Posted on 04/24/2003 5:51:34 AM PDT by ibheath
Scientist: Everyone Should Be DNA Fingerprinted
Apr 23, 2:39 pm ET
LONDON (Reuters) - Everyone should be DNA fingerprinted to help tackle crime and enhance personal security, the British inventor of the modern forensic technique suggested on Wednesday. Professor Sir Alec Jeffreys, of the department of genetics at the University of Leicester, said existing criminal DNA databases were too small to catch criminal suspects.
"At the moment, we have a criminal DNA database of about two million profiles in the UK," he told reporters as scientists met at Britain's top scientific body, the Royal Society, to celebrate the discovery of DNA 50 years ago.
"The real problem in a typical crime is that even if you get DNA from a crime scene, you can't pick up a suspect because they don't have a record, so one possibility is to extend the database to include the entire population."
Jeffreys said he would feel "very uncomfortable" if such a database was run by the police.
"That would give entirely the wrong perception. But I would certainly be in favor of a database like that being established by a quite independent agency."
The database would carry a person's individual DNA profile and would certify their identity. "So it is not just a criminal investigation database but a personal security and assurance database as well," he said.
DNA fingerprinting -- from the tiniest of human specimens -- is already widely used in criminal investigations, paternity testing and to help settle applications for immigration, affecting the lives of thousands of people in a way Sherlock Holmes could not have dreamed possible.
The technique was developed in 1984 by Jeffreys after he noticed the existence of certain sequences of DNA that do not contribute to the function of a gene are repeated within the gene and in other genes of a DNA sample.
In most cases it provides an accuracy of identification in the tens to hundreds of millions to one. Its use has trapped perpetrators but has also exonerated the innocent who might otherwise have been found guilty due to circumstantial evidence.
Jeffreys said he would feel "very uncomfortable" if such a database was run by the police.
"That would give entirely the wrong perception. But I would certainly be in favor of a database like that being established by a quite independent agency."
Another "well meaning scientist" proposes giving the government (in the UK, thankfully) WAY TOO MUCH information on the public.
Hopefully, this idea will be fought vigorously if ever attempted here in the US.
Or, better yet... let's just call the police & let them know WHERE we're going and WHEN we'll be back?
After all.....if it's just another tool to fight crime...
I have a real problem with this, too, but I am under no illusions about how the bulk of what we laughably call the citizenry will feeeel about it : Tell them it's "for the children" and "if you're not planning to commit a crime, why do you care?" and the sheep will be bleating for this.
Flash! Skippy claims everyone should eat peanut butter!
GM claims everyone should drive Chevies!
And are there any objective opinions?
ANTI-TERROR ÜBER ALLES
baa..aaaaa..aaaa
NO!
Without advocating it, I would hope that any national politician that proposed such an Orwellian system, a system that would utterly destroy liberty as we know it, would shortly thereafter be excreting red mist at a high velocity out of a newly created cranial orifice.
Oh, I forgot to add: Sic Semper Tyrannus!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.