×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Judge Says, Record DNA of Everyone In the UK

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the all-in-it-together dept.

The Courts 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.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

403 comments

Identity card not needed anymore (2, Interesting)

javilon (99157) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477745)

You don't need an identity card when you have stored a sample of everyone's dna and dna analysis becomes very cheap, a la Gattacca.

This is what expects us.

Re:Identity card not needed anymore (2, Insightful)

ComradeSnarky (900400) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477857)

I doubt extracting DNA and comparing it against a central database will become as fast as examining an identity card anytime in the near future.

Re:Identity card not needed anymore (5, Funny)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477907)

Then compare core samples through the brain.

Nothing wrong with that, and if you use a bore small enough people won't notice.

Re:Identity card not needed anymore (5, Funny)

Aokubidaikon (942336) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477939)

This is what expects us.

What you say !!
You have no chance to survive make your time.

Pennies (4, Funny)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477747)

I thought this was done already. Which is why they keep pennies in circulation...

Re:Pennies (4, Funny)

soulsteal (104635) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478423)

I keep my penis in circulation for the precise reason of DNA recording, otherwise- oh wait, you said pennies. PENNIES. Ah, nevermind.

Oh, sure. (5, Interesting)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477765)

Why not? In the U.S., don't we already record fingerprints at birth? Let's just all do this.

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. (1)

Drall (1006725) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477817)

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?
Judging by last week's UK 'Protecting our children' story, loosely-defined famous people won't have to submit their DNA, to protect their privacy.

I, for one, welcome our unsubmitted-DNA overlords.

Re:Oh, sure. (4, Funny)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477821)

I'm moving to a deserted island in the middle of the Pacific to start my own country. Anyone care to join me?

Only if your country has mandatory DNA recordings. I want to be protected from the terrorists.

Re:Oh, sure. (5, Funny)

RealGrouchy (943109) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478577)

Only if your country has mandatory DNA recordings. I want to be protected from the terrorists.
And from the children! Oh, god, someone think of the children!

- RG>

Re:Oh, sure. (1)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477941)

Since he proposes taking samples from all visitors I expect this will do for the UK tourist trade what fingerprinting has done for the US overseas tourist trade. http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2006/11/29/entry-t o-us-scares-away-tourism-business/ [homelandstupidity.us]

Re:Oh, sure. (2, Interesting)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478059)

From your link:

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:Oh, sure. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20478535)

According to the policeman on the TV this morning (I live in the UK), it'll boost the tourist trade because they'll feel "safer".

Yeah, right.

I want some of whatever he was smoking.

Re:Oh, sure. (1)

elFarto the 2nd (709099) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478615)

I'm moving to a deserted island in the middle of the Pacific to start my own country. Anyone care to join me?

As a Englishman, that sounds like a good idea.

Regards
elFarto

I find this highly offensive (4, Insightful)

stevedcc (1000313) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477793)

"We have a situation where if you happen to have been in the hands of the police then your DNA is on permanent record. If you haven't, it isn't. It means where there is ethnic profiling going on disproportionate numbers of ethnic minorities get onto the database."

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:I find this highly offensive (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20477827)

I don't think it's the police's fault that black people commit more crimes than white people.

Re:I find this highly offensive (3, Insightful)

stevedcc (1000313) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477891)

I don't think it's the police's fault that black people commit more crimes than white people.

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:I find this highly offensive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20477903)

The majority of people on the database have never been convicted of a crime. Mearly getting arrested gets you put on the database for life.

Re:I find this highly offensive (2, Insightful)

PinkyDead (862370) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477837)

To paraphrase a common /. paradigm:

1. Identify social inequality
2. ??
3. Social inequality resolved

Re:I find this highly offensive (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477839)

Maybe they should look into the cause of the disproportionate numbers?

Re:I find this highly offensive (5, Insightful)

starrsoft (745524) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478151)

Maybe they should look into the cause of the disproportionate numbers?


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:I find this highly offensive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20478679)

Yeah, like maybe more ethnic minorities are committing more crimes?

Good question. Tell you what, go get what percentage of racial group #1's arrests lead to an actual trial, and compare that to the percentages of racial group #2's arrests.

That'll give you a good look at how many people the cops are arresting for the hell of it.

While you're at it, look at the people arrested for resisting arrest, and try and see if they were ever charged with some other crime, that's another good counter for you. If they didn't commit a crime, then for what was this mysterious arrest they were supposedly resisting?

Re:I find this highly offensive (1)

faloi (738831) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477847)

Maybe they should try dealing with the apparent racism and/or social inequality rather than brushing it under the carpet?

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:I find this highly offensive (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20477915)

Maybe they should deal with REALITY, which is that 'ethnic minorities' ARE more likely to be criminal, parasitic wastrels, than the indigenous populations, whose countries they have come into to STEAL from.
After all, they all clearly know they aren't wanted here by the MAJORITY of whites, and non-whites can't seem to produce their own functioning societies.

Re:I find this highly offensive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20477961)

Precisely. Terror laws are used to periodically conduct "random" stop and searches in London for the same purpose - to rebalance the statistics.

Re:I find this highly offensive (2, Interesting)

iainl (136759) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478259)

The current status is that there are all manner of ways to get on the database without actually committing a crime. You can be arrested but not charged, you can be charged but subsequently found innocent, you can have your DNA "voluntarily" taken for all sorts of wide-sweeping investigations and so on. You can even have your DNA taken for elimination purposes as the victim of a crime.

The law, and indeed common sense, says that if you're not convicted of a crime, you shouldn't be treated like you've performed one. So what the Judge is really saying here is that the current composition of the database is a legal anomaly that should be cleared up. Either you can chuck away quite a lot of that data as unreasonable on Civil Liberties grounds, or if it's actually as useful as the Police claim, then the 'fair' solution is to put _everyone_ on there, whether they happen to have been attacked by someone or not.

Either one or the other, and it's up to the politicians, not the judges to decide which.

Re:I find this highly offensive (2, Interesting)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478375)

Or perhaps its not "disproportionate" and ethnic minorities really do have a higher percentage of criminals.

Just because you feel guilty for the acts of your ancestors doesn't make your biased assumptions accurate.

Sounds like a perfect solution to me (2, Funny)

Enlarged to Show Tex (911413) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477797)

Not only does this help the UK achieve zero population growth, it also keeps meddling foreigners out of the country...

This bit says it all... (3, Insightful)

jkrise (535370) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477815)

WHO'S ON THE DATABASE?

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:This bit says it all... (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20477931)

And those 9% white men? You can bet they're nearly all Irish.

Re:This bit says it all... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20478321)

Maybe they should lay off the whiskey then

Re:This bit says it all... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20478367)

Do fuck off and die, idiot.

Re:This bit says it all... (1, Interesting)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477947)

>When the remaining 91% are going to be DNA recorded
Of course, we won't mention the % of the 17 teens shot or stabbed in London this year who are black or the colour of the killers who have been arrested so far. Clue: Considerably higher than 40% were black.

Re:This bit says it all... (1)

iainl (136759) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478329)

Since being a witness or victim of crime is a way to get yourself on the database, as well as being a suspect who is subsequently eliminated from enquiries, you're absolutely correct on that aspect.

What the Judge is saying is that being on the database increases your chances of having something pinned on you. So either the cops need to remove all those innocent people from the database, or put everyone else on too, to make it fair. Police organisations have already told him they don't want to do the former.

Re:This bit says it all... (1)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478557)

As someone who gets grief from drunken teens (12-18) pretty much nightly, I'm all for anything that gets a few more off the streets and out my hair. However, this flies against my other belief that the state has far too much info on us. I don't buy the 'if you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear' line. On the face of it I would agree that if you are found innocent, your DNA should be destroyed (well, the bit the police have, anyway). However, some people are a bit slippery and perhaps something needs to be built in that if you get arrested under suspicion x times then your DNA should be kept for say 5 years.

Re:This bit says it all... (5, Insightful)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478487)

Just for the record, a quick bit of googling shows on london teen murders 2007 showed the following for those who thought this was flamebait:
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:This bit says it all... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20478175)

No women are on the database?

That does sound significantly mis-representative

The other solution is cheaper (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20477855)

Delete the database.

Hello my name is CAGGATATATATATGG (1)

way2trivial (601132) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477883)

I suggest, why bother keeping names at all if mispellings are such a hardship...

let me walk into the "******" ministry and identify my self with a cell sample.. it's just so much easier then!

Re:Hello my name is CAGGATATATATATGG (1)

bhima (46039) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478105)

As long as I can walk into the ministry of whatever and identify myself with a freshly produced stool sample I down with it

'visitors DNA' (4, Insightful)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477897)

A lot of people stated they would refuse to vacation in the States anymore because of the fingerprinting at Customs. This is far, far worse.

Re:'visitors DNA' (1)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478189)

It's already far, far more painful to simply change planes at Heathrow than it is to fly domestically in the US - which isn't any picnic, either.

Backwards Logic (3, Interesting)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477899)

Okay, I can see that the current situation of including people who aren't convicted of a crime is unfair, but to suggest that the only possible solution is to treat everyone as if they have convicted a crime?!
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 ... at them?

Re:Backwards Logic (2, Insightful)

David Off (101038) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478219)

> A spokesman for Prime Minister Gordon Brown said to expand the database would create "huge logistical and bureaucratic issues" and civil liberty concerns.

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 (1)

CmdrGravy (645153) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478485)

It's more likely that Labour have put this judge up to saying this so they can then say:

"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."

I hope someone else can (1)

caluml (551744) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477943)

I hope someone else can adequately express my incredulity and disgust with this. Words are failing me right now. Hopefully Shami from Liberty and any decent MPs will have a few things to say about this.

Re:I hope someone else can (2, Interesting)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478073)

I think that the biggest affect would be the social changes. It is well known that for £50 you can get a car license plate traced, even though only the police are supposed to have access. How many people will be tempted to "just check" their paternity and get a surprise? We already have a principle that adopted children have the right to know and contact their natural parents. It won't be long before this right is extended to children of mothers who "don't know" who the father is, plus those discovered to be illegitimate by their fathers "just checking"? I don't know what the end result will be, and end to normal family based structures or maybe an increase in fidelity as people realise that even a one night stand with someone you don't know could be found out. One thing is certain the social implications are much more than just catching a few more or a few less criminals. The only way round this would be if there was some enforced method of storing hashes of the results only. This would mean that you could check whether a sample was a compete match for anyone (following up with a full comparison just incase of a hashcode collision) , but not check for partial matching such as family members. I don't know how feasible this is, as there are issues of degraded samples, etc.

England & Wales only (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20477951)

In Scotland, DNA is only kept on record if you are convicted. If not, any DNA taken must be destroyed. This new (and insanely stupid) idea has already been rejected http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6979451.stm [bbc.co.uk]

Re:England & Wales only (-1, Flamebait)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478273)

In Scotland, DNA is only kept on record if you are convicted.

It's easier for the Scots though, because if they want to collect it from you again they can get it from the sheep in your backyard.

Re:England & Wales only (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20478511)

Typical Merkin. Go fuck yourself.

Re:England & Wales only (0, Offtopic)

Kev_Stewart (737140) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478667)

Go fuck yourself.
According to the DNA database in the UK, many people have/are doing this already

everyone a criminal (1)

toQDuj (806112) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477979)

And when everyone is a potential criminal.... NO ONE WILL BE! muhahaha. (sto.. adapted from Syndrome in the Incredibles)

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.

Re:everyone a criminal (1)

Hanners1979 (959741) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478123)

Oh, insurance companies in the UK are already coming up with far better ideas - Just today they brought up the possibility of monitoring supermarket loyalty cards to check whether you're eating healthily or not, and charging you (or refusing you) health insurance on that basis.

Could be an interesting political tactic... (5, Interesting)

Loosifur (954968) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477983)

I'm not real familiar with the way the British courts work, but I know that in the US a tactic sometimes used by judges that want a law overturned is to simply enforce the letter of the law. The idea is that the law itself is so flawed that by enforcing it strictly and literally it becomes evident that the law should be changed. Similar thing happened recently where some congressmen tried to reinstitute the draft, the reasoning being that if it's important enough for US soldiers to fight and die in Iraq, then it's important enough for every eligible US citizen to join up. Of course, and this was their point, if it's not that important, then we shouldn't be there. Maybe this judge is making the same point about DNA profiling: either everyone has to be on record, which would raise some serious privacy and legal issues, or no DNA records are kept at all because there isn't a fair way to do it.

Re:Could be an interesting political tactic... (1)

Harlequeen (58292) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478029)

Actually this was pretty much how they dealt with homosexuality in the armed forces. They fought against it all the way to the European courts, and lost. But then they always wanted to lose, but just to be able to blame it on Europe.

Re:Could be an interesting political tactic... (1)

bhima (46039) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478149)

Given that 1/8th is wrong in some way I was thinkng the same thing.

And I think it does point out how stupid it is.

Profiling non-sense (1)

Silentknyght (1042778) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477993)

From the article:

"It includes some 24,000 samples from young people between 10 and 17 years old, who were arrested but never convicted." WHO'S ON THE DATABASE? 5.2% of UK population Nearly 40% of black men 13% of Asian men 9% of white men "It means where there is ethnic profiling going on disproportionate numbers of ethnic minorities get onto the database."
If there are only 24,000 retained records of presumed innocents, and the argument for recording everyone is to eliminate ethnic profiling, I think there is a disconnect. 24,000 people aren't going to affect those percentages. The DNA records aren't at fault for profiling, rather they're indicative of a trend that already exists.

Re:Profiling non-sense (1)

Spad (470073) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478183)

That's only 24,000 under 18s who were arrested but never convicted and are now on the database.

Re:Profiling non-sense (2, Insightful)

Wowsers (1151731) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478283)

Perhaps we should be asking why this has ocurred (recent article):
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:Profiling non-sense (1)

RoverDaddy (869116) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478691)

Well, when you have things going on like a person named "Luxury Yacht" who's name is actually pronounced "Throat-Warbler Mangrove", you're bound to have some spelling errors.

Re:Profiling non-sense (1)

iainl (136759) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478377)

No, that's a mere 24,000 innocent children. Plenty of people over 18 are on the database for reasons other than being convicted of a crime, too.

Against (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20478001)

Senile old fart.

Let's start by asking why the police, politicians, rich, and famous all refuse to be on this database?

Consequences of Air Travel (1)

Double Entendre (1123719) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478011)

I'm sure there are quite a few of you that have had the experience of passing through Heathrow - and those of you have probably also had to do the cumbersome Gatwick-Heathrow exchange (or vice-versa) in order to reach connecting international and/or European flights.

From experience I know that whenever people do this exchange, they have to pass through customs and immigration where they declare that they are not expected to be in England for more than a few hours. Usually they have to present proof of a connecting boarding pass and sometimes, difficult questions can follow. Since they want to do this to "visitors," they'll probably mandate travellers passing through to go through this as well - even if they are not expected to remain in England.

While US air travel has become gruelling, I expect that the UK will rapidly surpass it with an invasive policy like this. I wonder how it will impact tourism and/or one of the largest connecting hubs in the world.

Re:Consequences of Air Travel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20478303)

If this went ahead, it would only apply to England and Wales. I wonder if they will be setting up checkpoints at the border to take DNA from anyone in Scotland heading south.

Re:Consequences of Air Travel (1)

arivanov (12034) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478661)

It will very quickly stop being a connecting hub.

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 Heathrow is to fly to the UK. Flying through Heathrow for USA-EU or USA-elsewhere transit is outright stupid. Plenty of better choices out there.

Over My Dead Body (1)

giafly (926567) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478071)

This will be a bonanza for lawyers, when people like me fight it every step of the way.

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 (1)

giafly (926567) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478199)

Assuming UKG do this, I'm offering a prize of £10,000 for the first person to liberate a significant proportion of the data stored in this database, so I can give it to the press. I'll repeat this offer using my real name if it happens.

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 (2, Informative)

BlueParrot (965239) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478085)

If they do try to put this motion in place then it is time to appeal to the European court of human rights. They have bitch-slapped governments for authoritarian crap before and they can do it again. If that doesn't work then it is time to take to the streets. Identity cards, detentions without trial, and now this, things have gone too far...

DNA from visitors? (3, Interesting)

fotbr (855184) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478095)

Fine. Just don't expect me to visit.

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:DNA from visitors? (1)

ricky-road-flats (770129) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478207)

Exactly the reason I won't visit the US now - fingerprinting us at the border, passing all my details to the US .gov while I'm flying there.... no way.

Re:DNA from visitors? (0, Flamebait)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478275)

Paris has better airshows, and Germany, Spain, and Italy all have better F1 races. Guess I'll take my tourist dollars there instead.
Sure, but where are you going to go (other than the UK) for fine dining? Hmmmm??

Re:DNA from visitors? (0, Offtopic)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478495)

Sure, but where are you going to go (other than the UK) for fine dining? Hmmmm??

      Ahhh the UK, where even salt is considered too spicy. Oh and remember, if in doubt, boil it until it's an even gray color.

Hmm... (1)

Borealis (84417) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478099)

So what do they do if you decline to provide a DNA sample?

Re:Hmm... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20478293)

Probably similar to what happens when you refuse to be fingerprinted
and iris-scanned for the forthcoming ID card
- you lose you job
- you lose access to social security
- you lose access to medical treatment
- you are fined 2000 quid for each offence of not turning up
and they keep this up till you submit or die of starvation.

My grandfather died in the second world war fighting fascism yet
my pathetic generation will be queueing quietly to be fingerprinted;
it sickens me. I've enough computer skills to be able to skip the
country in a couple of years but I pity the poor fuckers I'll be
leaving behind.

Re:Hmm... (1)

u-235-sentinel (594077) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478569)

- you lose you job
- you lose access to social security
- you lose access to medical treatment
- you are fined 2000 quid for each offence of not turning up
and they keep this up till you submit or die of starvation.


what do you loose if you are a visitor?

I'm glad i'am not [jew|indian|chinese|nonwhite] (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20478113)


Imagine if Hitler had this, i bet this gives eugenics supporters a hardon

Chimeras (3, Interesting)

kilonad (157396) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478131)

What about chimeras - people who have two different sets of DNA in the same body? They allegedly make up a small but not insignificant fraction of the population. How will the system deal with them?

Re:Chimeras (0, Offtopic)

KillaBeave (1037250) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478185)

What about chimeras - people who have two different sets of DNA in the same body? They allegedly make up a small but not insignificant fraction of the population. How will the system deal with them?

Is that how Steve Martin got by with saying he "was born a poor black child" in The Jerk?

**ducks

Support UK human rights. (1)

gdr (107158) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478135)

The British Institute of Human Rights should be lobbying the government to reject this proposal, I suggest contacting their president, Sir Stephen Sedley [bihr.org] to point this out.

there remains nowhere left to hide (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20478141)

butt, that doesn't equal lining up to be tagged by infactdead elitist southern baptist philistines.

sun's newclear power repels unprecedented evile
(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 04, @08:20AM (#20462703)
it's both a fairytail & whoreabull malady @once?

previously (dis)allowed post(s):

many of US never look up (or ever really see anything)
(Score:?)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 03, @09:34PM
too busy getting somewhere? we could still afford to pay attention, as it is cost effective, & time efficient.

it's not as though we weren't already being treated to more misinformation than we could ever disbelieve.

infactdead corepirate nazis still WAY off track
(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 01, @09:35AM (#20433195)
it's only a matter of time/space/circumstance.

previous post:
mynuts won 'off t(r)opic'???
(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 30, @10:22AM (#20411119)
eye gas you could call this 'weather'?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8004881114 [google.com] 646406827 [google.com]

be careful, the whack(off)job in the next compartment may be a high RANKing corepirate nazi official.

previous post:
whoreabull corepirate nazi felons planning trips
(Score: mynuts won, robbIE's 'secret' censorship score)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01, @12:13PM (#20072457)
in orbit perhaps? we wouldn't want to be within 500 miles of the naykid furor at this power point.

better days ahead?

as in payper liesense hypenosys stock markup FraUD felons are on their way out? what a revolutionary concept.

from previous post: many demand nazi execrable stop abusing US

we the peepoles?

how is it allowed? just like corn passing through a bird's butt eye gas.

all they (the felonious execrable) want is... everything. at what cost to US?

for many of US, the only way out is up.

don't forget, for each of the creators' innocents harmed (in any way) there is a debt that must/will be repaid by you/US as the perpetrators/minions of unprecedented evile will not be available after the big flash occurs.

'vote' with (what's left in) yOUR wallet. help bring an end to unprecedented evile's manifestation through yOUR owned felonious life0cidal glowbull warmongering execrable.

some of US should consider ourselves very fortunate to be among those scheduled to survive after the big flash/implementation of the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate.

it's right in the manual, 'world without end', etc....

as we all ?know?, change is inevitable, & denying/ignoring gravity, logic, morality, etc..., is only possible, on a temporary basis.

concern about the course of events that will occur should the ife0cidal execrable fail to be intervened upon is in order.

'do not be dismayed' (also from the manual). however, it's ok/recommended, to not attempt to live under/accept, fauxking greed/fear/ego based pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking hypenosys.

consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

More bad data don't help! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20478155)

Privacy concerns aside, before we even TALK about increasing the SIZE of the database, determine what is needed to improve the QUALITY of the data.

12.5% inaccuracy is pretty high. More bad data don't help!

Implementation (3, Funny)

chill (34294) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478193)

If they could get some of the Page 3 Girls [wikipedia.org] to creatively accept "DNA samples", this might work.

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 (2, Interesting)

fallen1 (230220) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478327)

will vanish, for the most part, if it requires giving a DNA sample to visit the country. This is not only intrusive, it is vile and disturbing on more levels than I care to go into this early in the morning. I, for one, would never visit the country if DNA sampling was required to enter.

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 :)

Great (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478331)

I feel so much safer now!

Phfft. You can forget me ever visiting the UK and spending my vacation dollars.

Re:Great (1)

peterprior (319967) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478403)

"Phfft. You can forget me ever visiting the UK and spending my vacation dollars."

It's ok. We don't accept dollars anyway.

Playing Devil's Advocate... (1)

bagboy (630125) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478379)

... you pretty much give DNA samples for free anywhere you go in public... Hair loss, epithelials, urine, feces, etc.... If you go through customs and touch anything your already giving them a sample. This is more about a database that can assist in retrieving records to quickly assist those that need information with it.

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.

Clearing innocents thru DNA does not need a DB (2, Insightful)

wikinerd (809585) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478561)

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:Playing Devil's Advocate... (1)

gentlemen_loser (817960) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478689)

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.

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!

Here's how while maintaining privacy (1)

kanweg (771128) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478395)

DNA should be stored/analyzed at one place, together with a code. The name, address etc. should be at another place, identified by that code. If the police has a sample, they can get it analyzed, but don't have the identity yet. The second organisation should be supervised by a committee. They look at the police report, determine whether its merrits are sufficient to release the name. The database itself cannot be read if there is no majority (e.g., each of the committee members has part of the password to unlock the database).

Bert

You first, judge (1)

frdmfghtr (603968) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478399)

Tell you what judge...if you believe this is necessary, how about having you and your family be the first to submit their DNA to the database?

No! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20478441)

A DNA database would be used only for the "rigorously restricted purpose" of criminal investigation and prosecution? We keep hearing [bbc.co.uk] this cheesy, patronizing and naïve pick-up line.

  • DNA will eventually* be used for pattern matching based deep profiling. Those with "nothing to hide" had better hope they don't share a rare gene sequence with murderers, terrorists or sex offenders.
  • Your DNA will be used by private industry. No matter what promises are made in order to acquire the data, at some point the database will be turned into a revenue stream.
  • It's easy to deliberately pollute a crime scene, and you thought identity theft was a problem?
  • Removing DNA from the database is a non-idea when there's a far greater incentive to preserve backups.
  • A comprehensive database doesn't even need everyones DNA, having a relative on file is enough.
  • I hereby invoke Godwin and ask what the Nazis would have done if such a database was availiable when they came into power. How can any government in a democratic state (especially those imposing ever more invasive and draconian laws) possibly give assurances against future totalitarianism?
  • Here in the UK we've seen our former PM avoid prosecution for acts such as selling peerages and starting a widely opposed and illegal war. What value do assurances have when those in government go unpunished for their crimes?

I'd be joining the record numbers of people emigrating from the UK before I voluntarily submitted to such an unwarranted, unnecessary and venal scheme as this.

One more thing, I don't care about inequality in the DNA database. How could this even be an issue unless having your DNA in the database is a fundamental violation of rights to begin with?

* No, current genetic fingerprinting techniques aren't tailored for such "pre-crime".

criminals can already fake their DNA (3, Interesting)

wikinerd (809585) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478453)

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 (1)

gentlemen_loser (817960) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478461)

As a citizen of the US, I am already displeased with the erosion of civil liberties for the sake of security.

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. ... I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a monied aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs.

We have permitted the creation (as Jefferson alluded to) of a ruling aristocratic class that has taken control and now works solely to support their own interests. History is the greatest teacher of all and yet we ignore her teachings. I do not understand why there are not more people enraged at what has gone on in both countries over the past ten years in the name of security.

In terms of a solution to the problem, the only thing that I could see as workable would be to add term limits for the house and senate, eliminate lobbying from for profit corporate entities, and making campaigns federally funded and capping the amount of money spent to ensure a level playing field.

Our founding fathers envisioned statesmen that would perform public service in office for a period of time and return to the proverbial farm when their term has completed.

One of the things that, as a software engineer, attracts me to open source is that the communities very much function as meritocracies. I'm not sure that something like that would be applicable on a larger, country wide scale, but its a nice idea.

Well, I guess ... (0)

xednieht (1117791) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478573)

Well, I guess this is a bit more civilized than the tattoos of the Nazis.

It is quite apparent from TFA that the Brits are incapable of managing the accuracy of a small amount of data. How will large amounts of data overcome their utter lack accuracy?

And remember databases don't do public profiling, PEOPLE do public profiling.

All technology can be used for beneficial AND malicious purposes, leave it to the bloody Brits to demonstrate the latter.

Trollin' away, have a nice day.

Old News (1)

Anomenat (1152311) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478585)

Why has this just been made public now? Lord Justice Sedley has been promoting this idea for a while, at least since January 2005 when he wrote an article for the London Review of Books [lrb.co.uk] in which he set out his argument. So why is it big news now? Is this cover for some new government initiative or what?

Mouth swab? (1)

b0s0z0ku (752509) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478683)

Make sure to engage in oral sex with a member of the appropriate gender on the flight over (for visitors). Fight the power, corrupt the samples, have fun while doing so!

-b.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...