[Metrobeans]

M101 - DNA Storage Motion, TSR Liberal Democrat

This House thinks that it is wrong for the state to keep very sensitive information about a person's DNA without that person's expressed permission, we are also wary of government plans to enact a "snooper's charter" that would allow them to access personal online communications.

Both are breaches of an individual's right to privacy, and are also clear examples of the government sacrificing civil liberties for the sake of the police.

All such information should be wiped from the National Database for all people that have not given their consent to it being used, provided they do not have criminal convictions.

[internetguru]

I am all for defending a person's right not to be snooped on using the internet etc but for keeping DNA records I am split, I know they don't have permission but it is only DNA. The only thing it can be used for is cloning you and stopping criminals so it doesn't really breach your privacy.

[cl_steele]

aye, if the person has not committed any offence and isnt a suspect of any offence it is not business of the government to pry on their personal life in any respect be it internet or especially keeping DNA records! gross infringement of freedom.

[barnetlad]

We should not keep DNA for anyone who can tell an appointed government official (verbally or by writing in their presence) what DNA stands for.

[JPKC]

No. Social utility far outweighs the right to keep information that you don't even know (DNA identity) "private". If this information could be exploited then I'd agree, but as it is, keeping it is completely harmless.

I agree with keeping online communications generally private, should maybe have been a different motion.

[Abiraleft]

What sort of sensitive information is this? Just interested; I'm pretty much for personal privacy most of the time.

[Keckers]

Aye from me.

[Rakas21]

Abstain.

Whilst i don't support taking DNA from somebody who was convicted of urinating in a street, i do support keeping the DNA records of those convicted for violent crimes (or condoning violent crimes such as Qatada).

[Ham and Cheese]

It should be made clear that the TSR Government has no current plans to enact the 'snoopers charter'; however, I believe it is something that should be discussed by the House, and I am therefore grateful that this motion has been tabled. It would be wise to split this into two motions as both of these are two issues; that way we can see what the House thinks on both of these issues separately and that will help us decide what policy needs to be implemented in a bill.

On the issue of the DNA database, I believe that we should keep this in place, and as Home Secretary I have no plans to abolish this as suggested in the motion.

[Moleman1996]

Since we don't fully understand what DNA completely holds yet I agree with this motion, in the future were it to fall into the wrong hands it could have devestating consequences.

Criminals however, should, as said in your motion have DNA records kept.

[Stiff Little Fingers]

(Original post by internetguru)
I am all for defending a person's right not to be snooped on using the internet etc but for keeping DNA records I am split, I know they don't have permission but it is only DNA. The only thing it can be used for is cloning you and stopping criminals so it doesn't really breach your privacy.

Putting aside that we're no where near the ability to clone people yet, I love that you make it sound like that's not a big deal.

Oh, it's only making a genetically identical copy of you, what harm could it be?




One thing though, I was under the impression unless you consented to being part of the DNA database, or were prosecuted for an offence, the government wasn't able to keep records of it anyway?

[Ysolt]

(Original post by Rakas21)
Abstain.

Whilst i don't support taking DNA from somebody who was convicted of urinating in a street, i do support keeping the DNA records of those convicted for violent crimes (or condoning violent crimes such as Qatada).

Yes but its double punishment to keep someone's DNA as well as having them serve their sentences. Violent criminals should be allowed to escape their punishment by living it out and then living their life as a normal person.

(Original post by Ham and Cheese)
It should be made clear that the TSR Government has no current plans to enact the 'snoopers charter'; however, I believe it is something that should be discussed by the House, and I am therefore grateful that this motion has been tabled. It would be wise to split this into two motions as both of these are two issues; that way we can see what the House thinks on both of these issues separately and that will help us decide what policy needs to be implemented in a bill.

On the issue of the DNA database, I believe that we should keep this in place, and as Home Secretary I have no plans to abolish this as suggested in the motion.

OK Home Secretary. I didn't realise that. Why do you believe DNA databases should be kept in place?

(Original post by JPKC)
No. Social utility far outweighs the right to keep information that you don't even know (DNA identity) "private". If this information could be exploited then I'd agree, but as it is, keeping it is completely harmless.

I agree with keeping online communications generally private, should maybe have been a different motion.

This is a combined motion because it is about civil liberties... Personal information like private communications and DNA should be treated the same as they are both as important and should need consent to reveal. Why do you think it is morally OK to violate a person's privacy like this??

[CyclopsRock]

If the Police have your DNA, and that can be used to prove your innocence or guilt... can you not see how they having a 'copy' of your DNA could lead to abuses of power?

[Metrobeans]

This is in cessation.

[Metrobeans]

Division!!