howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
12 November 2009
18:4132922#1
big news item yeterday, just catching up.
at present dna is stored for up to 6 years for people arrested but not charged, or charged and acquitted.
sound very dodgy to me, is this the superstate thing taking over?
i notice that plans to store all e mails from and to our citizens have been put to one side now.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
12 November 2009
20:2832939#2
the superstate as you put it howard has said so because of some human rights thing,so this goverment saw the errors of its way.as far as im concerned if you are inossent or acquitted it should destroyed straight away.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
12 November 2009
20:3732940#3
i fully agree with you brian, i wondered what our political people in particular thought about the subject.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
12 November 2009
20:4232941#4
dont no howard,might end up with a punch and judy show as useall.
12 November 2009
22:5432947#5
All liberty-sapping ideas are sold to us "in the interest of security". I'm so sick of it all that I'm exhausted thinking about it. I can't wait until ID cards become law - looks like I will finally become a criminal coz there's no bloody way I'm getting one.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
13 November 2009
08:1032948#6
This was raised on question time last night, you will find the tories would store DNA results for 5 years as well so not to much diffrence.
so lets get behind it all;
Lets get tough and be tough and not keep pussy footing around this one.
Those convicted criminals should have DNA stored and why not.
I don't agree with storing or holding suspected criminals/associates/non convicted persons youths without proof.
So it needs ironing out, but we have a decision to make, do we want to take on the criminal or not
13 November 2009
08:5732963#7
Why store all cirminals DNA anyway? Why not just the crimes of violence or sex crimes? I genuinely don't know anyone who hasn't committed a criminal act of some sort, whether they were caught or not - don't forget speeding, dropping litter and jay walking are criminal offences, as are many other small but potentially criminal acts. And the woman on TV news today had her DNA stored even though she was not charged with anything. Let's forget the whole saving DNA thing except for major crimes involving high risk to others.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
13 November 2009
09:0032965#8
The debate will go on, interesting how people feel, and how we want on the one hand to deal with criminals then on the other maybe we don't
13 November 2009
09:1532973#9
We all want to deal with criminals, it's how we eal with them that is the discussion. And it does raise the question about at what level of criminality we begin to penalise.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
13 November 2009
09:1632974#10
Yes it does BERN
Debate will go on, just hope we dont get bogged down anfd not want DNA on anyone