NO2ID

Page last updated at 21:37 GMT, Monday, 8 March 2010

http://news.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/hi/ ... 550147.stm

Crime and Security Bill

MPs have rejected a Tory bid to cut the time that someone's DNA can be kept on a police database.

...

The Tories want the bill, which applies mainly to England and Wales, to follow the Scottish model of DNA retention which allows for samples of those convicted of an offence to be kept for three years.

In addition they would allow for the retention of samples from those who were arrested for a sexual or violent offence.

For the Liberal Democrats, Chris Huhne said only the DNA of people convicted of a criminal offence should be on the database.

But Policing Minister David Hanson said the Tories and the Liberal Democrats were on the "wrong side of the argument".

He said the government had "the evidence and support to meet our legal obligations" and insisted the six-year retention period "will lead to the prevention of crime".

A Tory amendment to retain DNA samples for three years when people are arrested for a sexual or violent offence was defeated by 264 votes to 185, a majority of 79.

I'm sorry but I don't agree with this. It seems a lot of people think this is ok, if you have commited a criminal offence.

What is a criminal offence? or what constitutes a criminal offence?

Lets say you over fill your bin and the bin police come round and fine you. You refuse to pay (quite right) and get taken to court. You still refuse to pay and you get found guilty.

Why should you have your DNA kept on the DNA database or have your DNA taken at all. You have not caused any one any harm. This is where storing DNA is wrong.

If you killed someone for no reason and you was found guilty, then yes be on the database for a set amount of time.

Think about it. We don't want the government to use any old excuse to get hold of, or to keep your DNA unnecessarily.