DNA bank yes or no?

[Nimos]

I have been watching a lot of crime series lately and as most people know DNA is very good for identification. So for fun I looked up whether we had a DNA bank (not sure what its called) or not, which hold DNA for all Danish people.

And found that it is not the case and from what I could understand the main reason for this is due to an individuals right to privacy.

So was just interested in hearing if people is against such thing or for it, and what reason you have for your point of view? Also if you know, if your country already have such thing and if you have heard good or bad things about it.

(Obviously it depends on the country you live in etc. how it was used, lets say only for solving crimes, accidents, identification of people.)

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't know. What is its interest rate?

 

[Subduction Zone]

More seriously the US already effective has one:

 

[Brickjectivity]

And found that it is not the case and from what I could understand the main reason for this is due to an individuals right to privacy.

Privacy means that you, the individual, can be trusted. It means you are supporting society. It means you are important and a decision-maker.

Part of the reasoning behind the right to privacy is that the government is not always trustworthy. It (the bureaucracy) always assumes it is trustworthy when it is actually run by a lot of people who are not. They also have terrible reasoning when it comes to guilt such as "Well if you weren't guilty then you wouldn't be investigated would you?" or "If you are innocent then you have nothing to hide do you?" and "The government wouldn't accuse someone falsely! That's ridiculous!" Sometimes it seems like people in government believe themselves to be incapable of error.

Even so, it is not the case that DNA of family members can help in criminal cases. You don't have to find an exact match to infer that someone is guilty. If DNA is found at the scene of a crime and someone is suspect but won't give DNA then family members can be tested.

 

[Nimos]

Privacy means that you, the individual, can be trusted. It means you are supporting society. It means you are important and a decision-maker.

Part of the reasoning behind the right to privacy is that the government is not always trustworthy. It (the bureaucracy) always assumes it is trustworthy when it is actually run by a lot of people who are not. They also have terrible reasoning when it comes to guilt such as "Well if you weren't guilty then you wouldn't be investigated would you?" or "If you are innocent then you have nothing to hide do you?" and "The government wouldn't accuse someone falsely! That's ridiculous!" Sometimes it seems like people in government believe themselves to be incapable of error.

Even so, it is not the case that DNA of family members can help in criminal cases. You don't have to find an exact match to infer that someone is guilty. If DNA is found at the scene of a crime and someone is suspect but won't give DNA then family members can be tested.

But lets assume that its a robbery or something, the chance is that robber would leave DNA traces on the scene. So it doesn't really help that you can test family members if you don't know who to suspect in the first place?

 

[Brickjectivity]

But lets assume that its a robbery or something, the chance is that robber would leave DNA traces on the scene. So it doesn't really help that you can test family members if you don't know who to suspect in the first place?

Lets suppose, instead, that you are a political fugitive. You are a journalist who has disagreed with a powerful politician and are a threat to their authority, and they are using the DNA bank and DNA detectors to track you down. Are you glad, now, that there is a DNA bank?

 

[Nimos]

More seriously the US already effective has one:

But this is not a complete one from what I could understand, meaning that it is only people of interest and former criminals if I understood it correctly. I do think we have something like that in Denmark as well. But im talking about something where you took from everyone, lets say birth for newborns and others would just be collected in whatever way.

 

[Nimos]

Lets suppose, instead, that you are a political fugitive. You are a journalist who has disagreed with a powerful politician and are a threat to their authority, and they are using the DNA bank and DNA detectors to track you down. Are you glad, now, that there is a DNA bank?

Im only referring to it being used in crimes or accidents to identify people, not like a google search engine for everyone.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Privacy means that you, the individual, can be trusted. It means you are supporting society. It means you are important and a decision-maker.

Part of the reasoning behind the right to privacy is that the government is not always trustworthy. It (the bureaucracy) always assumes it is trustworthy when it is actually run by a lot of people who are not. They also have terrible reasoning when it comes to guilt such as "Well if you weren't guilty then you wouldn't be investigated would you?" or "If you are innocent then you have nothing to hide do you?" and "The government wouldn't accuse someone falsely! That's ridiculous!" Sometimes it seems like people in government believe themselves to be incapable of error.

Even so, it is not the case that DNA of family members can help in criminal cases. You don't have to find an exact match to infer that someone is guilty. If DNA is found at the scene of a crime and someone is suspect but won't give DNA then family members can be tested.

I think the first case that was tried using this sort of evidence occurred in my city. The police were very sure that a particular person was guilty. But since this was rather new science it was not enough evidence for a court ordered DNA test. So the city had some detectives put him under surveillance and when he tossed a used coffee cup or something of the like they picked it up and ran a DNA test on that. It matched their decades old sample.

 

[Subduction Zone]

But this is not a complete one from what I could understand, meaning that it is only people of interest and former criminals if I understood it correctly. I do think we have something like that in Denmark as well. But im talking about something where you took from everyone, lets say birth for newborns and others would just be collected in whatever way.

No, it is very complete. Watch the video for an explanation why. Many people that used various DNA tests gave an okay to look for other relatives. As a result almost everyone in the US is covered.

 

[We Never Know]

I have been watching a lot of crime series lately and as most people know DNA is very good for identification. So for fun I looked up whether we had a DNA bank (not sure what its called) or not, which hold DNA for all Danish people.

And found that it is not the case and from what I could understand the main reason for this is due to an individuals right to privacy.

So was just interested in hearing if people is against such thing or for it, and what reason you have for your point of view? Also if you know, if your country already have such thing and if you have heard good or bad things about it.

(Obviously it depends on the country you live in etc. how it was used, lets say only for solving crimes, accidents, identification of people.)

I think most people arrested are swabbed for DNA. They do have a DNA database.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I have been watching a lot of crime series lately and as most people know DNA is very good for identification. So for fun I looked up whether we had a DNA bank (not sure what its called) or not, which hold DNA for all Danish people.

And found that it is not the case and from what I could understand the main reason for this is due to an individuals right to privacy.

So was just interested in hearing if people is against such thing or for it, and what reason you have for your point of view? Also if you know, if your country already have such thing and if you have heard good or bad things about it.

(Obviously it depends on the country you live in etc. how it was used, lets say only for solving crimes, accidents, identification of people.)

I'm not sure I understand the concept you are going for. Is it banking DNA samples in some sort of biological archive?

Would cloning be used for identity theft?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm not sure I understand the concept you are going for. Is it banking DNA samples in some sort of biological archive?

Would cloning be used for identity theft?

In post number five the OP implies that the bank could be used for identifying people. The example he used was DNA left at a crime scene.

And if you watch the video I provided from the information at Ancestry dot com and other such sites that allowed a fair amount of sharing, the US effectively has a DNA data bank already.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Not sure I can answer as to whether it would be a good thing to have a complete bank of everyone's DNA but as we get more information in any such bank, for whatever reasons, one should perhaps hope one is a single child, since culprits have been located in crimes because a relative's DNA was on such and further detective work led on to said culprit.

 

[Nimos]

I'm not sure I understand the concept you are going for. Is it banking DNA samples in some sort of biological archive?

Would cloning be used for identity theft?

Basically its just a place where citizens DNA is kept, for instance when someone is born you could take a sample and store it there, should something happen and the police find some DNA, but don't know who it is, they could run it against this DNA bank and find out who it is.

Not sure what you mean by cloning?

 

[Nimos]

No, it is very complete. Watch the video for an explanation why. Many people that used various DNA tests gave an okay to look for other relatives. As a result almost everyone in the US is covered.

I didn't have time to watch all of it.

Would be interesting to know if the crime solving rate is higher here than countries which doesn't have this or one as extensive.

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

Under no circumstances!
Imagine that, in hands of some fascist regime with intentions of "ethnic cleansing"?!

 

[Twilight Hue]

I have been watching a lot of crime series lately and as most people know DNA is very good for identification. So for fun I looked up whether we had a DNA bank (not sure what its called) or not, which hold DNA for all Danish people.

And found that it is not the case and from what I could understand the main reason for this is due to an individuals right to privacy.

So was just interested in hearing if people is against such thing or for

It's a double edge sword.

While useful, there's also a huge if not inevitable potential for abuse and minuplation.

 

[exchemist]

I have been watching a lot of crime series lately and as most people know DNA is very good for identification. So for fun I looked up whether we had a DNA bank (not sure what its called) or not, which hold DNA for all Danish people.

And found that it is not the case and from what I could understand the main reason for this is due to an individuals right to privacy.

So was just interested in hearing if people is against such thing or for it, and what reason you have for your point of view? Also if you know, if your country already have such thing and if you have heard good or bad things about it.

(Obviously it depends on the country you live in etc. how it was used, lets say only for solving crimes, accidents, identification of people.)

In the UK, suspects arrested by the police may have to give a sample which is recorded in the DNA database. However, no member of the general public has to provide a sample. I understand there are now some 3.5 million records, amounting to about 5% of the UK population. By law, these records can only be used in relation to criminal investigations. However there are concerns that samples can be taken and recorded, even from people who are never charged with any offence, or are charged but subsequently acquitted.

It comes down to the issue of how far one trusts the state not to abuse the data, and how far one trusts it not to make mistakes using it. Personally I struggle to see how this type of information could be abused. But I have no difficulty at all in seeing how the police could screw it up and convict the wrong person.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Under no circumstances!
Imagine that, in hands of some fascist regime with intentions of "ethnic cleansing"?!

It already exists in the US. Not officially, but practically.