Awol

As posts about the national DNA Database have been going in this thread as well as ID card issues I thought I'd add this on the subject by a former colleague of mine, now a solicitor. Question: Should it be allowed? Some good points there I thought and also applicable to the ID card debate...

If I can take the last bit first mate, yes they do work in terms of restricting access to secure sites(and sometimes the rozzers will let you off for speeding if you flash one, allegedly ). I am not aware of an MOD 90 - mil' ID card - being cloned or forged but that's not to say it hasn't happened. The ones that have beem lost couldn't be used by anyone other than the card holder unless the bloke on the front gate was an utter mong. However all forces personnel agree to surrender a good chunk of their civil rights in order to serve so carrying an ID card isn't an issue. I don't think it's on to take the same line with the general population who have certainly not consented to giving up those rights. On your benefits point an ID card could be used to verify who the claimant is but I don't think that is where the fraud is happening, it seems to be more about people claiming who aren't entitled to at all. Either way that wouldn't be solved by ID cards and immigrants who are illegally claiming benefits wouldn't have them anyway so it wouldn't work as a catch all solution imo. Biometric passports I think we both agree on, unfortunate but probably unavoidable. I'm not quite sure what you are getting at with the banks, they seem to manage perfectly well now. Unless the government gives them the extra option of demanding "achtung papers!" - which they would no doubt take up - I don't see why it's relevant. Are you proposing they could be used to prevent credit card fraud? *a subject I know naff all about btw* As for going to the gym I wouldn't know about that anymore We seem to be starting from the premise that 'we' want ID cards and we will find uses for and reasons why we should have them, reverse engineering the issue. It just seems a little perverse to me and from an economic POV vast expense for no appreciable gain.

As Gringo wont answer any of the points, what's your take on those I raised? I'll try but you've made a lot of points, which ones?! We have plenty of forms of ID already so I fundamentally do not accept that as a good reason, it's also not impossible to prove who you are using existing forms of ID. I concede that air travel will probably necessitate biometric passports for security reasons and that's the way it has to be. It does nothing however to make a case for domestic ID cards imo.

So 17 pages and still missing a reason why we should have them. I'm gonna ask again Mr D' - and not picking on you but - why?

Are you trying to sink your own argument here? Planes yes, because as you know the yanks are going to do it, so for international travel we wont have a choice. Any luck with a reason yet?

Ah you see that's exactly one point that people just cant sort out. On one hand these are fine as is a whole load of other ID card type things, but on the other hand its all wrong and an infringement of our civil rights. Surely it's one or the other? It's not that simple is it. Using biometrics to verify that you are who you say you are at an airport is one thing, having to use them in everyday life within the secure borders of your own country is just wrong and a total infringment of your civil liberties, aside from access and data security issues. If you want to know why I think that it's all in this thread and I'm not typing it again! Fact remains we are STILL to hear a SINGLE good reason for them so the only question that matters is WHY?

I think the whole point mate is that neither you - although it's not your job :winkold: - nor anyone in government have come up with a reason why we need them. Start off with terrorism, er no that wont fly, ok what about immigration? er no, that won't work either. So we're down to opening a bank account or getting a student loan, either of which can be done quite happily with existing forms of ID. Biometric passports I can understand - not like but that's irrelevant. There has not been a single good reason proposed for these things being introduced, as Pete said above the government are just being dogmatic now and it shows.

I voted blues before I read the thread, now I'd like to change my mind. The geordies going down would be hilarious..

Ha ha! We haven't even got enough blokes to fight the two wars we are in effectively let alone policing the streets of the UK! This is much more to do with an attempt to reconnect the public and HMF because a growing minority of small brained people are holding them responsible for the decisions of the Labour Party. Exceptionally stupid of them, but at least the problem has been recognised and the authorities are trying to do something about it. However a few battalions back from Iraq 'surging' bad estates in anti-chav patrols might go down quite well with alot of folks.

I thought that was one of the best lines I've heard from anybody in yonks. Where was this David Davis during the Tory leadership contest? If he'd relied upon that kind of wit rather than crapping on about his being brought up on a council estate then people may not have fallen asleep during some of his speeches. He is one of a handful of MP's I genuinely respect, grounded bloke, served the country and doesn't come off like a shrill schoolboy al a 'Dave' and Osbourne. I remember Jacqui 'uber clown' Smith mocking him during his leadership contest for serving in the TA . Classy girl that one.

David Davies mate and I agree completely. I'd say roll on the election but I suspect it will be cancelled because the public can't be trusted to vote for the current government...It's for our own good though. Edit: He also said catagorically if the Tories get in then ID cards will be scrapped, period. They'll get my vote.

Can I have no election but another new unelected Prime Minister? FWIW I think David Milliband may be the next Dear Leader..

Not meaning to pull a 'Tony' but I said that earlier in the the thread. Are you still giving out points?

Maybe we should start stealing their houses then because we're obviously not stealing enough oil!

No mate, I'm not suggetsting a return to Trumpton style policing but i don't agree that ANY methodology should be considered. Maybe the police should be in hospitals waiting to cuff potential crims as they pop out of the womb? I think where you and I really differ is imagination. Mrs Awol is pretty switched on with all of the DNA/Genetics stuff and her argument against this is mainly based on what they can do with this information in the future - that it would not just be used for the detection of criminals and as scientists understand the genome more the opportunity will be to usean individuals DNA against them. Insurance if you have a gene for hereditary diseases, criminal profiling, loads of potential ways to use an individuals DNA against them. How is that not undermining an indiviuals civil liberties? FWIW I agree the police should keep ther DNA of convicted criminals on file - the degree of re-offending justifies that - but those cleared of wrong doing or indeed the entirely innocent should not have their DNA retained imo. For the reasons above I think it is an infringment of civil liberties and as you mention fingerprints, no, I don't think innocent people should be having their fingerprints stored either. I agree with one of Gringo's later posts in this thread that you fundamentally take a different view from mine over whether healthy suspicion of authority is a good thing and what consititutes personal freedom. DNA database, National ID cards, pay as you drive in-car spying etc is not what this country stands for, no matter how much your Stalinist buddies try to make it so.

Terrible idea, the police and government want total surveillance capability over the population imo and this is just another tool in the box. The Home Office have said they don't support this but I think that's only because they know how badly their ability to maintain data security is percieved by the public - and with good reason. The police have managed for this long without resorting to a national DNA database and should continue to do so imo. The benefits of catching a handful of criminals do not outweigh the infringment of personal liberty. That said I expect it will happen and probably by stealth. I think I've also figured out why you're such a fan of all these databases; will IBM be selling govt all the kit to store the information? If so I guess you have a commercial interest in all of these things going ahead?

Well sorry to be a removed word but as a potential first time buyer I'm absolutely banking on a crash and have deliberately held back from diving into the market for a couple of years in anticipation of it. Housing prices are not sustainable in the long term unless there is a shift in the culture of home ownership towards long term rentals like they have in Germany. Either that or half the country will be renting short term from the other half who used their equity to buy all the houses! The other option is to do a 'Nick Rogers' and get the hell out of dodge to a country that's not in a shite state.

i'm sure that when I said on another thread i wouldn't grass someone up if i saw a minor crime taking place (minor ,i'm not talking rape or murder etc) i got a lot of flack and the usual I'm alright jack and not on my street type replies thrown at me ...(must be something about what i post :-) ) but it would suggest that most on here are happy with grassing thy neighbour ? I think there is a difference about being aware of what is happening in your neighbourhood and taking action against things in your neighbourhood (these two coupled) and spying on and grassing up one's neighbour. If I saw a crime taking place in my neighbourhood (or was aware of one taking place), I would see it as my duty to do something about it. Now that would probably come down to who was doing what and whether that crime fell within the bad degrees of my 'moral compass'. If it were a neighbour with whom I had a decent relationship, I would try and point out the folly of his action and hope that he would correct his behaviour. If it were some bod attacking someone, I would intervene. If it were a robbery at a car lot opposite where I live - I would call the coppers and then go outside to confront the burglars. If it were anti-social neighbours who couldn't give a damn about anyone else, were rude, objectionable and threatening then I'd go that extra yard to even gather info for Five-0 on their drug dealing habits (including number plates, descriptions and witness statements). Get yourself a yellow jacket, your new job title is PCSO Snowy

Light reading at the moment, Lord of the Bow which is the second in a fictional series about the life and times of Genghis Khan. He was NAILS.

There is a fear in some circles that it will turn into a little Al-Quaeda camp in Europe, one of the reasons the EU is sending a 2000 man nation building team next week; I'm helping to recruit the reconstruction teams at the moment that will follow them in. I'd leave the travelling for a few weeks and observe if you have the option mate.

OT Funny thing, Kosovo will declare independence from Serbia tomorrow and the Russians are making sinister noises about a plan to deal with it.. The Royal Welch are on NATO spearhead in the UK and are on standby to go out at the moment. Not enough blokes to do much if it really kicks off, but enough to start a war if they all got killed. Same cast, same location and a century on, same sh*t. Sad isn't it?

All were heroes, all were victims and we all owe our freedom to them and their sons. As a few posters have picked up on already shell shock, PTSD etc were not even thought of back then and the sheer horror those men went through cannot be imagined. I would not criticise their conduct when faced with hell, Indeed it only deepens my respect for those who stood fast. They should all be recorded on our Cenotaphs. More worrying to me is the dwindling attendances on 11/11; as a nation we seem to remember less and less. Edit to add: I'd strongly recommend a walk around the national memorial arboretum by Alrewas on the A38 to anyone who hasn't been. A humbling place and if you have kids, educational.

30, the wrong side of.

1 & 2) First PCSO’s then this, basically joe public in hi-vis. Presumably they will all go through the proper psychological and legal education necessary to ensure they don’t break the law in the course of their “duty”? Plenty of well meaning but utterly useless - for this task - people will end up getting battered. 3) [rant]You could guess there is concern in Parliament that the public aren’t very happy with them at the moment... Now private armies to keep the constituents in line. Ban protests within miles the HoC; round up and detain for hours hundreds of peaceful innocent peoplein London; video every protester they can on peaceful non-violent demos; take your DNA following a stop and search and have it retained on a database for life; dracoinian anti-terror laws; wiping their collective arse on Magna Carta and Habeus Corpus and proposing to lock people up for 40, 42, 50 - Christ knows how many days without charge; ad infinitum. Anyone know a good reason why? [/rant]. Even if they were used purely as support for a terrorist incident, how could they all be mobilised and assembled quickly enough, briefed, equiped and moved to the incident in time to contribute in a meaningful way? In that event - as shown on 7/7 - the emergency sevices will inevitably be overwhelmed to a degree and it comes down to the public at the scene. I'm not being 'nationalistic' or being a HateHeiletc reader but ordinary Britons generally perform very well in those situations. IMO that effectively rules out this 'Force' as a tool in the box for any sort of terrorist incident. That only really leaves civil disorder. I know a fair few of these private security types and they are good blokes but I wouldn’t want them policing our streets, essentially as an affiliated paramiltary force. I say paramilitary because if they are intended to control large scale civil disorder - and it must be what is being planned for otherwise the Police would be able to cope - they will be armed in some fashion. Not a great idea imo. Edit: having read Matsey's link it is obviously not what I took from Gringo's post. Project Griffin seems very sensible, I had visions of the Baghdad bandits hairing around..

Yes, insurance companies do it every day, so do the NHS. If the drug is too expensive it doesn't get rolled out despite life saving potential. I wouldn't want to be the bean counter who makes that call.