A fine line between Man and Monster

[Double Trouble]

Please remember that DT is paid to churn out forum inches. There is no need for their work to be that well researched, or to particularly stand the scrutiny of debate - it is after all just tomorrow's chip wrapper. There is a danger however that weaker minded people may not scrutinise the comments they read, seeing them as a STARTING point for debate, but rather view these columns as definitive reference material.

There you go. Just thought I'd amend that for you.


I do this for fun. I like poking you all with a stick...lighten up dude.

[Raul]

There are times when the venom level of your misandry really worries me babe. May I ask, when your read the tabloid press do you ever stop for a moment to consider the wider implications and the possibility that there may be a valid counter argument?

####

Please remember that these columnists are paid to churn out column inches. There is no need for their work to be that well researched, or to particularly stand the scrutiny of debate - it is after all just tomorrow's chip wrapper. There is a danger however that weaker minded people may not scrutinise the comments they read, seeing them as a STARTING point for debate, but rather view these columns as definitive reference material.

Such as starting a debate on this forum, for example! which is what she did!

Hey !?? are you calling DT weak minded?

[Gav]

Funny that you have picked up on sensationalism when I have mentioned other valid reasons. I elaborate on the latter.

That'll be because I was only replying to that particular post, otherwise I would've quoted whatever else it is you're going on about.
You don't really think I care enough to read all of your posts do you?

[Double Trouble]

Hey !?? are you calling DT weak minded?

I've got broad shoulders Raul. I've been called worse on the forum.

[straycat]

Have you two started up a DVD rental business?

We've discussed the idea, but extensive market research has suggested that our proposed name: 'The Dreadful Stray DVD Emporium' is not going to be a winner with the public for some silly reason or other... and there the idea rests.

[~*~Saligal~*~]

So how are we saying this should work? lock up people who haven't yet committed a crime, but have the potential to commit the crime? I'm not sure that washes with the justice system.
As well, where do these people get locked up?
If we go to the extreme, why not find out if the gene is hereditary and just kill those we know have the gene - problem solved!
The gene testing could be used as a "tool" in a court case or something - or as a way to find education or some way to help these people with their genetic tendancies (as is done with other gene testing results). This might be a more productive way to work with the data perhaps?

[Gav]

If we go to the extreme, why not find out if the gene is hereditary and just kill those we know have the gene - problem solved!

Cool.

While we're at it, we could find out who is genetically predisposed to appear on the Jeremy Kyle show and kill them too.

[StokeBloke]

Cool.

While we're at it, we could find out who is genetically predisposed to appear on the Jeremy Kyle show and kill them too.

I realise that was a tongue in cheek comment But this is the very reason why we must NEVER concede to blanket DNA information being held on everyone and anyone. The ability for someone to arbitrarily decide something that could effect thousands of innocent people because they were forced to give a DNA sample. It's a HUGE invasion of privacy.

[Gav]

I realise that was a tongue in cheek comment But this is the very reason why we must NEVER concede to blanket DNA information being held on everyone and anyone. The ability for someone to arbitrarily decide something that could effect thousands of innocent people because they were forced to give a DNA sample. It's a HUGE invasion of privacy.

You can leave your Orwellian world and join the real world whenever you're ready.

[Double Trouble]

It's a HUGE invasion of privacy.

It is, but personally, that's a small price to pay for the good that it would do.

Quite a lot of repeat offenders drift from one country to the next. Unless they are caught it's almost impossible to trace them. If you DNA tested everyone who came in to our country, or any other country, it's bound to help.

Take the case of Caroline Dickinson, for example. She was raped and murdered by a drifter who went from one place to another raping and killing young girls. It was only when he was caught in a America sexually assaulting another girl and DNA tested, years later that he was brought to justice.

Francisco Arces Montes knew he could literally get away with murder, as long as he kept moving. I wonder how far he would have got with DNA testing in place.

[David Bailey]

It is, but personally, that's a small price to pay for the good that it would do.

I'm sorry, but you're talking rubbish here.

• DNA profiling wouldn't have made any difference to the current Jersey child abuse scandal - where loved ones were tortured, raped, and probably murdered.
  
• DNA profiling wouldn't have stopped Harold Shipman.
  
• DNA profiling didn't catch Millie Dowler's killer, even though an obvious suspect lived (Levi Bellfield) lived round the corner at the time - as I said, the police simply didn't bother to actually contact him because he didn't answer the door to them

What we need is less reliance on technology as a magic wand, and more getting people to do their jobs right in the first place.

[Gav]

I'm sorry, but you're talking rubbish here.

• Blah.
• Blah.
• Blah.

What we need is less reliance on technology as a magic wand, and more getting people to do their jobs right in the first place.

Well done for finding 3 examples where it wouldn't help, I'm sure we could go back and forth finding more and more examples on both sides.

How about this for a radical idea? What if they did both? More effective policing as well as better technology.

[Double Trouble]

less reliance on technology as a magic wand, and more getting people to do their jobs right in the first place.

Never gonna happen. People are not reliable and do not do their jobs properly. It's a fact and nothing will change that.

Wouldn't you agree that using technology AND following procedures correctly would help?

You make is sound like technology is evil. I'm sure you'd agree that your washing machine does a better job of cleaning your clothes than you would, doing it by hand.

It's BECAUSE humans are so crap at following procedures that technology is the way forward.

EDIT: Gav we are thinking alike again. I'd be worried if I were you.

[Trouble]

[QUOTE=Double Trouble;457044]
It's BECAUSE humans are so crap at following procedures that technology is the way forward.
QUOTE]

mmm interesting.

Let me give you an example of why this is not as straight forward as we would hope.

Yes i would love technology to come into play on the DNA profiles etc but in reality, even if we did go down that route what would happen is this...

1.Human error will still come into play on input. all information needs to be done manually at some point and human reliability is still a must.
2.The system breakdowns will then also rely on human correction. Technology breakdowns are a constant which is why so many IT people are rich. This also relies on human correction.

So, in a nutshell, currently we rely on humans doing their jobs well to catch them, if we move on, we will have the help of technology but that alone does bring in different problems that will rely on more people to correct it.

Saying that tho, i do think them working together would be better than only having the one.

[David Bailey]

The problem is, politicians like spending money on Stuff, and don't like spending money on people - training, enforcement, and so on.

This is most obvious in the armed forces. We've got Eurofighter, we've got Trident+, we've got 2 massive aircraft carriers on the way - but we've got a small army, poorly-paid, and we're cutting their training now. And guess who's doing 90% of the actual work?

So politicians will always choose shiny things rather than boring people. So you should never give them that choice, because they'll never choose the right one. Remember, £15 billion. So we can have 30,000 extra police officers on the beat, or we can have a rickety, expensive and massive database system, with unproven benefits.

We're never going to get both.

EDIT: Gav we are thinking alike again. I'd be worried if I were you.

Nah, I need both of you to argue before I have to engage my brain anyway.

[Trouble]

We're never going to get both.


.

funny, a lot of people said they would never ban smoking!!

I would not be surprised if its being done already without our knowledge.

You do realise, we cant go anywhere in this country without being filmed almost. There are also these new sort of signs going up if anybody has noticed. They look like they are information signs but they are actually tracking systems as well as cameras so ive been told.

We are being watched already so DNA being take at birth, how would we know if it was or wasnt?

[Double Trouble]

I think that's the dumbest idea I've heard since ID cards. It's almost as dumb as the poll tax, in fact.

I'm sorry, but you're talking rubbish here.

I need both of you to argue before I have to engage my brain anyway.

If you are trying to bully me off of this thread by being insulting, it wont work. I haven't called you dumb or said you are talking rubbish, even though I completely disagree with you, maybe you could extend the same courtesy to me.

[David Bailey]

If you are trying to bully me off of this thread by being insulting, it wont work.

A/ You specifically said you started this thread to yank our chains? Some people might call that trolling...
B/ I've commented on the posts, not you. You're not dumb. But some of your posts are. Hope that's clear.
C/

[StokeBloke]

You can leave your Orwellian world and join the real world whenever you're ready.

I know, let's electronically tag everyone too and track them all with satellites. That way your movements can be accounted for 24/7. Then if there is a need we can curfew the population and track and arrest any non-compliant citizens. Let's finger print everyone too. Give them all ID cards.

Ohh hold on, what about the tens of thousands of people who exist in this country illegally? The ones that are already living outside the law. What about the data loss and data leaks that happen already? What about human error? How are we to ensure these systems are beyond abuse? Who decides what constitutes abuse of the system?

I am not living in an Orwellian world yet, and that is exactly the way I want to keep it.

Please feel free to remove your head from your Utopian cloud and rejoin the real world whenever you're ready

[Twirly]

So we can have 30,000 extra police officers on the beat, or we can have a rickety, expensive and massive database system, with unproven benefits.

Best of all would be to find a way of stopping these things happening in the first place, obviously. And although I can't be 100% confident in it happening, chances are that the extra police officers are more likely to reduce crime through their presence than the threat of being caught once you've done it.

And of course this will only catch certain types of criminals. "White collar crime" (ie fraud) is unlikely to be impacted at all by a DNA database. Now extra police, they certainly could have an impact...