Judge Says, Record DNA of Everyone In the UK 403
Many readers informed us about the opinion of Lord Justice Sedley, a senior UK Appeal Court judge, who said that everyone in the UK should have their DNA recorded in the national database — including visitors. Reader ChiefGeneralManager writes, "Sedley calls the current database 'indefensible' because it contains a hodge-podge mix of people, including children and those who have been in contact with the police. His view is that we should make it compulsory for all DNA to be recorded to remove this anomaly. The UK Information Commissioner has expressed some concerns, but not dismissed the idea outright." And reader john.wingfield adds, "Just under two weeks ago, the Independent reported that the Government has admitted that an eighth of all records on the DNA database are false, misspelled, or incorrect — over half a million records. This raises the possibility of a breach of the 4th data protection principle of the Data Protection Act 1998: 'Personal data shall be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date.'"
Identity card not needed anymore (Score:3, Interesting)
This is what expects us.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Identity card not needed anymore (Score:5, Funny)
Nothing wrong with that, and if you use a bore small enough people won't notice.
Re:Identity card not needed anymore (Score:5, Funny)
Proving your innocence (Score:5, Insightful)
That does not matter. If these loose words of the judge are ever put into law (unlikely, but given surveillance-mad Britain, who know...), this proposal would force every Briton - and visitor - to prove his or her innocence for every crime in the future. That will take time, but UK authorities don't care about that. Their abstract view of justice (catching criminals) has blinded them to the liberality upon which Western justice is based.
Speed be damned. This is about the slow constriction of society.
I already avoid traveling to America; now, perhaps I will need to avoid the UK as well. Although not perfect, at the least the EU has its privacy directive [google.com].
DNA samples tend to clear the innocent ... (Score:4, Insightful)
I apologize, I haven't had my morning coffee yet, but I don't understand. DNA samples tend to clear innocent suspects, not falsely implicate them. In the US numerous people suffering from false imprisonment, DNA tests were not available at the time of their trial, have been released as they managed to get DNA tests performed. Thank goodness for long term preservation of evidence.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Unlike fingerprints, which serve as
Insurance company screening a red herring ... (Score:4, Insightful)
In the US, since the 1970s, government agencies have been restricted in terms of what information they can collect and what they can share even amongst each other and subcontractors. Since then privacy rules have become even more restrictive, in particular with respect to medical information.
The insurance company screening argument is a red herring to a degree. They could collect a DNA sample as part of a mandatory physical. Unless such profiling is outlawed, it will happen regardless of whether or not there is a national DNA database.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:DNA samples tend to clear the innocent ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Identity card not needed anymore (Score:5, Funny)
What you say !!
You have no chance to survive make your time.
Re:Identity card not needed anymore (Score:5, Insightful)
The homepage for the Canadian National DNA Data Bank [nddb-bndg.org] says that DNA samples are taken only from convicted criminals. The site says:(emphasis added)
Moreover, this page [publicsafety.gc.ca] discusses debate (in 2005) about whether or not a DNA database could help with missing persons investigations. The discussion doesn't mention using an already-existing DNA database of all citizens (or all citizens born since 1994) but instead seems to discuss the creation of a new database. In the discussion about whether such a database should be created, they say: In short, this sounds like a proposal for a voluntary system where loved ones of a missing person could donate DNA samples to help locate the person or identify their remains. It makes no mention of an existing effort to retain DNA on all newborns since 1994.
Anyone have any further information on this subject?
(Anecdotally, I'm not aware of any such DNA testing on any children recently born in Canada--e.g. my nephew.)
Pennies (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Pennies (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, sure. (Score:5, Interesting)
If you're against this, you probably have something to hide and you should be prosecuted anyway. If you didn't do anything wrong, you have nothing to hide, so why you should care? After all, we need to be protected from the terrorists!
You can't be against this, because it will protect the children. After all, if we have their DNA and they're kidnapped, we'll be able to find them quicker. Will someone please think of the children?
*sigh*
I'm moving to a deserted island in the middle of the Pacific to start my own country. Anyone care to join me?
Re:Oh, sure. (Score:5, Funny)
Only if your country has mandatory DNA recordings. I want to be protected from the terrorists.
Re:Oh, sure. (Score:5, Funny)
- RG>
Re:Oh, sure. (Score:5, Funny)
I believe the children are our future... unless we stop them now!
Re: (Score:2)
As a Englishman, that sounds like a good idea.
RegardselFarto
important question (Score:2)
What are your breasts like?
*Two* important questions (Score:3, Funny)
What are your breasts like?
I'd add are you a woman? I really don't care about a man's c-cups.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The government (in the USA anyway) has at LEAST the following: Your full name, birth record, race, eye color, hair color, parents names and IDs, your social security number, address, drivers license number, license plate, vehicle VIN number, vehicle registration number, insurance information, bank account numbers, credit account history, mortgage information, phone number (if you
What "the government" is and isn't. (Score:5, Interesting)
"The Government" is a hodgepodge of agencies with mutually contradictory goals and aims, most of whom would sooner throw rocks at each other than cooperate. This is, perversely, a good thing.
Why? Because although "the government" may know a lot about you, it doesn't know all of that in any one place. There's no single database -- yet -- where you can sit down, CSI-style, and bring up any citizen's dossier. Your local police department knows your name, address, and how many parking tickets you've gotten this year, but they don't have access to your tax information from the IRS. (And the IRS is actually pretty snarky about not sharing information casually; if I had a dime for every time one of my LEO buddies bitched about the IRS making them jump through hoops, I'd be a rich man. I guess there's honor among thieves or something.)
This is the way the system is supposed to work. (Well, I'd like to see the size of the bureaucracy cut down dramatically, but that's a different topic.) In order for the bureaucracy to function, it needs to know a certain amount about you. But different agencies need to know different things. As long as the data is kept compartmentalized -- as it is, in large part, today; owing less to design than simply because it's a really hard problem to correlate it all -- it's not a mortal threat to privacy.
It's when you start to get all that information put into a single database, and where there's a natural primary key that allows the database to be easily searched and information to be linked (why do people get paranoid about SSNs? Because they're the obvious choice for a primary key), that you start to get really Orwellian. With minor exceptions, we don't have anything like that in the U.S., although there are a lot of people trying.
Re:Oh, sure. (Score:4, Informative)
Abstract:
In this short essay, written for a symposium in the San Diego Law Review, Professor Daniel Solove examines the nothing to hide argument. When asked about government surveillance and data mining, many people respond by declaring: I've got nothing to hide. According to the nothing to hide argument, there is no threat to privacy unless the government uncovers unlawful activity, in which case a person has no legitimate justification to claim that it remain private. The nothing to hide argument and its variants are quite prevalent, and thus are worth addressing. In this essay, Solove critiques the nothing to hide argument and exposes its faulty underpinnings.
I've Got Nothing to Hide [ssrn.com]
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
F The government (in the USA anyway) has at LEAST the following: Your full name, birth record, race, eye color, hair color, parents names and IDs, your social security number, address, drivers license number, license plate, vehicle VIN number, vehicle registration number, insurance information, bank account numbers, credit account history, mortgage information, phone number (if you have ever included it on a form or called them from home, but they can get it on request anyway if you haven't), tax history, employer name(s), payroll information, fingerprints (from birth, typically elementary school age in most states, and adulthood if you've ever been to a police station or filed them voluntarily), your dental records and medical records (by request of a judge or coroner), military ID and rank (if any), and the list goes on.
Fingerprints are not kept by the UK government unless you've ever been suspected of a crime, and taken down to the local cop shop (I live in the UK, one reason I'm boycotting travel to the USA is because they want my prints; my own government doesn't even have them, why should I give it to a foreign one). Well that was true until this year anyway now they also take them if you want a new passport (aledgely to harmonise biometrics with other countries; in reality the only country demanding this is the USA,
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The possible problems with this idea are many and varied. We must trust our government to both record the data properly and use it wisely.
Who has not had some simple error made by our devoted public servants cause them hassle ? It may only be a minor problem regarding non-payment of some local government bill, or perhaps some misunderstanding over refuse collection. Once such sensitive information as DNA is regarded as 'routine' it will be tre
Re:Oh, sure. (Score:4, Informative)
Nope. Having had a few kids, I have never seen them fingerprinted at birth. The Hospital takes a footprint at birth to make sure the mother walks out with the same baby she walked in with. However, that information is not transmitted to law enforcement. The US of A does not record fingerprints at birth like you think.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
DHS spokesman declined to say whether the air carriers had offered to provide the training, or whether any agencies would accept it. "The survey is flawed and self-serving," said department spokesman Jarrod Agen. -- Government Executive
My response (to DHS, not to you): I think your comments are flawed and self-serving, sir. You keep taking away our rights, and the rights of foreign guests of our country, all for a self-serving agenda involving the criminalization and corruption of the U.S. government, a slide of our system from democracy into fascism, and all for what? To enrich you and your powerful friends' pocket books? I spit on you!
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Yeah, right.
I want some of whatever he was smoking.
Re:Oh, sure. (Score:4, Funny)
I find this highly offensive (Score:5, Insightful)
I interpret this as 'because the police are arresting a disproprtionately high proportion of ethnic minorities and the contents of the DNA database reveals this, we should just profile everybody so that the apparent discrimination disappears'. Maybe they should try dealing with the apparent racism and/or social inequality rather than brushing it under the carpet?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
1. Identify social inequality
2. ??
3. Social inequality resolved
Re:I find this highly offensive (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I find this highly offensive (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, like maybe more ethnic minorities are committing more crimes?
All races have equal worth. All cultures/socioeconomic structures do not. Call me politically incorrect, but Thai culture is far better than Cannibal culture.
The crime disparity is not racial, it's cultural/socioeconomic. Whites who follow an inner-city culture have just as high crime rates.
Re: (Score:2)
But this is the UK. I'm constantly told there is no racial inequality, and there is no gun crime. The only logical solution is to force everyone to give DNA samples!
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The law, and indeed common sense, says that if you're not convicted of a crime, you shouldn't be treated like you've performe
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Just because you feel guilty for the acts of your ancestors doesn't make your biased assumptions accurate.
Re:I find this highly offensive (Score:4, Insightful)
You're missing the point. Many of these people haven't committed a crime, they've only been arrested on suspicion of comitting one. This can easily be due to the interpretation of the officer at the scene, and there might not enough evidence to prosecute. Racial prejudice WILL be a factor in the disproportiante number of ethnic minorities. How large a factor is open to debate, but it would be much fairer to only retain the DNA where there was sufficient evidence to charge or prosecute, this would remove at least some of the distortion due to racial prejudice.
Re: (Score:3)
Sounds like a perfect solution to me (Score:2, Funny)
This bit says it all... (Score:3, Insightful)
5.2% of UK population
Nearly 40% of black men
13% of Asian men
9% of white men
Source: Home Office and Census
Enuff said. When the remaining 91% are going to be DNA recorded, they start squirming. Majority of ethnic minorities kept quiet and bore it all....
Re: (Score:2)
Do they take dna in the UK for speeding tickets and late library books?
WTF?
Re:This bit says it all... (Score:5, Insightful)
Mohammed Ahmed, suspect attacker, black
Adam Regis (black) attacked by 2 blacks
Billy Cox (black) attacker black
James Smartt-Ford (black)
Michael Dosunmu (black)
Annaka Keniesha Pinto (black)
Charlotte Polius (black)
That was the first few I found. I remember the London Evening Standard did a photo spread recently of all the victims of stabbings or shootings in London this year and there was one white face.
It might not be PC, it might not be palatable but this is what's going on and waving the race card to object is doing the black population a huge disservice as is trying to sweep it all under the carpet. There are endemic problems with gang culture and there is a need for some postive role models for young kids that don't involve rap songs about ho's, bitches, killing, drugs, fast cars and easy money.
Re: (Score:2)
The other solution is cheaper (Score:5, Insightful)
Hello my name is CAGGATATATATATGG (Score:2)
let me walk into the "******" ministry and identify my self with a cell sample.. it's just so much easier then!
Re: (Score:2)
'visitors DNA' (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
US: I have a sketchy muslim name, so I invariably get corralled into a side room, fingerprinted, "registered" and interviewed. If it takes less than 2 hours to complete this process, I consider myself fortu
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We are known for the abundance of wealth, belligerence, and fat people, not so much things to see and nice places to relax.
Backwards Logic (Score:3, Interesting)
How about we stop adding people to the database so easily in the first place.
I also love that for once, it's a judge proposing authoritarian measures, and Labour who are opposing it: A spokesman for Prime Minister Gordon Brown said to expand the database would create "huge logistical and bureaucratic issues" and civil liberty concerns.
(For non-UK readers, Labour being the Government that have repeatedly brought in authoritarian measures, and plan bureaucratic nightmares like the national ID card scheme, ignoring any civil liberty concerns...)
Only a tiny sample of saliva, blood, semen
Hmm, if we are forced to all turn up to have our DNA taken, can we choose to spit, bleed or er
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
To translate this for you "we only plan to introduce compulsory DNA testing after we have won the next general election"
Under promise, over deliver (Score:2)
"Oh no, what a horrible plan - we stand firmly against such draconian measures which undermine civil liberties to such an extent. Which is why our marvellous ID card scheme, and the strictly limited and carefully controlled extensions we will propose to the current DNA scheme have none of those problems."
Re: (Score:2)
Your supposition wouldn't surprise me in the least.
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone HAS committed some form of crime at some time or other. Just not everyone has been caught.
I hope someone else can (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
England & Wales only (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Scotland should finally do what it's been talking about for a long time and secede. Maybe even join with Ireland for a mutual protection pact against the British aggression that has been practiced over the last 500+ years. I don't like where the UK is heading, and it's finally time for the K to no longer be U.
-b.
everyone a criminal (Score:2)
I wonder how you would check whether the record of your DNA is up-to-date and correct. I certainly can't remember all my chromosomes.
Imagine "others" (read: companies) getting their hands on this database. Insurance companies will be thrilled to correlate the chromosomes to your likelihood of requiring said insurance.
B.
Could be an interesting political tactic... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
And I think it does point out how stupid it is.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Indeed. The value and accuracy of a DNA database decreases with size as the number of false hits and prevalence of simply mislabeled and misidentified samples increases. With a whole-population database you'd start dragging provably innocent people into court in the range of thousands or tens of thousands per year. This already happens; in the UK, a man with advanced P
Re:Could be an interesting political tactic... (Score:4, Funny)
Suddenly it's starting to appeal
Over My Dead Body (Score:2)
I'm sure this Sedley bloke hasn't been influenced by the prospect of ££££s for his chums.
£10,000 reward to hack the database (Score:2)
This offer won't make any hacker break the law, because they will be able to get 100 times as much from insurance companies and credit reference agencies, but hopefully it will make it more likely that leaks become public.
Human rights court (Score:3, Informative)
DNA from visitors? (Score:4, Interesting)
Besides, Paris has better airshows, and Germany, Spain, and Italy all have better F1 races. Guess I'll take my tourist dollars there instead.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Do what? The UK's most popular food is curry - we like spicy. Drunken men try to impress each other by tackling Phal's or drinking straight from a bottle of 'Old Grindley's bastard hot sauce'.
Hmm... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or leave the country and move to another EU state. No big loss; many countries have better climate, friendlier people, less paranoid governments, etc, etc. If you can't vote 'em out, vote with your feet.
-b.
Re: (Score:2)
Chimeras (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Support UK human rights. (Score:2)
Implementation (Score:4, Funny)
If not, could someone please post when this is actually put into force? It'll make my future travel plans easier if I can strike one more country off my list of places to visit.
Tourism in England (Score:3, Interesting)
And let's go ahead and give a rest to that tired old bullshit about "If you have nothing to hide then..." Everyone has something they want hidden, even if they won't admit it. My argument is that, regardless of if I have something to hide or not, I _DO NOT TRUST ANY GOVERNMENT IN THIS WORLD_ with my DNA on file and for them to "protect" it while "only using it to solve crimes". Virtually all things that have been expressed in this manner are then perverted for some other use, above and beyond what the stated intent was. Someone in power will eventually decide they can use the database for other "good" and seek to extend their reach further and further into the homes and lives of all people - the criminal AND, especially, the INNOCENT.
I, for one, hope that the people of the United Kingdom will stand up against this complete and utter invasion of their lives and take back some control of the information that is connected to them. I also hope that the people of the United States and other countries (Australia, Canada, and many others) also stand up and take back control, because those so-called free countries many of us are living in are looking more and more like they're creeping into fascism and/or totalitarian or police states.
We must dissent.
(Kudos to all those who get the reference in my last line
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, go on you eurosceptics Brits and hate the EU some more...while all it does is create more checks and balances so that crazy stuff like this happen less often.
Great (Score:2)
Phfft. You can forget me ever visiting the UK and spending my vacation dollars.
Re: (Score:2)
It's ok. We don't accept dollars anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Playing Devil's Advocate... (Score:2)
DNA has also been used to clear individuals as well. In the case of the criminal justice system, many individuals (with criminal records) are cleared already due to DNA samples on hand
Clearing innocents thru DNA does not need a DB (Score:3, Insightful)
DNA has also been used to clear individuals as well. In the case of the criminal justice system, many individuals (with criminal records) are cleared already due to DNA samples on hand not matching a particular case.
It is very good that DNA can be used to help clear innocent people accused of being criminals. However, if the police already has a DNA sample from the crime scene and a person is accused of being the criminal, and such person can always give their DNA to the police for testing. A database of DNA samples for helping clearing innocents is not needed at all, I think. You have the DNA sample from the crime scene, you have the accused person in front of you, what else do you need? How could a database help
Re: (Score:2)
In the event that I am arrested and a DNA sample is needed to prove my innocence, the authorities and my legal representation may take the sample at that time. In any other circumstance, anyone requesting a DNA sample from me will get a resounding go fuck yourself!
You first, judge (Score:2)
criminals can already fake their DNA (Score:4, Interesting)
Unfortunately a criminal can very easily hide their DNA by injecting foreign blood into their circulatory system. It has been done, according to Wikipedia.
Wikipedia says [wikipedia.org]: Dr. John Schneeberger of Canada raped one of his sedated patients in 1992 and left semen on her underwear. Police drew Schneeberger's blood and compared its DNA against the crime scene semen DNA on three occasions, never showing a match. It turned out that he had surgically inserted a Penrose drain into his arm and filled it with foreign blood and anticoagulants.
This means that criminals have a way to bypass DNA checks and hide their identity. It's harder than making a fake ID card, but it's still relatively easy. Therefore, a national universal DNA database would not help to catch the smartest (and probably most dangerous) of the criminals. It could help to catch a few stupid or clueless criminals, but these are not too dangerous compared to the smarter ones.
Therefore DNA evidence is not the final answer to whether a person is guilty. It can contribute to an investigation, but no one must base a decision solely on DNA identification. With this in mind, the ROI of a massive universal national DNA database may be much lower than this judge thinks.
Not cool (Score:2)
Two of our greatest statesmen (Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, respectively) have said the following:
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.
Mouth swab? (Score:2)
-b.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/ne ws/2007/08/27/ndna127.xml [telegraph.co.uk]
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.
Lynne Featherstone, a Liberal Democrat frontbencher, told The Daily Telegraph that she wanted a full parliamentary inquiry into the "shocking" number of errors.
So for whatever reason (and spelling seems to be common), a huge amount of the database is wrong. Those are amazing figures.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is only a matter of time until more people notice that there are alternatives like Madrid-Barajas, Paris-CDG, Amsterdam-Schiphol and quite a few others. Every single one of them is so much more comfortable and better organised than Heathrow it is simply unreal. Prices are comparable if not lower. It may be slower by half an hour to an hour, but this is easily compensated by the considerably quicker security and customs.
The only reason to fly through Heathr
Re: (Score:2)
It'll be nice when the Irish take away a lot of the Brits' business :) Call it one more small payback for centuries of tyranny and death.
-b.