Just In Case They Commit Future Crimes?

Subtitled: DNA is your friend – especially if you’re an authoritarian government

God bless Her Majesties Benevolent Government tm ‘eh…. always looking to protect her loyal subjects, even if it’s at the expense of the privacy of future loyal subjects who may, or may not, ever commit a crime [let alone a violent one] in their entire lives but who will end up in the policeman’s database anyway.

You may recall a post we made in February of last year about the government in Britain trying to force everyone over the age of 16 to deposit their finger prints into a government database….. well, the home of big brother is at it again.

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.

Gary Pugh, director of forensic sciences at Scotland Yard and the new DNA spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo), said a debate was needed on how far Britain should go in identifying potential offenders, given that some experts believe it is possible to identify future offending traits in children as young as five.

What parent in their right mind would allow the police to take DNA samples of their five year old because of something her or she may have done at kindergarten?

By the Daghda’s great red beard (since it’s St. Patties Day and all) will they be taking spit samples from kids for playing “you show me your’s and I’ll show you mine” behind the garbage bins at recess now just in case one or more of the players turn into prostitutes?

‘If we have a primary means of identifying people before they offend, then in the long-term the benefits of targeting younger people are extremely large,’ said Pugh. ‘You could argue the younger the better. Criminologists say some people will grow out of crime; others won’t.

(emphasis mine)

And what about the DNA samples taken from those who “grow out” of their potentially criminal ways? At what point do those records disappear, or, having been identified as a potential criminal at the tender age of 5 (or younger) are they consigned to the database forever …. just in case.

Hell, why bother going through all the muss and fuss of waiting until they go to school and trying to catch the little beggars exhibiting signs of future criminal behaviour, I mean after all, the truly devious future criminal just might be crafty enough right from the moment of birth to evade detection – better grab a sample as soon as they pop out just in case ‘eh?

– and don’t forget to grab a ‘wee bit of mummy while she’s laying there on her back and not paying much attention to what’s going on….. who the hell knows what she might do later on and it’s always better to be safe than sorry ain’t it?

It’s no friggen wonder films like 1984, Children of Men, and V For Vendetta, are set in Britain is it?

According to Pugh

We have to find who are possibly going to be the biggest threat to society.

Government intrusion into peoples lives based on what the government psychologist thinks they might do at some point in the future……. I think we already know the answer to your question Mr. Pugh, the people who represent the biggest threat to a free society are people just like you.

Trackposted to Rosemary’s Thoughts, third world county, McCain Blogs, A Newt One- Chris Hill on tonight, DragonLady’s World, Adam’s Blog, Right Truth, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Stuck On Stupid, Leaning Straight Up, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

This entry was posted by stageleft on Monday, March 17th, 2008 and is filed under Authoritarianism, International, Privacy & Civil Rights. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Recommend this Post @ Progressive Bloggers

2 Responses to “Just In Case They Commit Future Crimes?”

  1. Karen on March 18th, 2008 at 10:50 am

    Holy mother of god. There are reasons to want fingerprints and DNA on file (or at least for parents to have records of both those things), but not the reasons that were given in the article. I think those items should be readily available for parents to have, and then, if it’s ever necessary, the parents or the child (as an adult) may share the information with whomever they choose. Police departments around here routinely set up “booths” at fairs and events, and fingerprint children, for free, but the fingerprint cards are given to the parents.

  2. Post of the Day for March 17, 2008 on March 20th, 2008 at 7:25 am

    [...] by Stageleft:. Life on the left side : Just In Case They Commit Future Crimes? |Edit [...]

Causes & Sponsors

Recent Comments

  • Dr.Dawg: I know, cheap shot, but shouldn’t that be “Thinner Mike Duffy?”
  • Looney Canuck: Someone pointed it out to me this morning on the bus. I’m skeptical that it is as bad as...
  • Throbbin: I don’t like critical thinking. Gums up the brain.
  • Ti-Guy: “Kim Kierans, head of the King’s School of Journalism, was surprised to hear Duffy’s comments. She...
  • Mike Brock: I’m skeptical that carbon taxes within ranges we’d generally consider marginal would do much,...
  • Throbbin: What’s a Carbon Tax if it’s not a marginal tax-increase? It wouldn’t require “major...
  • Mike Brock: And by “outlawed”, I meant “outlined”. I mean, I’d put moving to carbon...
  • Mike Brock: At the end of the day, unpopular measures will still meet public scrutiny. Marginal tax increases are one...
  • Throbbin: Originally Posted By Mike BrockThis may be the perfect rationale for that old adage â�� Some things...
  • Mike Brock: And on a side note: I really don’t care what people think of my motives here. I’m not here to...

Recent Trackbacks


Disclaimer: The writings, musing, comments, thoughts, and ideas, put forward within the stageleft.info domain belong solely to their individual authors who hold ultimate responsibility for them. While here be mindful of the words of Buddha: Believe nothing just because a so-called wise person said it. Believe nothing just because a belief is generally held. Believe nothing just because it is said in ancient books. Believe nothing just because it is said to be of divine origin. Believe nothing just because someone else believes it. Believe only what you yourself test and judge to be true.

Designed by Gabfire slightly modified by stageleft