[jambutty]

Nice can of worms Tinkerbelle.

It would appear that most contributors to this thread favour a DNA database for everybody and some advocate taking a sample at birth. They counter objections to a DNA database with the ubiquitous “If you are not doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear” and it would help to catch criminals. It would also help to trace wayward fathers, rapists and help to solve paternity cases. By the way there are also wayward mothers.

But can we just put this into some sort of perspective? What percentage of the population of the UK are convicted, known or suspected criminals? At just 1% that would be around 600,000 people. Out of those 600,000 how many have been convicted on DNA evidence alone? I would suggest that not very many. How many bodies are found in a year with no clue to the identity? DNA would be useful in such cases but should the whole population be screened to establish the identity of just a few people? How many babies are abandoned each year? Are there that many rapists, wayward fathers or paternity suits to warrant mass DNA screening? I accept that just one rape is one rape too many but should the whole of the population have to have their civil rights infringed for the sake of a tiny percentage of the population.

So some 60 million people would be, as ‘The Prisoner’ might have uttered, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed and numbered for the sake of less than 1% of the population. That is a Draconian measure too far.

I can see an argument that i-d cards may infringe civil liberties, but who besides those with something to hide could possibily complain?

A DNA profile is as accurate an ID as you can get these days garinda so if you accept that ID cards may infringe civil liberties then it follows that so does a DNA profile. I’m not a criminal or a heedless man garinda and I object to a DNA database of every living person in this land. Or because I object does that make me a criminal or a heedless man?

Originally Posted by Neil

I think you misunderstood the reason for this thread. No one has had their DNA tested. It was just an example of how samples are taken.

Your reply is a perfect example of how many people half understand something and then jump to the wrong conclusion. This is not an attack on you in any way Junetta, just pointing out that we all need to understand the facts before saying if something is right or wrong.

Pardon me Neil but the opening post stated a fact and then offered an opinion on that fact. The opinion being that Tinkerbelle thought that it would be a good idea to DNA screen school children and then asked, “What do you lot think?” Having offered an opinion and asked a question surely members have a right to reply?

No computer database is safe from prying eyes if they are determined enough and Insurance companies would relish the thought of getting a DNA profile on everybody. “Sorry Mr Bloggs we can’t insure you. Your DNA profile suggest that you have a propensity to having a heart attack before you are 60.” Or “Cancer is waiting for you.”

Or taking it even further down the Big Brother road – no Mr Jones you cannot marry Miss Green because your DNA profile suggest that any offspring might be *!!**????.

If there is to be a national DNA database it should be limited to convicted criminals and volunteers only.

Slowly and ever so surely we are staggering down the road to a total control of the people by the government, industry and commerce. A national DNA database is just the start.

The other day whilst at the checkout in Asda, Blackburn, as I handed over the money I was asked for my postcode.
“Why” I queried.
The checkout girl couldn’t tell me other than she had to ask each person for their postcode.
“Sorry but I do not want to tell you” I replied, took my change and strolled out.

Believe it or not I get phishing phone calls now. Can you tell me if it is Mr so and so who lives at xx? No prizes for guessing what my answer is. A polite answer I might add.