Two men have gone to the European Court of Human Rights in an attempt to get their fingerprints and DNA samples removed from the Police database on the grounds that it’s a breach of their human rights.
In England and Wales – but not in Scotland of course – the Police refuse to destroy the biometric data of people who are arrested but who are found innocent of all charges.
I understand the usefulness of having DNA samples and fingerprints in solving crimes but this has to be balanced against the individual’s right to privacy. The men are arguing that by the Police holding their biometric data, there is an immediate suspicion that they are criminals.
On balance I think the infringement of civil liberties and right to privacy outweighs the benefits of having biometric data of tens of thousands of innocent people.
Technorati Tags: DNA, Police, Civil Liberties
I think the greatest difficulty is the quest for both freedom AND security. I have reached the conclusion recently that it is practically impossible to have both.
In a world of global terror the easiest solution appears to be ever increasing encroachment upon individual liberty as a kind of protection against other seemingly more totalitarian and demonstrably more violent elements.
However, the wisdom of ages applies and as Christ himself said “For what shall profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” St.Mark 8:36
What then is the merit of fighting the Talaban and the Jihadists only to find that at the same time those who themselves talk the loudest about freedom and democracy are throwing it all way?
I believe that a different approach is needed and one that does not involve the sacrifice of our own liberties and freedoms. As history demonstrates people and societies that crave security beget dictators and despots.
A truly free people need no such figures to “look after” them. They would take responsibilty for themselves. And that involves a rejection of totalitarianism in all of its forms; from the Jihad to the politicians intent on subtituting one form of totalitarianism for another.
Through freedom, security will follow. The quest for security of itself is futile and utterly doomed to failure. Iraq demonstrates that quite clearly. It may be that some nations prefer totalitarianism. Yet in a world of a globalised economy it would seem that those nations will only continue to be increasingly isolated and as we saw with the Soviet Union, eventually the message of Freedom breaks down the barriers.
I’m against a National DNA database for the same and only reason I’m against the death penalty, Cock-ups happen. The trouble is those in authority, either police or government seem incapable of admitting that they could be, or are wrong.
I think the john charles de menezes fiasco is a prime example
Think of you body as this country.
Think of the security of your body as your skin and immune system,proper hygiene,healthy eating and good waste disposal system.
It should follow that without a skin there is no immunity,
And without a skin and an immune system there is neither an internal nor external form of security.
Thats why we have borders and controls;
But who controls the controls and the controllers?Theres the rub.
You do thats who,or at least should do unless of course you are being controlled and want to be controlled and brainwashed.Now how do you determine that i wonder?You certainly do nt ask other people nor trust anyone to do it for you.
If you dont take responsibility for your own actions and those of others both within and without, your body cant become secure and you will die.
Firstly you must have a sensible health and security plan.
Secondly you must a sensible defense system;perhaps weapons armour?
Thirdly and probably most importantly you must keep re-assesing you own methods,ideas and practises to determine their respective validities and truth to life,your life, and those of others.\”No one is unto himself an island\”
Fourthly you must re-assess and keep re-assesing what you believe to be true and what others believe to be true because what is true remains true whatever the questions may be.
If you have doubts search them out and find out the answers.Dont just accept that something is true because other people say so.Use your own judgement.
I agree with Kev here but without Real Justice there will be no confidence in Law.
What is more important Justice or Loyalty?
Some would say that depends on the circumstances but Justice will never be your friend and Loyalty always will.Justice is always flawed at best and worthless at worst.Loyalty never fails.
Why do you think that Common Purpose chose this over Justice?Its they who will make the Justice once Loyalty has given its all but one mans Justice is anothers Injustice.
I dont see them as being Just where Loyalty comes first do you?