Remember this recent announcement?
A National-led government would require DNA samples to be taken from anyone arrested for imprisonable crimes, allow police to issue immediate protection orders and would toughen up bail laws.
Here's a report from the UK which already takes DNA samples from anyone arrested for an imprisonable crime:
Civil liberties campaigners and MPs have raised doubts about the national DNA database after the Home Office confirmed it contained more than 500,000 false or wrongly recorded names.
Suspects arrested over any imprisonable offence, including rape and murder, can have their DNA held even if they are not charged or are acquitted.
The database, the biggest in the world, contains about four million names.
But it has been dogged by problems. Statistics released by the Home Office show it contains around 550,000 files with wrong or misspelt names.
It always gives me the shivers when I hear people say, if you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to hide, and then go on to advocate taking DNA samples at birth. Their trust in the administration and use of these databases is touching. I do not share it.
No monopoly on stupid
37 minutes ago
8 comments:
Hear hear. I have a few responses to those who say that:
1. OK, I'll come round and look around your house at 8 then?
2. So have you ever had a parking ticket, speeding fine, did you drink before you were 18, or see a pornographic photo, or did you ever swear in a public place, or hit anyone who never hit you first?
3. So can I ask you 100 questions about personal things and put them on the internet?
The Nats said that!?
That's mental!
Gods help us.
Surely incorrectly attributed DNA evidence would be refuted by a current DNA test for a suspect.
DNA has been used in NZ to absolve people wrongfully convicted using coventional methods, and to also solve crimes which had lain unsolved for many years.
Vigilante justice eventually arises when lawlessness reaches a tipping point (I was going to say trigger point). Although effective, the right of appeal is unavailable, and there is little redress should there be mistaken identity.
Do libertarians have a preference?
Anon 1, Yes. But how far down the track would that be? After your home has been searched, after your arrest, when the case eventually gets to court?
Anon 2, I have no problem with people offering their DNA to rule themselves out as suspects and this has been done in NZ. But databases of samples taken compulsorily from people who haven't even been convicted (and they want to extend the types of crime to the more minor in the UK as well) is too much an infringement in my book.
Remember too that these systems are devised under a regime which may be far more benevolent than a later one.
Lindsay,
Law Enforcement needs redirection, a meaningful resource injection, and the opportunity to earn, once again, the respect of the community.
If the basics are attended to then there will be less need for the extreme measures which chill you.
The current political climate does not look conducive to this change happening.
What coalition of parties might give the leadership required?
Referring to your UK lead story, it has recently been revealed that a flunky in the HM Revenue & Customs "lost" 25m child benefit records.
Seems he POSTED 2 disks containing the names, addresses, dates of birth of 9.5m parents & 15.5m children together with their national insurance and child benefit numbers and bank account details, with a private courier, which never arrived at the destination the National Audit Office.
The information on the disks was protected by a password but was not encrypted.
No information was supplied on what happened to the junior official responsible for breaching security guidelines!
I work with databases every day as part of my job. I wouldn't trust them either.
Brian Smaller
Post a Comment