Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options

DNA data storage

2»

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whowhere wrote: »
    But, I'm asking why people, with views such as yourselves think that DNA being kept on file is a bad idea.

    It sits there, waiting to be compared against DNA that is found at a crime scene. Why is that a bad thing?

    because im not expecting to be found at a crime scene as a suspect, and if i had killed someone, being me id probably just confess it or something

    until then though ive not done anything wrong and i dont expect to so i dont want to have a DNA on file
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    and if i had killed someone, being me id probably just confess it or something

    Lol. If only all criminals confessed because they felt guilty about what they had just done, rather than because they know they're going to get caught regardless and a guilty plea means a lighter sentence, the world would be a friendlier place :lol:
    until then though ive not done anything wrong and i dont expect to so i dont want to have a DNA on file

    That's my point, you may not ever do anything wrong. On the other hand there are a lot of sadistic bastards out there, who will do the worst things imaginable, but get away with it because they've swum below the radar until now. If they leave some DNA at the scene and it's not recorded previously, then chances are they will get away with the crime.

    I'm sorry, but if everyone having their DNA lie on file means we could potentially catch just one murderer or rapist who would otherwise escape justice, then I can only see it as a good thing.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whowhere wrote: »
    Lol. If only all criminals confessed because they felt guilty about what they had just done, rather than because they know they're going to get caught regardless and a guilty plea means a lighter sentence, the world would be a friendlier place :lol:

    yes however i'm talking myself, i admit it wouldcatch more criminals BUT NOT that many since lots of crimes are matters of circumstance ie people would say they were thee but would deny the wrongdoing etc

    it doesn't justify the cost of taking someone's DNA without theirconsent
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    yes however i'm talking myself, i admit it wouldcatch more criminals BUT NOT that many since lots of crimes are matters of circumstance ie people would say they were thee but would deny the wrongdoing etc

    it doesn't justify the cost of taking someone's DNA without theirconsent

    It depends though.

    Say you search somebody's house. You find loads of stolen property in that house. Most they could be prosecuted for is handling.

    If you find DNA/Fingerprints at/near the scene of the crime, then you can be pretty sure they're the ones that comitted the original offence.


    You are right though, a lot of people will argue "I must have been walking past" e.t.c. and sometimes rightly so. But when combined with other evidence then that means you've got yourself a solved crime and an offender brought to justice.
Sign In or Register to comment.