DNA Samples used to fight crime.

2008-02-22 14:10:46

#1

FatherTed: xD; +3,936|6522|so randum

As you may know, if you commit a crime in the U.K, you now have a DNA sample taken, to aid in further investigations (based on the figures of re-offence).

There has been call for this to be compulsory for everyone in the country, to make identifying criminals that little bit easier.

Is this the right way to go? What are the positives and what are the negatives of such a move?

Post away.

Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella

2008-02-22 14:15:05

#2

IRONCHEF: Member; +385|6513|Northern California

Ok, compulsory for "convicted" criminals, and that DNA can and should only be used within the bounds of the criminal justice realm. I believe DNA should also be taken for investigative purposes within due process with the right probable cause.

DNA is a sacred form of identity and should not be taken lightly..but should be compulsory within the bounds I suggested above. Convicts are citizens with degraded rights.

2008-02-22 14:17:33

#3

Agent_Dung_Bomb: Member; +302|6758|Salt Lake City

No, within limits. I agree with Ironchef on much of what he said. For every citizen to be forced to comply with something like this, without justification, or probable cause is not right. I would also think that if DNA were collected by some one suspected of a crime, but then cleared of that crime, their DNA information should be wiped from the system.

2008-02-22 14:19:16

#4

justice: OctoPoster; +978|6763|OctoLand

If it's going to help, why not?

I know fucking karate

2008-02-22 14:23:55

#5

FatherTed: xD; +3,936|6522|so randum

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
No, within limits. I agree with Ironchef on much of what he said. For every citizen to be forced to comply with something like this, without justification, or probable cause is not right. I would also think that if DNA were collected by some one suspected of a crime, but then cleared of that crime, their DNA information should be wiped from the system.

As i understand it, it's only stored if the persons convicted, though i could be totally wrong.

Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella

2008-02-22 14:26:28

#6

Agent_Dung_Bomb: Member; +302|6758|Salt Lake City

FatherTed wrote:
Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
No, within limits. I agree with Ironchef on much of what he said. For every citizen to be forced to comply with something like this, without justification, or probable cause is not right. I would also think that if DNA were collected by some one suspected of a crime, but then cleared of that crime, their DNA information should be wiped from the system.
As i understand it, it's only stored if the persons convicted, though i could be totally wrong.

And I have no problem with that. I think I would also stipulate that said crime must be classified as a felony. To take DNA for misdemeanor crimes would simply be a way to skirt the crap they would get from a 100% compulsory DNA collection.

2008-02-22 15:11:30

#7

PureFodder: Member; +225|6308

No. Eventually the information will get sold on to the business sector for them to do God know what with.

2008-02-22 15:48:26

#8

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6427|North Carolina

Compulsory for the general public, no...

Compulsory for suspects in a crime, yes.

2008-02-22 15:53:04

#9

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,810|6128|eXtreme to the maX

Don't forget DNA evidence is easy to plant, easy to cross-contaminate, its easy for your DNA to end up somewhere just by accident.

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!

2008-02-22 16:33:50

#10

I'm Jamesey: Do a Research Noob; +506|6155|Scotland!

I'd give it if they asked, if you're convicted of a crime I don't see why they shouldn't record your DNA.

2008-02-22 17:10:59

#11

SenorToenails: Veritas et Scientia; +444|6152|North Tonawanda, NY

Turquoise wrote:
Compulsory for the general public, no...

Compulsory for suspects in a crime, yes.

Compulsory for suspects? No way! The government can collect the DNA when they convince a judge they need it and get a warrant.

2008-02-22 17:13:09

#12

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6427|North Carolina

SenorToenails wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
Compulsory for the general public, no...

Compulsory for suspects in a crime, yes.
Compulsory for suspects? No way! The government can collect the DNA when they convince a judge they need it and get a warrant.

Touche... scratch that then.

2008-02-22 17:16:43

#13

Vilham: Say wat!?; +580|6788|UK

SenorToenails wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
Compulsory for the general public, no...

Compulsory for suspects in a crime, yes.
Compulsory for suspects? No way! The government can collect the DNA when they convince a judge they need it and get a warrant.

I agree.

2008-02-22 18:47:33

#14

Raga86: Member; +6|6508

I think it should be compulsory for all convicted criminals that got jail time.

As some people already pointed out DNA evidence is a powerful tool in investigations but also easy to fool. To take samples from every single person in a country just to bust the few that convict crimes is an unnecessary cost and a potential risk for the personal integrity.

Yes	45%	45% - 10
No	54%	54% - 12
Total: 22

BF2S Forums DNA Samples used to fight crime.

Poll

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Board footer