Here here - especially the poem by the pastor, which oddly I was going to quote in a future post on this very issue.

The DNA issue is a non-starter as far as I am concerned. I own all rights to and on my DNA (and you own all of yours), since it is the most basic definition of "the individual". My right to ownership of my DNA and hence body and life is a fundamental right - a given. If I do not have that right, then I have no fundamental right to ownership of goods or properties purchased, intellectual material created, and so on; and I have no right to my vote. Either I own my DNA or I own nothing at all. This is an essential, starting principle of freedom; or we have no freedom.

Furthermore, if I don't own my DNA then no-one owns my DNA either, nor can any organisation, since these are confederacies or federations of individuals who, by extension, do not own their own DNA either. Unless we want to go down the road of violating the second given in liberal democracy - that all individuals have equal rights. Here there is an argument that convicted criminals have restricted rights for the duration of their sentence, and that this may include inclusion on a DNA database for that duration. However, unless you wish to criminalise the public as a whole, a DNA database of non-convicted criminals is itself, by definition, criminal.

Therefore holding my DNA on a database, unless convicted by a jury of my peers for a specified crime held on statute books and created by a parliament which I elect, without my prior written permission - which you will not get - is by fundamental principles of liberty and liberal democracy a criminal act, must be so-recognised by parliament and punished appropriately. QED.

"I own all rights to and on my DNA (and you own all of yours), since it is the most basic definition of "the individual". My right to ownership of my DNA and hence body and life is a fundamental right - a given"

I so wish that was true Ian, (and the rest of what you wrote) but it isn't, and most people simply do not realise how much damage the authoritarians in Westminster have done already. Just look below at articles I've quickly mustered up. It's freightening. Innocent peoples DNA can be kept forever. You can have a sample forcably taken. 5.2% of the UK are already on it. It is used for "genetic research" (G.R. my hat! Bioweapons, big pharma and Insurance). This really is a liberty that we MUST not be submissive about. It is Fascist. People must realise the danger.

Police may be given power to take DNA samples in the street
Thursday August 2, 2007
The Home Office is considering giving the police the power to take a DNA sample on the street, without taking the suspect to a police station, as well as taking samples from suspects in relatively minor offences such as littering, speeding or not wearing a seat belt.
The Guardian. Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/genes/article/0,,2139673,00.html

Police are allowed to Keep DNA of Innocent, say UK Law Lords
23/07/2004
Police are allowed to keep DNA of Innocent, say UK Law Lords
In light of a lacuna of cases defining the application of DNA and biometric

DNA samples obtained for analysis from the collection of DNA at crime scenes and from samples taken from individuals in police custody can be held in the National DNA database.
The UK’s database is the largest of any country: 5.2% of the UK population is on the database.
The Home Office
Source: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/science-research/using-science/dna-database/

The new GeneWatch report ...recommends:
an end to the practice of allowing genetic research using the database;
Source: http://www.genewatch.org/article.shtml?als%5Bcid%5D=539478&als%5Bitemid%5D=507903

New Police Powers To Bring Criminals To Justice
The Home Office
8 April 2004
Police officers can now take fingerprints and DNA samples from arrested persons detained at police stations, Home Office Minister Caroline Flint announced today.
Source: http://press.homeoffice.gov.uk/press-releases/New_Police_Powers_To_Bring_Crimi?version=1

We call on the Home Secretary to amend the law so that the DNA records of people who are innocent are no longer kept indefinitely.
http://campaigns.libdems.org.uk/dna

Police to retain DNA records of cleared suspects
Published Friday 23rd July 2004 11:09 GMT
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/07/23/police_dna_retention/

EVERYONE: Please join organisations that will fight this tooth an nail. It is far more serious to your way of life than 'terrorism' or anything else. There really is no going back. Copies of this database are no doubt already being replicates and spread by provate companies.

Activism by ALL people is needed!

Living with;
in China, donor organs are harvested from executed criminals and sold to other countries, and DNA data, along with other specifics, are collected from these convicts, leading to the commercialisation of the human being. There is enough evidence that databases of this kind have been created and used for over a century, always to the detriment of people. The arguement that this is the best form of evidence base to convict criminals is compelling, but the reality and track history of abuse of these systems, in my opinion, outweighs the benefits. Details will be traded to private corperations, and at some stage evidence will emerge of abuse. At which point will it become apparent that we are trading human beings for profits?.

oh, I forgot to mention that biometrics and the genetic disciplines were created by eugenicists for human analysis. This analysis must logically lead to the discovery of a "better breed", at which point, the rest become disposable, maybe via genome specific viruses. Those that think this is crazy , ought to take a look at history between 1900 and the present

More intelligent and worthwhile contributions. Yes, the conclusions you draw are the inevitable path to all this.

There were (and currently are) research teams developing human cloning techniques. As time has rolled on, some have been exposed, most have not. Regulations prohibiting this work are utterly useless, other than pacifying the publics hostility to such work. But bio-research companies are beavering away in their unregulated labs all trying to discover some aspect of cell biology to enable them (or rather their company) to make millions.

Assuming that we have greater then say 50 years left before enviromental, religious, physical and social armageddon, I believe you are absolutly right. A master breed human will be created, most likely for military use at first. But of course, years down the line, the better breed will actually turn out to be a worse breed, such is their ignorance and maniacal intentions.

What you speak of in not crazy talk to anyone who has studied the field from an insider or from the perspective of a casual observer. All genetic research points towards 'genetic perfection'. I totally agree, those people who dont have this genertic perfection (USam perfect teeth and TV/public adoration or acceptability is a very mild analagy) or those who cant afford to "rectify" it will in some way be trashed by society. Whether this means people sleeping on the streets or deliberate extermination is another part of this issue which we must start thinking about. It WILL be a real-world issue one day.

1
Ten myths about the police National DNA Database
February 2008
Background
In England and Wales, the police now take DNA samples routinely without consent
from anyone aged ten or above who is arrested in connection with any recordable
offence. Recordable offences include being drunk and disorderly, taking part in an
illegal demonstration and minor acts of criminal damage by children, caused by
kicking footballs or throwing snowballs. A false accusation is sufficient to be arrested
on suspicion of committing an offence. All DNA samples are kept permanently by the
companies that analyse them, and the computerised DNA profiles and personal data
(such as name and ethnic group) are also kept permanently on the National DNA
Database, even if a person is never charged or is acquitted.
In Scotland, DNA may be taken on arrest for any imprisonable offence and
computerised DNA profiles and samples are kept permanently if the individual is
convicted. However, the Scottish Parliament voted against permanent retention of
DNA from innocent people, in May 2006. Instead, police powers were expanded to
allow temporary retention (for up to 5 years) from a much smaller number of people
who had been charged but acquitted of a serious violent or sexual offence.
In Northern Ireland, the law is the same as in England and Wales, but it has not yet
been fully implemented.
Myth 1. Keeping more people’s records on the DNA database will make it more
effective
The value of entering increasing numbers of DNA profiles from individuals on the
Database (unrelated to the reason for arrest) is that it may allow investigation of a
past crime to be re-opened, by unexpectedly identifying a new suspect. The purpose
of retaining an individual’s DNA profile on a database is to treat them as a suspect for
any future crime. Keeping DNA profiles from convicted criminals has been shown to
be effective, as has collecting more DNA from crime scenes. But keeping DNA
profiles from unconvicted people on the Database has not helped to solve more
crimes: the proportion of recorded crimes detected using DNA has not increased in
the last 5 years, despite 2 million more people’s records being kept. The Government
has provided evidence of DNA matches with unconvicted persons, but matches are
not the same as prosecutions or convictions – many matches occur with victims or
passers-by or are false matches. The number of false matches will increase as the
Database gets bigger.
Myth 2. Keeping the records of unconvicted people on the DNA database
makes us all safer
If people are a danger to society, it makes sense to keep their DNA profiles on the
Database. But vulnerable people may be put at risk by being on the Database,
because an individual’s computerised DNA profile can be used to trace their
movements or identify relatives. If a person’s DNA sample is also accessed, other
personal information about their health may also be obtained. If criminals can
infiltrate the system they may be able to use it to identify people whose identity is
protected, including vulnerable women or children, or people in witness protection
schemes. The permanent retention of records of arrest, linked to DNA, also means 2
there is significant potential for individuals to suffer erosions of their rights. Potential
abuses could include: refusal of visas or access to visa waiver schemes (such as that
operated by the US); refusal of employment; and excessive Government or police
surveillance (of individuals or selected groups of people).
Myth 3. Removing the records of unconvicted people would allow murders and
rapists to walk free
Adopting a policy of removal of records in line with Scotland’s would make no
difference to cases such as the Ipswich and Sally-Ann Bowman murders. The
chance of a crime scene DNA profile matching an individual’s profile on the DNA
Database is higher in Scotland than in England and Wales, even though most people
have their records removed from the Database on acquittal in Scotland. Keeping
records of vulnerable women and children on the Database does not make them
safer, because of the danger of misuse.
Myth 4. Individuals with records on the Database will only be identified if they
have committed a serious crime
Most people whose names are sent from the Database to the police in ‘match
reports’ are not subsequently convicted of any crime: for example, they may have
been at the crime scene earlier in the day, or the match may be a false one. In
addition, all Police National Computer records are now kept permanently, linked to
the National DNA Database. Information contained in these records may be used to
refuse someone a visa or a job, even if they have never been convicted of a crime.
The retention of permanent records of arrest is unprecedented in British history.
Myth 5. Information will only be shared with other countries if it is needed to
investigate a serious offence
There is now a presumption in favour of data-sharing across the European Union for
the purposes of crime prevention and detection. However, other European countries
only keep DNA profiles of convicted criminals permanently on their databases,
whereas the Database in England and Wales contains DNA profiles from around a
million unconvicted people, about 100,000 of whom are under 18. Although the police
in other countries will not be given direct access to the DNA database, a plan is being
developed to allow them to submit crime scene DNA profiles and to receive reports
on matches with individuals’ profiles on the Database. A worst case scenario is that
someone who infiltrates the law enforcement system of another country could use
this system to track down a potential victim, by submitting a DNA profile obtained
from, say, the toothbrush of a child, rather than a crime scene. Other governments –
for example, the US - may also seek records of arrest, or the DNA profiles of named
individuals.
Myth 6. DNA evidence is foolproof
DNA evidence is not foolproof: false matches can occur by chance, especially if
the DNA profile from the crime scene is not complete. The National DNA
Database Annual Report 2005/06 states that between May 2001 and April 2006,
50,434 matches with crime scene profiles, or 27.6% of the total number of match
reports, involved a list of potential suspects, not a single suspect, being given to
the police, because matches with multiple records on the Database were made.
The increasing use of Low Copy Number (LCN) DNA analysis – which allows a
DNA profile to be extracted from a single cell – has led the Director of the
Forensic Institute in Edinburgh to warn that innocent people may be wrongly 3
identified as suspects as a consequence of being on the Database. For example,
a single cell of DNA can be transferred from someone who had never been at a
crime scene, simply because they had earlier shaken hands with the perpetrator.
The LCN technique was strongly criticised by the judge in the Omagh bombing
trial.
Myth 7. Keeping individuals’ DNA profiles on the Database helps to exonerate
innocent people who have been falsely accused of committing crimes
A DNA database is not required to provide evidence of guilt or innocence when there
is a known group of suspects for a specific crime: a computerised DNA profile can be
obtained from each individual and compared directly with a crime scene DNA profile.
A database of individual DNA profiles is therefore unnecessary to exonerate an
innocent person – their DNA profile can be taken directly from them, rather than
looked up on a database. The ‘added value’ of putting individuals on a database is
only to introduce new suspects into an investigation.
Myth 8. The Database can only be used to identify an individual, not for other
purposes
The Database may be used for any “purposes related to the prevention or detection
of crime”. Uses now include: familial searching (using partial DNA matches to try to
identify the relatives of a suspect); searching by name; and undertaking various types
of genetic research (including controversial attempts to predict ethnic appearance
from DNA). Undertaking genetic research using the Database or samples is a breach
of the usual ethical requirements for consent to such research.
Myth 9: Putting everybody on the Database would be fairer and would help to
solve more crimes
To put everyone on the database would require DNA to be taken from all British
residents and visitors, by force if necessary, sent to laboratories and analysed, and
put on the computer database, linked with each person’s name and address. This
would be an enormous and expensive distraction from solving crimes, as well as
increasing the likelihood of errors and misuse. If everyone in the world was on a DNA
Database this would lead to more crimes, not less, because of the danger of misuse
by governments and infiltration by organised criminals, who could use it to track
victims and political opponents.
Myth 10. People’s DNA profiles, samples and personal details can only be
accessed by a small number of people
Copies of the personal information collected by the police when someone is arrested
– such as name and ethnic appearance – are sent with people’s DNA samples to the
commercial laboratories which analyse and store the samples, rather than directly to
the central DNA Database. Records of arrest – although not the DNA profiles
themselves - are also kept on the Police National Computer (PNC). A wide range of
agencies, including potential employers, can access information from the PNC.
GeneWatch UK, 60 Lightwood Road, Buxton, Derbyshire, SK17 7BB
Phone: 01298 24300
Email: mail@genewatch.org Website: www.genewatch.org
Registered in England and Wales Company Number 3556885

Ten myths about the police National DNA Database
February 2008
Background
In England and Wales, the police now take DNA samples routinely without consent
from anyone aged ten or above who is arrested in connection with any recordable
offence. Recordable offences include being drunk and disorderly, taking part in an
illegal demonstration and minor acts of criminal damage by children, caused by
kicking footballs or throwing snowballs. A false accusation is sufficient to be arrested
on suspicion of committing an offence. All DNA samples are kept permanently by the
companies that analyse them, and the computerised DNA profiles and personal data
(such as name and ethnic group) are also kept permanently on the National DNA
Database, even if a person is never charged or is acquitted.
In Scotland, DNA may be taken on arrest for any imprisonable offence and
computerised DNA profiles and samples are kept permanently if the individual is
convicted. However, the Scottish Parliament voted against permanent retention of
DNA from innocent people, in May 2006. Instead, police powers were expanded to
allow temporary retention (for up to 5 years) from a much smaller number of people
who had been charged but acquitted of a serious violent or sexual offence.
In Northern Ireland, the law is the same as in England and Wales, but it has not yet
been fully implemented.

Myth 1. Keeping more people’s records on the DNA database will make it more effective

The value of entering increasing numbers of DNA profiles from individuals on the
Database (unrelated to the reason for arrest) is that it may allow investigation of a
past crime to be re-opened, by unexpectedly identifying a new suspect. The purpose
of retaining an individual’s DNA profile on a database is to treat them as a suspect for
any future crime. Keeping DNA profiles from convicted criminals has been shown to
be effective, as has collecting more DNA from crime scenes. But keeping DNA
profiles from unconvicted people on the Database has not helped to solve more
crimes: the proportion of recorded crimes detected using DNA has not increased in
the last 5 years, despite 2 million more people’s records being kept. The Government
has provided evidence of DNA matches with unconvicted persons, but matches are
not the same as prosecutions or convictions – many matches occur with victims or
passers-by or are false matches. The number of false matches will increase as the
Database gets bigger.

Myth 2. Keeping the records of unconvicted people on the DNA database makes us all safer

If people are a danger to society, it makes sense to keep their DNA profiles on the
Database. But vulnerable people may be put at risk by being on the Database,
because an individual’s computerised DNA profile can be used to trace their
movements or identify relatives. If a person’s DNA sample is also accessed, other
personal information about their health may also be obtained. If criminals can
infiltrate the system they may be able to use it to identify people whose identity is
protected, including vulnerable women or children, or people in witness protection
schemes. The permanent retention of records of arrest, linked to DNA, also means 2
there is significant potential for individuals to suffer erosions of their rights. Potential
abuses could include: refusal of visas or access to visa waiver schemes (such as that
operated by the US); refusal of employment; and excessive Government or police
surveillance (of individuals or selected groups of people).

Myth 3. Removing the records of unconvicted people would allow murders and rapists to walk free

Adopting a policy of removal of records in line with Scotland’s would make no
difference to cases such as the Ipswich and Sally-Ann Bowman murders. The
chance of a crime scene DNA profile matching an individual’s profile on the DNA
Database is higher in Scotland than in England and Wales, even though most people
have their records removed from the Database on acquittal in Scotland. Keeping
records of vulnerable women and children on the Database does not make them
safer, because of the danger of misuse.

Myth 4. Individuals with records on the Database will only be identified if they have committed a serious crime

Most people whose names are sent from the Database to the police in ‘match
reports’ are not subsequently convicted of any crime: for example, they may have
been at the crime scene earlier in the day, or the match may be a false one. In
addition, all Police National Computer records are now kept permanently, linked to
the National DNA Database. Information contained in these records may be used to
refuse someone a visa or a job, even if they have never been convicted of a crime.
The retention of permanent records of arrest is unprecedented in British history.

Myth 5. Information will only be shared with other countries if it is needed to investigate a serious offence

There is now a presumption in favour of data-sharing across the European Union for
the purposes of crime prevention and detection. However, other European countries
only keep DNA profiles of convicted criminals permanently on their databases,
whereas the Database in England and Wales contains DNA profiles from around a
million unconvicted people, about 100,000 of whom are under 18. Although the police
in other countries will not be given direct access to the DNA database, a plan is being
developed to allow them to submit crime scene DNA profiles and to receive reports
on matches with individuals’ profiles on the Database. A worst case scenario is that
someone who infiltrates the law enforcement system of another country could use
this system to track down a potential victim, by submitting a DNA profile obtained
from, say, the toothbrush of a child, rather than a crime scene. Other governments –
for example, the US - may also seek records of arrest, or the DNA profiles of named
individuals.

Myth 6. DNA evidence is foolproof

DNA evidence is not foolproof: false matches can occur by chance, especially if
the DNA profile from the crime scene is not complete. The National DNA
Database Annual Report 2005/06 states that between May 2001 and April 2006,
50,434 matches with crime scene profiles, or 27.6% of the total number of match
reports, involved a list of potential suspects, not a single suspect, being given to
the police, because matches with multiple records on the Database were made.
The increasing use of Low Copy Number (LCN) DNA analysis – which allows a
DNA profile to be extracted from a single cell – has led the Director of the
Forensic Institute in Edinburgh to warn that innocent people may be wrongly 3
identified as suspects as a consequence of being on the Database. For example,
a single cell of DNA can be transferred from someone who had never been at a
crime scene, simply because they had earlier shaken hands with the perpetrator.
The LCN technique was strongly criticised by the judge in the Omagh bombing
trial.

Myth 7. Keeping individuals’ DNA profiles on the Database helps to exonerate innocent people who have been falsely accused of committing crimes

A DNA database is not required to provide evidence of guilt or innocence when there
is a known group of suspects for a specific crime: a computerised DNA profile can be
obtained from each individual and compared directly with a crime scene DNA profile.
A database of individual DNA profiles is therefore unnecessary to exonerate an
innocent person – their DNA profile can be taken directly from them, rather than
looked up on a database. The ‘added value’ of putting individuals on a database is
only to introduce new suspects into an investigation.

Myth 8. The Database can only be used to identify an individual, not for other purposes

The Database may be used for any “purposes related to the prevention or detection
of crime”. Uses now include: familial searching (using partial DNA matches to try to
identify the relatives of a suspect); searching by name; and undertaking various types
of genetic research (including controversial attempts to predict ethnic appearance
from DNA). Undertaking genetic research using the Database or samples is a breach
of the usual ethical requirements for consent to such research.

Myth 9: Putting everybody on the Database would be fairer and would help to solve more crimes

To put everyone on the database would require DNA to be taken from all British
residents and visitors, by force if necessary, sent to laboratories and analysed, and
put on the computer database, linked with each person’s name and address. This
would be an enormous and expensive distraction from solving crimes, as well as
increasing the likelihood of errors and misuse. If everyone in the world was on a DNA
Database this would lead to more crimes, not less, because of the danger of misuse
by governments and infiltration by organised criminals, who could use it to track
victims and political opponents.

Myth 10. People’s DNA profiles, samples and personal details can only be accessed by a small number of people

Copies of the personal information collected by the police when someone is arrested
– such as name and ethnic appearance – are sent with people’s DNA samples to the
commercial laboratories which analyse and store the samples, rather than directly to
the central DNA Database. Records of arrest – although not the DNA profiles
themselves - are also kept on the Police National Computer (PNC). A wide range of
agencies, including potential employers, can access information from the PNC.

GeneWatch UK, 60 Lightwood Road, Buxton, Derbyshire, SK17 7BB
Phone: 01298 24300
Email: mail@genewatch.org Website: www.genewatch.org
Registered in England and Wales Company Number 3556885

Mr Gandolf.
Thank you very much for that superb contribution. I am indeed lucky to have so many intelligent and informed people contribute to this blog.

In appreciation...
lwtc247

Put young children on DNA list, urge police·
'We must target potential offenders'
- Teachers' fury over 'dangerous' plan

Mark Townsend and Anushka Asthana The Observer,
Sunday March 16 2008

Primary school children should be eligible for the DNA database if they exhibit behaviour indicating they may become criminals in later life, according to Britain's most senior police forensics expert.

SOURCE and full story here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/mar/16/youthjustice.children?gusrc=rss&feed=uknews

- This is a disgusing but 100% predictable development.
Please good people, RESIST the DNA database NOW - lwtc247