Barcoding People

**J'Pol** · 09-08-2003, 10:47 PM

Originally posted by lynx@8 September 2003 - 23:30
Must have been a good answer, JP agreed with me

My apologies, I'll try not to agree with you again.

It's not as if it's difficult.

**thewizeard** · 09-08-2003, 10:48 PM

Originally posted by JPaul+8 September 2003 - 23:45--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (JPaul @ 8 September 2003 - 23:45)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-bigboab@8 September 2003 - 23:33
If it was possible it would be a good idea for everyone to have some kind of DNA code on their ID cards. It would help in solving crime.

I was going to say something along those lines as well.

Why not take a dna sample from everyone. How intrusive is that.

I see no reason why the authorities should not hold a fingerprint and dna sample for everyone. I would happily supply mine.

It would help to protect the innocent and find the guilty. Is that a bad thing. [/b][/quote]
Well there is the risk of someone 'planting' your DNA at the scene of a crime.

**bigboab** · 09-08-2003, 10:51 PM

But that risk is already here!

**thewizeard** · 09-08-2003, 11:06 PM

Just been suffering from a bit of lag.

Of course, but if the authorities had samples, they could use it to incriminate someone. If there was a fail-safe methode of keeping samples, then it would be a good idea.

**lynx** · 09-08-2003, 11:13 PM

Although the risk is diminishing (with better techniques), there is still a possibility that someone could be wrongly identified from a dna sample. As for fingerprints, as far as I know it has never actually been proved that they are unique, they appear to be random so it is possibly that two people at random could have the same pattern.

If everyone had to give samples, the chance of someone being incorrectly identified rises if dna (or fingerprint) samples match more than one person, and if the real offender is a habitual criminal he is more likely to have arranged an 'alibi' than the innocent person.

I believe that the odds against being wrongly identified from a dna sample is now about 1 in 50 million. But if you look carefully at what that statistic means, you will see that in a country the size of Britain there is probably someone with dna which matches your own.

**loz** · 09-08-2003, 11:15 PM

Everyone's eyes are unique too maybe we could have what they do in minority report....

**Alpha_Caesar** · 09-08-2003, 11:18 PM

Barcoding huh? Hmmph I'm sure not getting one when they start to implement it.

**evilbagpuss** · 09-08-2003, 11:20 PM

I'm not religious but I've always found this passage rather interesting...

Originally posted by Revelations chapter 13 verses 16-17

He causes all, the small and the great, the rich and the poor, and the free and the slave, to be given marks on their right hands, or on their foreheads;  and that no one would be able to buy or to sell, unless he has that mark, the name of the beast or the number of his name.

Anyway... imho ID cards are a bad move. Once you introduce them you cant get rid of them and they could be easily be abused by any future repressive Gvt. With todays technology they could easily track your every move with it.

With regards to the DNA issue... again a very bad idea. The insurance companies would have a good old time finding out who was at risk from hereditary medical conditions and then charging them extortionate prices for cover.

You cannot trust the powers that be with this much info and power, so dont give it to them.

Asides from all that serious stuff... I dont want some Nazi screaming "PAPERS!" in my face every time I leave the house.