-
Welcome to the Land Rover UK Forums
You are currently viewing the site as a guest and some content may not be available to you.
Registration is quick and easy and will give you full access to the site and allow you to ask questions or make comments and join in on the conversation. If you would like to register then please Register Now
school fingerprinting 6 year old children.
- Thread starter nobber
- Start date
nobber
Extreme Landy Fan
Snagger
Posting Guru
And fingerprinting kids harms them how? EVERYONE should be finger printed and give DNA samples to the police for use in a databank. It would then give police a place to start their investigations. As long as other evidence was required for conviction, not just a fingerprint or DNA trace, then what's the issue. People who get upset about this either don't have enough real things to worry about or have something to hide.
Bernie
Posting Guru
Well I don't fall into either of those categories. But I can see no valid reason why the state has any right to keep a record of my fingerprints or DNA. I've done nothing wrong, so it is none of their business. What harm can come of it? It can be mis-used and abused. No thank you.
nobber
Extreme Landy Fan
i think fingerprinting kids for a database without parents permission is very very wrong.
we have still got our human rights and this is an obvious invasion of them.
i do see your point though nick but let me ask you this, would you agree to have a microchip installed in your body so you can be traced every where you go?
if our government had their way , if we let them get away with things like this , then its quite probably going to go in that direction.
we have still got our human rights and this is an obvious invasion of them.
i do see your point though nick but let me ask you this, would you agree to have a microchip installed in your body so you can be traced every where you go?
if our government had their way , if we let them get away with things like this , then its quite probably going to go in that direction.
Snagger
Posting Guru
You haven't done anything wrong, Bernie, but thre are plenty of crimianls who get away with their acts because they have not previously been caught and are not yet on a database. The cases of serial killers, rapists and paedophiles are the best examples of where the public would be protected by having everyones biometric data on file - the criminal should be identified after the first offence, preventing the normal continuation of their pattern. Now, if you think that is a weak arguement, so be it, but I can't imagine why police would misuse biometric data if they had to provide corroborating evidence in court - they already have the opportunity to fiddle the pathology, but experience shows they don't. If a conviction can currently be achieved on a DNA match with no other evidence, then what I'm suggesting would be safer as well as quicker and more efficient. Too many people bleat on about their rights being infringed evry time something new is proposed without thinking about why it might be a good idea.
landydoctor
Trekker
they'll be tagging them next...
although i do think that chavs and hoodie types should'nt be allowed to have kids!
although i do think that chavs and hoodie types should'nt be allowed to have kids!
Bernie
Posting Guru
I'm not bleating on about rights, I'm putting across a point of view, why do you always have to insult those who don;t agree with you?
And I have given this a lot of thought over many years. We all have a right to a private life and I don't see why the state should have the right to track my every move ...
You seem perfectly happy to sleepwalk into a Big Brother state in which we are all gradually being taken over, and losing our individuality. I happen to think the price is too high to pay, and I don't believe that these infiringments of our liberties are actually justified, in terms of how much they reduce crime / terrorism etc etc.
Pogmahog
Trekker
a local school , according to ms nobber (shes a nanny) has started fingerprinting 6 year olds , their excuse? for her library pass.
The little scrotes will nick anything these days!
On a more serious note several years ago at an end of term party. A group of teachers came up with a reasoned logical argument for tattoing a bar code on the forehead of each pupil:
Aid registration,
No money needed for meals, (no theft)
Security; uses code to open doors, log on to computers, etc
Replace uniform
I am a 36 year old mother of 2 girls aged 17 and 14 and guess what.......... I wear hoodies! Cos they keep my flippin head warm
Oh and if anyone other than the police wanted to fingerprint my children....... damn straight I would kick off about it!
stevo
Trekker
Proven in some way by the ongoing court case of the '21/7' would be bombers.
On the news tonight, the alleged bombers had been filmed the previous year by security forces. They were under surveillance, yet still managed to get on trains with bombs....
How on earth would fingerprinting have prevented this??
nobber
Extreme Landy Fan
it wouldnt , nor would id cards.
Snagger
Posting Guru
Finger printing wouldn't have, because they were already identified. They were deemed a threat, but presumably hadn't commited an actual offence until the bombing itself, and so any action would have been deemed a similar "infringement of their rights" as fingerprinting.
Snagger
Posting Guru
Sorry Bernie. Porrly put. I didn't mean to insult anyone. I just don't see how having your fingerprints is any threat to your privacy - what would the police be interested in a law abiding citizen for? They would, thogh, be a very useful tool in starting an investigation in the right direction, especially if other evidence is initially hard to come by.
I don't mind surveilance by the authorities - I don't do anything that requires secrecy. I do object to the removal of our other freedoms, like what activities we undertake or what items we own - LRs and laning are perfect examples. Perhaps if there were better surveilance to catch the irresponsible laners and punish them, we wouldn't all have lost access to them? I'd hate to live in an Orwellian dictat, but a state where surveilance is effective can be liberating rather than restricting if applied correctly.
stevo
Trekker
Fingerprinting / dna samples / iris recognition........
Its all the same - individual identifiers of people.
We already have it with an NI number.
I suspect the way this will happen will be samples taken at birth and recorded. Its a bit Orwellian to do it., but I don't actually think it will prevent crime.
It might just make our lives easier eventually.
Its all the same - individual identifiers of people.
We already have it with an NI number.
I suspect the way this will happen will be samples taken at birth and recorded. Its a bit Orwellian to do it., but I don't actually think it will prevent crime.
It might just make our lives easier eventually.
theoldtrout
Overdrive!
Yeh, what a great idea!
Seriously. It is always the people who abide by the law that are expected to to tolerate infringments such as DNA sampling, surveillence etc We are the good guys so why should we put up with our freedom to a private life being eroded just because there are some dodgy geezers and geezeresses out there. If someone is convicted of any crime then their details should be on a database, but leave the rest of us alone!
Angela
Bernie
Posting Guru
No probs Nick, I know what you mean
My point is these are all creeping steps towards a total erosion of our privacy. If I have never done anything wrong, why should i have such personal details held about me by a law enforcement agency? it is well known from past cases that little 'mistakes' can be made, accidental and deliberate, and there is always going to be an element of corruption ... the more data you put into the hands of the 'powers that be', the more it can be abused.
But as with many of these things, we will have to agree to disagree
Roger Whittle
Posting Guru
No probs Nick, I know what you mean
My point is these are all creeping steps towards a total erosion of our privacy. If I have never done anything wrong, why should i have such personal details held about me by a law enforcement agency? it is well known from past cases that little 'mistakes' can be made, accidental and deliberate, and there is always going to be an element of corruption ... the more data you put into the hands of the 'powers that be', the more it can be abused.
But as with many of these things, we will have to agree to disagree
Yup, I'll admit the 'total erosion' threat ..... well, potential really, does give me furiously to think, while the 'cock up' theory rules absolutely, as far as I'm concerned. Added to which, the only 'law' the 'powers that be' are ever likely to observe ..... is Murphy's law.
Having said that ........ couldn't you hear that coming? Having said that, if there were - heaven forbid - a serial killer in your borough or geographical area, wouldn't you want to help by providing a DNA sample that will eliminate you and the thousands of other innocent people? The more effective the coverage, the more likely the killer will either be found, or left unsampled in a constituency of 99.999% sampled innocents.
The DNA sample, even if it were held on record permanently, does nothing to track you or provide information on your habits or interests. It simply eliminates you when someone else is committing a crime. How would crime be affected, if everyone was DNA sampled and recorded (at birth where appropriate) and fingerprinted at say, ten, if fingerprints are stable and relevant by that age?
I bet it would plummet. A thug smacks someone in a bar - leaving a smear of his own blood on the victims face - and does the usual vanish into the crowd. Police take samples from the victim and the computer says 'Wayne Scrote dun it.' Knock, knock on the door; 'Mr. Wayne Scrote? Yor' nicked - GBH. Assume the position.'
And ten isn't too young - look at the Bulger case.
So called 'joy riders' - AKA scrotes with no consideration for other people or their property - would all have to go equipped with gloves and the possession of same in suspicious circumstances - like at a club - would attract police interest. Even then, they would probably leave DNA evidence. True, the costs at first would be astronomical, but the personal cost to each and every scrote would be too high for the buzz they get.
I'm still in two minds, but I think Nick has a point worthy of consideration.
Roger.