, lets get tough with the scum of society and get them running. The only people opposed to a DNA database are people who see life through rose coloured spectacles and do-gooders. If you are a good law abiding person then you have nothing to fear.
Brendan,
UK
In America they are re-examining hundreds of cases where convictions have been made on the basis of DNA evidence. The first sample to be retested showed that DNA used to convict a man now serving 25 years for rape could not possibly have been his. Lab technicians were incompetent, standards were poor and some DNA evidence was even contaminated by rainwater from a leaking roof. Anyone think it can't happen here?
Dave, UK
Innocent people have nothing to fear from DNA tests, so therefore it seems obvious to check all people charged with a crime and keep a central register/record. This could then, hopefully, help improve clear up rates for crime and speed up the whole criminal process.
Mary Hocking, United Kingdom
To say this is an infringement of our civil liberties is absolutely ridiculous. The "right on" PC pillocks at it again - representing all that is WRONG with this country. I, as would all the people I have asked, would gladly volunteer samples as I have nothing to hide. Surely this in itself would help Police by elimination alone. Bring the law in (and how about hardening/reinforcing a few others as well!
Kim Smith, England
What's the big deal about having your DNA on record? How can that be abused?
Colin, UK
If you have nothing to hide then what is the problem? Surely if we all gave DNA samples and fingerprints it would reduce the amount of crime because of the ease of detection. This, in turn, would reduce costs for Prisons, court proceedings and we could spend the wasted taxes on something useful like educating our children and good hospitals with low waiting lists!
Russell way,
England
Privacy is a cornerstone of any democracy
|
The plans for DNA police, taking samples from anyone arrested, seems like the legal system is taking yet one more step towards the principle of 'Guilty until proven guilty.' Surely if no arrest, or even charge is forthcoming then all records of that individual must be destroyed as the police, by implication, have no further cause to investigate that individual. These plans would extend the shadow of the erosion of civil liberties over the nation of the UK. Privacy is a cornerstone of any democracy.
Andrew Smith, England
If Big Brother is going down this road, it might as well be made compulsory to give a DNA sample of newborn children when the birth is registered. And in answer to your question: yes - it IS an infringement of civil liberties.
Christopher Hunter, England
I'm all for it, and why not sample everyone from birth? Many crimes go "unsolved" purely because the culprit offends multiple times. If you can pick them up after the first; then the second, third etc "unsolved" crimes might never happen! In the Milly Dowler case, instead of trying to match DNA from two different counties, with a DNA database the police could have merely looked up who it belonged to and called them in for questioning. Easy!
Bennett, England
This is a real infringement of liberties and privacy. A person's DNA can turn up in places they have never been - hairs or skin flakes picked up on clothing for instance, whilst sitting in the pub or on a bus, may belong to someone who later becomes a victim. Likewise, your own hairs may appear on a victim's clothing in the same way, even if you have never met that person. The result is an instant implication of guilt. DNA data is not as infallible as the government or police would have us believe.
Steve D, UK
Yes - if this could clear a potential suspect then that helps focus police time and efforts.
M Payne, UK
If it helps solve crime or even better, help prevent crime, then let's go for it
|
The only people who ought to be concerned about such measures are those who commit crimes, or who would be afraid to be tracked once "on record". I have no problem with the idea; in fact if it helps solve crime or even better, help prevent crime, then let's go for it.
J R Masters, England
This would be an excellent crime deterrent in theory, but the harsh reality is that our police force are prone to distorting the truth in order to get a conviction!
Eric,
UK
"The only people who object are those who have something to hide" seems to be the latest tabloid jingle. Well, I object, and I have nothing to hide. So it's a lie, isn't it?
Simon Richardson,
UK
There is the argument that it violates privacy, but with so much crime, and evil people carrying it out, is it too much to ask in an endeavour to stop it happening?
Hannah, UK
No, DNA is not a panacea for all society's crimes. Would the people who support this convict someone on the basis of DNA evidence alone? If their answer is yes then people have every right to be concerned about this.
Ola,
England
There is no way they will be able to create a flawless system
|
I have no objection in principle - but I disagree with people who say this will prevent miscarriages of justice. There is no way they will be able to create a flawless system. I would worry that there will be a "mix-up" of data (such as you're always hearing about in hospitals when they operate on a cancer that wasn't there due to a results mix-up). And then we'd still have innocent people going to jail. It will improve things I guess, but it will never be perfect.
Andrew,
UK
I simply can't understand people's objections, if there was a DNA database I think it would result in a massive cut in crime in the long term and quick results in the short.
Simon Allardice, Bristol
What a really good idea! Personally, I think we should also have CCTV in our houses as many crimes are committed or planned in the home.
Graeme, UK
Yes. Only 90% of crime of gets solved and who are the ones who end up paying for it? Us, not the criminals. It's high time this was done; it would reduce crime, reduce our insurance premiums and reduce the stress caused to people who are victims of crime.
Mario Roberts, UK
Yes. This technology will be able to get the guilty convicted. It will also be a tool to prove innocence early on in a case. How exactly is it an invasion of your freedom? It's not. It doesn't stop you expressing yourself, it doesn't stop your freedom of movement. The Orwellian 'big brother' image used by 'civil-liberty' groups is as out of date as it is a work of fiction. Without this technology the only lost 'liberty' will be the victims of crime.
Patrick,
London, England
DNA profiling is not nearly as accurate as people think or the police wish
|
A swab should be taken on arrest, but if the suspect is released without charge or found not guilty, the records should be destroyed. People have a false sense of security when it comes to science. DNA profiling is not nearly as accurate as people think or the police wish. Having twice been arrested for crimes I did not commit (and one I actually reported) I can say that if you are innocent you have everything to fear.
Mark Hiscock,
UK
If every ones DNA was on record, surely this would stop people committing crimes in the first place? If one person is saved from being killed or raped then this so-called 'invasion of privacy' is worth it!
Allan,
UK
I disagree with the comment that anyone who opposes such a move must have something to hide. We have seen enough travesties of justice in recent years in the UK to know that if your DNA is on file when incorrectly arrested, you will have a higher likelihood of being accused of other crimes subsequently - even if you are completely innocent. I don't believe we can take this risk.
Mike Sheldon, UK
It would be an absolute infringement of all civil liberties. It should not be allowed.
Tony, England
I don't see how my DNA being on file would bother me. (If the government wanted to make life tricky they could anyway!) How does this invade my privacy? I could give a sample and think no more of it until I do something criminal. 'Civil liberties'? I'd rather have the right to expect murderers, rapists and ID thieves to be caught!
Rob, UK
The civil liberties groups need to get real and live with the times
|
The only people who object are the ones with something to hide. The CLGs need to get real and live with the times. Most of the population would have no problem with any sort of DNA, retinal recognition etc, for ensuring that honest citizens stay safe and secure while the state can peruse those who are criminals or not entitled to the many benefits of belonging to our multicultural society.
Brian Thorby, England
Within a few years it will be possible to tell a great deal about an individual from their DNA. Would people accept that the police should have unrestricted access to personal medical records? In effect, that is what we may be permitting here.
Dean Madden, UK
This is perfectly OK if they are allowed to use the DNA in a court of law, and not have some squealing Lawyer getting it quashed on appeal costing more money on legal aid.
Jon Mills, England
If DNA fingerprinting was as accurate as some people claim, this would be fine. But we've already seen how our courts misuse statistics to 'prove' people's guilt from DNA evidence, when in reality the DNA doesn't prove anything of the kind. So I'd be in favour of compulsory DNA fingerprinting of anyone the police come into contact with, but only if we first sort out the way that the courts use this evidence.
Jim, UK
All citizens of every country should have there DNA profile taken and recorded onto to each countries ID card, and you should have to carry it no matter where you are in the world.
Mr P Sullivan, UK
It would have to 100% foolproof, and no technology is. There will be more miscarriages of justice.
Colin Wright,
UK
This is an appalling idea and is a sad indication of presumption of guilt instead of innocence
|
If all these people think it is such a good idea and they have nothing to hide, would they mind giving me their bank details? Or do they believe in privacy when it suits them? This is an appalling idea and is a sad indication of presumption of guilt instead of innocence.
Jeremy, UK
Unlike other forms of ID such as identity cards et al, I can see no downsides to a DNA database - after all, it's not like you can accidentally leave it at home, borrow someone else's or forge it! DNA defines the physical make up of 'you'; it doesn't track your behaviour or measure your personal freedom. I've sat here and tried to think up a way this database could be abused and so far I've drawn a blank - would any of those in opposition please give some examples?
N Davies, UK
I would go further and say that a record of everyone's DNA should be stored on a national database, linked to the NI number, and accessible only with a court order. The people who oppose DNA sampling must have something to hide, and comments about innocent until proven guilty do not make sense, it would have the capability to eliminate from an enquiry as well as prove guilt.
John, England
This doesn't seem reasonable to me. What the police are actually saying is that they think you might commit a crime in the future, so they are keeping you on record even though they can't prove you had anything to do with this one. Surely it would be far fairer to keep DNA records for the entire population from birth then there is no discrimination.
Stephen Couch, UK
This is completely outrageous. Do not allow the UK to become a police state.
Paul Sears, Canada
if this procedure could be used to crack unsolved crimes then it is for the greater good
|
Personally, I wouldn't mind. As a white female, the chance of abuse or prejudice is slim. If I were a black male I might think very differently about this! However, with strict guidelines and codes, if this procedure could be used to crack unsolved crimes then it is for the greater good.
Wendy, UK
This is unacceptable. This goes to show just how 'democratic' and 'free' the western world really is. I'd rather live in a Pacific island than have myself tagged by the people I chose to lead this place! This is simply another step in stamping out our civil liberties. They're getting us accustomed to the idea, and they've been doing that for years now. It seems they don't want a nation of individuals, but a nation of sheep.
Christian, UK
Referring to the comments made by Christian, what difference will it make to you? If you commit a crime then a database will ensure you're convicted, if you don't... well, nothing! How does having a DNA sample and your name on a database infringe your civil liberties? Do you have a bank account, a driving licence, a passport, etc?
Paul, UK
Yes! The police should have the right to collect such evidence as needed in the investigation of a crime. However, if that person is no longer a suspect or is found not guilty in a court of law, then those samples should be disposed of immediately.
Roy Merritt, UK
No, the police should not be able to store DNA or fingerprints from suspects. I would consider it extremely offensive for such data to be stored just in case I committed a crime in the future. What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Julia, UK
If someone is innocent then they have nothing to fear!
|
Fingerprints and DNA evidence, when used correctly, can prove beyond a reasonable doubt the guilt or innocence of an individual. If the checks and balances are in place regarding the levels of proof required then this is not a civil liberties issue.
Andrew Livesley, UK
As long as the information on the DNA database is only available to the emergency services and not commercial concerns I cannot see the problem.
Danny, UK
If this helps crack unsolved crimes then it could also be used as a deterrent, which may result in lower crime rates. Surely in a country where the vast majority are law-abiding citizens this would be a sensible move.
Lab, UK
Every time someone suggests a means of identity the cry "breach of civil liberties" is heard. Provided the database is used only for investigation of criminal activity, why should any law abiding citizen object? There will be accusations that it will be used for other purposes by devious underhand government agencies. Get real; if those devious underhand agencies want information about you they will get it anyway.
Ian Baker, England
I support the proposal. As usual the civil liberties of the innocent are ignored by the bleeding hearts. They should apologise for their over-privilege with their own lives. DNA will eliminatee the innocent and convict the guilty, so what is the issue?
Nigel Tromans, UK
If this happens then there must be safeguards. Police should be able to check the database to identify suspects, but the fact that a suspect was identified by the database should not be admissible in court. Any DNA evidence brought to the trial must be based on another test that has been done specifically for that investigation.
Did, UK
For once I agree with the "civil liberties groups"; this is a real erosion of freedom
|
For once I agree with the "civil liberties groups"; this is a real erosion of freedom. Unless the police have sufficient evidence to charge individuals, any samples taken should be destroyed when the individuals are released. This proposal would allow the police to collect a huge body of information on the population without any significant safeguards.
Mark Gamble, UK
Considering that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty, surely the taking of a persons DNA against their will is an infringement of their civil liberties, and human rights. However, in a time where civil liberties, the will of the people and indeed international law is utterly ignored by our present government, it certainly doesn't surprise me this bill will slip through, just like the criminal justice bill under the Conservative administration.
Sophie Yarrow, UK
Why not ask the general public to volunteer their DNA for the database as well? Most people would willingly agree and lessen the suspects for a major enquiry in the future, the others who do not want to give a sample? You can make your own mind up on them.
Graham,
England
No. This is an attempt to build a national DNA database with the obvious deleterious consequences to crime investigation.
Andrew Eatherall, UK
It would ease suffering of victims and their families, and may save future victims
|
I would be quite happy to give police my DNA. They need as much help as they can get and I see no moral conflicts in having an extensive DNA database. Imagine how much easier they could identify murderers and rapists and will save time and money in the investigation. It would ease suffering of victims and their families, and may save future victims. It's about time police had laws that work in their favour and not against them.
Peter, UK
I have always been a liberal but this time I am whole-heartedly in favour of DNA being taken in these circumstances. In an 'ideal' world DNA would be taken from every single person and this would undoubtedly affect the crime rate!
Calypso, England
No, the police should not have the automatic right to take DNA from every "suspect." Even though I may have nothing to hide, I'm not going to tell the police they can come and search my house any time they like. That would be an invasion of privacy, and so is taking my DNA - and keeping it on record - without a very good reason.
Christopher Slater-Walker, Watford, England
If just one rapist, murderer, thief or thug is taken off of the streets by this new initiative, it will be worth the effort. Criminals have no regard for their victim's liberties, so none should be given to them. Anyone who disagrees is probably lucky enough not to have been a victim of crime.
Mark J, Herts, UK
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~31~RS~)
One-Minute World News
News services
Email this to a friend
Printable version
