Compulsory DNA Testing

[Woodstock]

Wouldn't it be a good idea if all new born babies had DNA samples taken at birth and stored on computer?  If all immigrants gave samples too, in future years most crimes could be a thing of the past.

[Oneeyedvic]

There was a tv documentary recently ,where they explained how they started doing an experiment several years ago where they took samples of the parents blood and the babies blood.

Unfortuantely it had to be stopped as around 1/3 (yes a third) showed that the father was not actually the father!

Would you also trust the 'system' that this was fool proof. Could you also get a sample of someone's blood and commit crimes using their dna? Seeing as cloning is also a reality, would this syetm be safe to catch criminals?

[jake-the-peg]

Great idea Woodstock!

Why don't we let them tattoo us with a serial number too?

[Woodstock]

What's the problem Jake-the-peg?

[Woodstock]

I take your point, In A Pickle, and although it probably wouldn't alter things much in the short term, I'm sure it would for the future.  I have suffered so much at the hands of criminals, in business and personal life, probably to the tune of about �500,000.00, and I would literally have cameras on every street corner if it meant catching the b-gg-ers!

[dmsjps]

I guess there are pros and cons with it. I respect the people who say they don't want 'big brother' knowing everything they do, when they do it and how. On the other hand, if you're not doing anything illegal there shouldn't really be a problem. Maybe that's a bit broadbrush though.

I think it would help with all the bodies they find and spend years trying to identify if everyone had DNA on file: let people who are affected stop hoping/wondering and let them grieve properly. It would also minimise to a massive extent the amount of time, money and effort spent on trying to find someone's attacker/rapist/murderer.

[jocasta]

To be honest, it's a watered down version of the State of Germany that Hitler was trying to run in the '30's...personally I dont think it's a good thing...there's a lot to be said about personal freedom..IMHO

[Woodstock]

Unfortunately, Jocasta, the personal freedom enjoyed by the criminal fraternity completely removes the personal freedom of the law-abiding.

[smudge]

Woodstock - I see your point, but as already stated, there are too many issues for this to work properly.

dmsjps - makes a valid point in respect of when bodies are found, although the chances of needing to use the system suggested for that purpose are very few & far between.

jake-the-peg - funny you should mention tattooing. Since there is always the chance of a mix up when babies are born, I've often wondered why they don't stamp identity details on babies backs with a harmless dye that washes off after a few weeks. These details would still show if identity tags or wrist bands  accidentally came off, or were intentionally removed. They use a similar method for electtrical goods, so why not our little bundles of joy.

When our daughtere were born, they had wrist tags & plasters stuck to their backs with their identities on, but these came unstuck after a couple of baths & whilst I was still in hospital the first time round!    

[smudge]

*electrical

[kaktus]

Woodstock - What makes you say that crime would be a thing of the past? If the fear of punishment/being caught stopped crimed, countries with very harsh justice systems would have a very low crime rate.

DNA, if the criminal leaves any behind, might make people easier to identify but not to catch.

Besides where is the limit for surveillance of the society?

[kaktus]

IAP - Well said!

[Woodstock]

Thank you for your opinions - interesting reading.  Kactus, I'm suggesting some crimes could be a thing of the past because forensic investigations are so good these days and are improving all the time, that  eventually criminals will realise that there is just no getting away with it. DNA is left at far more crime scenes than the public might think.  In A Pickle "Big Brother " would be paid for by the time,money and effort not spent on searching for these criminals, but by simply dipping into a computer system.

My home and business are covered with cameras, locks and all manner of anti-burglar devices providing considerable nuisance value to me, to mention nothing of the expense involved, just because criminals think they have "personal freedom" on my property.  They are the only ones who do have it!

[Woodstock]

In A Pickle.  Over 20 acts of burglary and theft in 10 years have left me uninsurable, so my fears are totally justified and not in a dream world.  However, I didn't pose this question to invite sympathy, but gain opinions on how rising crime could be tackled.

[magicdice]

at the moment in britain, the DNA of 8% of white males and 32% of non-white males is stored in a national database. this is being used for all sorts of research (without the need for consent from the person whose DNA it is), and it mostly comes from people who have been arrested for a crime, regardless of whether or not they have been charged. if DNA is found at a crime scene, the police can test it against the database, and if there is a similar but not identical sample on the database, then the relatives of the person in the database can be questioned/arrested in relation to the crime.

in my opinion, this would be fine if they had committed a crime, but the fact is that many of these people were never charged, and some volunteered DNA to clear themselves, and so shouldn't be deprived of their right to give or withhold consent as to what is done with the data.

also, when you're smashed off your face on drugs & looking for another hit, i doubt that the fact that your DNA may be on file will dissuade you from stealing to supply your next fix.

on a somewhat related note, the novel "cocaine nights" by JG Ballard puts a different slant on how crime affects society, as well as being well-written and an interesting read

[stevie21]

I don't actually see any problem with this if it was securely stored, only certain people had access to it etc.

The worst case scenario is obviously that you are denied life insurance because the whole world knows that genetically you have a 20% chance of developing Parkinsons or something.

I'm liable to change my mind about this at will but at the mo' I'm for it. Just because my DNA is stored somewhere, doesn't mean that there's a big brother constantly watching me or denying me my rights.

[Otrere]

Just a thought Woodstock.. after so many burglaries, have you not thought about making your property more secure as you appear to be an easy target?