We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

The state can take what the state wants to

If you are arrested, and the police take your DNA to run tests on it, and if the outcome of your arrest is either that no charges were brought against you or you were brought to trial and found innocent, it has been ruled that the state can retain your DNA records indefinitely regardless.

The moral of the story is, of course, that if you do not want the state to take your DNA and hold it on record forever because you simply do not trust the state or because you have the quaint notion that your body is your own property, then do whatever it takes to not get arrested, regardless of how confident you are that you can establish your innocence subsequently.

Lord Brown said the benefits of this procedure were so manifest and the objections so threadbare that the cause of human rights would be better served by expanding the police database rather than by reducing it.

Just as it has often been said that modern fascism is most likely to appear in the guise of anti-fascism, when some establishment figure like Lord Brown start taking about ‘human rights’ it is a fair bet that ‘human rights’ about to get trampled underfoot.

My guess is that it is only a matter of time before the police in some nations start taking samples of DNA from everyone, probably starting with all children under a programme with a name like ‘The Safe Children Act’ or something similar, probably with the ostensible reason of ‘protecting your child from kidnap by Paedophiles’ or some such drivel. I mean, after all, who could possibly object to that?

The state is not your friend.

10 comments to The state can take what the state wants to

  • Guy Herbert

    Indeed. What’s most disturbing about the learned noble Lord Brown’s speech is that he says something very similar to: “if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear”. It appears the House of Lords, which is supposed to defend the Common Law, is operating on the assumption of the essential benificence of the state.

    We’ve seen credulousness with respect to scientific evidebnce before in the courts. But here we have credulousness with respect to hypothetical, untestable scientific evidence.

  • Sandy P

    Or they could just take DNA at birth.

  • Verity

    This is just s-o-o-o much better than “Papers, please”.

  • Perry, you beat me to it. I saw this ‘gem’ in the Times the other day, a tiny paragraph in a corner of a page. Obviously, not newsworthy enough.

  • All children to go on ‘big brother’ computer

    Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why?

    A NATIONAL database containing confidential details about every child in Britain is to be set up by the government. An identifying number will be assigned to each child so that the authorities can access their records.
    Details of the proposals — affecting all 13.5m children in Britain under the age of 18 — are contained in cabinet papers leaked to The Sunday Times.

    All parents will receive letters from the government informing them of the plan, which will be added to the Children’s Bill in the autumn.

    The central electronic register will hold information on a child’s school achievements, GP and hospital visits, police and social services records and home address.

  • Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why?

    It’s obviously essential. How else will O’Brien find out if Winston is afraid of rats?

  • ThePresentOccupier

    I may be berating the obvious – or at least, it seems obvious to me – but:

    By introducing this database on the back of the Children’s Act, in the guise of it being “for the children”, we end up with a DNA database being put into place for the entire populace. It won’t take 40 years to get it completed, either – this database is to include “details” of all relatives of the child, in order that they may be protected from abuse. Do anything to irritate social services or the police, and you’ll doubtless find a black mark on you in this file.

    Couple that database with the arrested individuals database and we get a lot closer to a complete record. Incidentally, since March 27, *all* individuals arrested have been fingerprinted & DNA swabbed, it isn’t just a case of if they decide to run a match.

    So if one is arrested due to a malicious accusation – which the police are apparently duty-bound to regard as “evidence” – congratulations. You just made the lists – regardless of the fact that you have commited no offense whatsoever. As a direct result, you find you have been added onto a database that is to be checked any time the police feel like it (not that they’d ever actually abuse such a system – oh no, perish the thought).

    The state is not just not your friend – the state is actively engaged against you.

  • toolkien

    Human rights, versus individual rights, are doled out by the State. They say what they are and they say when they are NOT being trod on because they are the ones writing what they are in the first place. A clear example of double-speak.

  • ThePresentOccupier

    Here’s another one –

    “Train staff given DNA swab kits

    First Great Western Trains staff are to be given DNA swab kits to reduce assaults on employees and passengers.”


    Back, or I shall swab thee!

  • Guy Herbert

    I’ve just noticed (thanks SpyBlog) that the Lord Justice of Appeal, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood, whom I quoted above is also the Intelligence Services Commissioner. Guaranteed a safe pair of hands with our civil liberties, then.