Why would I not want the Gardai to know my DNA profile?

I don't understand the argument about civil liberties here.

If it was operationally possible, why would the Gardai not collect everyone's profile?

What have innocent people to lose?

There will be mismatches extremely rarely, so I could get a knock on the door , telling me that my dna had been found in a rape case in Donegal.

But far more people wouldn't even be suspects, because the Dna would show that it was not them.

But the Gardai would be able to catch the guilty much easier.

I must be missing something here.

I think what most people dislike is the thought of giving the state any more power over its citizens than it already has. people for the most part don't trust the state, and with good cause. plus the fact that DNA is not 100% foolproof

I agree, a database should be compiled (&fingerprinting).

I think it should be independent of the guards and with lots of safety checks. Otherwise, amongst the paranoid at least, there would be a fear of being framed (assuming the DNA/fingerprints could be taken from the holding and placed elsewhere - maybe that's not even possible).

In general I think Civil liberties should relocate to the Middle East, Africa & Latin America - I cant recall the last good service they performed in Ireland.

The innocent have nothing to fear (except from criminals), its about time the innocent allowed the State to turn the tables on criminal elements.

it would be open to all kinds of abuse by agents of the state, think of it...you are giving them evidence to do as they please with, you would have to be nuts to trust the state with your DNA. anyway its all just kite flying, if they ever tried it on it would be challenged through the courts

In a nutshell because we cannot trust the state or its agents not to abuse their power.

Betsy Og said:

In general I think Civil liberties should relocate to the Middle East, Africa & Latin America - I cant recall the last good service they performed in Ireland.

Click to expand...

Is this a joke? Seriously, is it?

Let's say a Garda takes a personal dislike to me and wants to convict me of a crime, I have not committed.

He has my DNA profile on a database. How can he abuse that profile?

Vanilla said:

In a nutshell because we cannot trust the state or its agents not to abuse their power.

Click to expand...

What you appear to be saying is that since power is open to abuse the agents of the State should not have, or be able to exercise, power...?

Using that line of reasoning then we arguably shouldn't have a police force, a revenue collection service, an army, or enforceable laws of any kind.

The exercise of power by the State (in this case via it's holding of information) always requires checks and balances to prevent abuse - I'm not sure why the above idea should be dismissed out of hand without weighing up the pros and cons, purely on the basis of potential for abuse.

It's a debate worth happening but I would naturally be suspicious of such databases. There is a danger that it could encourage lazy policing and juries who get blinded by the presence of DNA evidence and ignore other evidence that proves a persons innocence. Already we see DNA evidence been treated like it is infallible.

There is also a question as to whether any Government should have the amount of genetic information on its citizens that this Database would provide. Maybe we have nothing to fear in Ireland but what if Hitler or some other dictator came to power and decided to engage in a bit of ethical cleansing. He wouldn't have to work hard to identify anyone that didn't fit his ideal genetic make up. I admit that this argument is weak in many ways but I wouldn't trust this technology to some countries and if that's the case, why should we have it?

I would also have concerns about the cost of running and securing a database. Concerns about the ability of the Government so share information as seen in the US. Concerns about the database being used for civil law matters as well as criminal e.g. Paternity disputes.

Having said all that there are positives to the idea and I am more comfortable with a full database than a partial database just made up of criminals.

it wouldnt be other countries getting their hands on it that would bother me, it would be that fact our own 'bozos' had it that id be scared of..

The Birmingham 6 were convicted on the basis of circumstantial scientific evidence that was then largely regarded as infallible.

T McGibney said:

The Birmingham 6 were convicted on the basis of circumstantial scientific evidence that was then largely regarded as infallible.

Click to expand...

but our honest state and its agents would never do anything like that to one of its citzines

Vanilla said:

Is this a joke? Seriously, is it?

Click to expand...

Well I'm open to being enlightened, but the only time I hear of them is to object to things like gardai using audio surveillance - used to great effect against the Limerick gangs. They appear to me to be handwringing 'do gooder' types, always at hand to defend the 'our rights', but ultimately their output is to make it harder for our justice system to do its work.

Our citizens have more to fear from criminals than from the State. With the exception of fairly isolated incidents in Donegal, have our guards been widely discredited in the last 20 years? I dont think so.

So I'm willing to 'take a few chances' (as some might see it) for the greater good, as fundamentally I dont believe these things will be used 'conspiracy style' against me, and even if they are dont I have plenty of opportunity in the independent court system to state my case (or maybe this goes all the way to the Aras - I wanted to say White House....).

I'd rather criminals to be running in fear than ordinary people.

In terms of trusting the State, I trust them to waste money, have jobs for the boys, take an eternity to do things, but on the other hand I trust them to, fundamentally, have the best interests of the State and its citizens at heart, try to deliver good services for citizens (however flawed - both the citizens and the services).

Put it this way, if the State is such a malign influence, why dont we have separatist Militia type groups (like the Michigan Militia), or why arent we voting in all manner of extreme left types??

I think we're thinking too academically about the DNA point, about whether in principle in an ideal world it should be a good idea - I think we should be pragmatic and imagine if it was in use in Ireland of today would the benefits outweigh the downsides.

Using that logic, why don't we all wear microchips so we can be tracked. You have nothing to fear unless you are up to no good.

I was thinking the same, that way they could track us from the minute we left our homes. where we were, who we met. but theres noting for us to worry about. the state would promise the information would never be open to abuse by anyone!
yippie...we can all sleep easy in our beds at night....well except for the nasty criminals!!

Betsy Og said:

Well I'm open to being enlightened

Click to expand...

Who are the 'civil liberties'? It's FLAC, the Rape Crisis Network, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, the Irish Human Rights commission,among many others. You may not value all that they do, but it is hugely important that they exist. They guard our human rights and right to equality.

I strongly believe in freedom, privacy and the right to bodily integrity in the absence of having been proven to have committed a crime ( or having been charged with a crime in some circumstances) and I would not agree with a generic database being kept of DNA or other records by the State that would fundamentally undermine those rights.

I know that although we live in a democratic country that the state is not beyond corruption. Mandlebrot, your leap from my not wanting a DNA database to not allowing the State to exercise power of any sort is so far fetched that I don't think I need to answer it. The state can and must exercise power however we should keep a close eye on how it is done and jealously guard our rights.

At the risk of being very far-fetched and I'm saying this with a smile on my face- could a Guard abuse this database? I'm not a forensic scientist, but would it be possible for them to 'plant' evidence, conclusively linking a suspect through their DNA to a crime scene? Ie Jimmy's DNA is on the database, Garda takes Jimmy's hair ( or whatever) and plants it at the scene. Ergo Jimmy must have been there. It could be a lifesaver for a lazy Guard, in fact, save them from actually investigating the crime. Or if their tally of nicking the right suspect was below target.

Vanilla said:

the Irish Council for Civil Liberties

Click to expand...

These are the lads I was thinking about.

it all comes down to trust, and if history has thought us anything its that the state cannot be trusted to act in the best intrest of its people. would a DNA data base be abused by the less scrupulous among us, I think most of already know the answer to that.

Betsy Og said:

These are the lads I was thinking about.

Click to expand...

So you find an organisation that campaigned for equal rights for women, decriminalisation of homosexuality etc offensive? God forbid anyone would want to hold the Government to account on human rights issues.

Sunny said:

Using that logic, why don't we all wear microchips so we can be tracked. You have nothing to fear unless you are up to no good.

Click to expand...

a) twould cost too much, b) it might be a teeny bit OTT for the entire population to be constantly monitored. Maybe if we focussed the chipping on violent criminals for starters, sure its just a version of the ankle braclet used in some jurisdictions but no doubt is viewed as a vile and insidious erosion of the rights of serious criminals by our friends in the Irish Council of Civil Liberties.

Back to the DNA - its a once in a lifetime swab. I'd imagine the pattern or whatever is kept on a computer file and the swap of cotton is incinerated. So Lugs Branningan that has us in his sights has nothing to plant on the scene of the crime.

All the database will ever do is quickly focus on some suspects from whom, with the benefit of rapid response, will be yielded more evidence (have less time to line up alibi's, get caught by surveillance etc). If it was even only used for people who were convicted of a serious crime (and that would reap most of the rewards and be a good compromise between all or nothing) it should be a great asset.

As you mention chipping, in view of the horror that is child abductions, is it surprising no-one has ever discussed chipping a child so that, in the event of an abduction, they could be found within minutes (more likely alive & unharmed)? Could it even technically be done? You'd wonder with regard to high risk people (royals, the v wealthy, presidents etc), is it something they have done???....just a thought.

Sunny said:

So you find an organisation that campaigned for equal rights for women, decriminalisation of homosexuality etc offensive? God forbid anyone would want to hold the Government to account on human rights issues.

Click to expand...

All good and laudable of course, but my point (and bear in mind our discussion is solely on the criminal side) is that they seem to be the criminal's biggest ally.

My experience of them was solely in relation to criminals but thank you for enlightening me as to their other good work.