Pussycat Doll's DNA Database
I see that our pussycat loving Home Secretary, Theresa May, is in disagreement with the Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) over DNA stored by the police.
Pussycat May wants the police to be able to store indefinitely the DNA of adults convicted/cautioned, whilst those charged but later cleared (ie "not guilty" in the eyes of the law) would have their DNA stored for up to five years. Plus, in the event of a "perceived" threat to national security, DNA could also be stored by the police.
JCHR are of the view that this would create “a significant risk of
incompatibility with the right to a private life’’. It would also create a broad catch-all discretion for police to authorise the retention
of material indefinitely for reasons of national security.
Given that Pussycat May hates the Human Rights Act, I assume that she will ignore the committee's opinion.
Databases, when mismanaged by the state, are dangerous beasts.
Visit
The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.
Visit
The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.
Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from
Nanny's Store.
www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by
www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"
Celebrate the joy of living with booze. Click and drink!
Visit
Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves;
Food,
Bonking,
Gifts and Flowers,
Groceries
I believe that this bitch also has given the police the go ahead to snatch the DNA from people convicted of certain crimes before DNA was routinely harvested, regardless of whether they have reoffended since.
ReplyDeleteI don’t know why they bother. It is not like crime levels have fallen or detection rates have increased since they started abusing individual’s rights in such a way.
The problem is, as I see it, is that the use of DNA databases and indeed the rise of CCTV, has led to lazy policing. It seems little real old fashioned police work/investigating takes place these days. Plod would rather look at CCTV or search a database rather than get off their backsides and prevent crime in the first place.
ReplyDeleteDatabases and CCTV do NOT prevent crime, they merely record crime that has already happened. During the recent riots, it was not until the number of police on the streets were increased that the amount of crime/rioting recinded.
Plod now arrests everyone for the most minor offence/suspicion of a crime just to harvest data for their databases. In time, I am sure everyone will be fitted with a chip that will allow the state to monitor us at all times; who is to say this isn't already happening given the cozy arrangements between the large communications companies and Nanny?
I am sure that the ID card will be mooted again soon as the EUSSR want it.
Nanny micromanages our lives because she has little else to do given that many of what were her functions and powers, have been given away to the EUSSR.
We need to redress the fragile balance between our freedoms and the power of the state; at the moment we are becoming a police state and I for one, don't like it.
Sadly, with the cultural Marxists controlling both our media and education systems, the young have been brainwashed to think the police state is normal and indeed, desirable......Sad isn't it?
Did not the ECHR order the removal of most DNA samples, but "our" government decided not to obey?
ReplyDeleteFunny that they seem to gold plate every other edict from Brussels...
“My genome is my property. It is not the state's. … It is an issue of my personal genetic privacy,”
ReplyDelete“I have met some [innocent] people who are on the database and are really distressed by the fact. They feel branded as criminals,”
“There is a presumption not of innocence but of future guilt here … which I find very disturbing indeed"
Quotes from the DNA fingerprinting pioneer Professor Sir Alec Jeffreys.
When the ECHR told the Police that they should not 'routinely' retain the DNA of aquitted or not prosecuted accused they came back with "Oh, well, we'll just keep them for five years"
ReplyDeleteThis is what the hag Theresa May is supporting. Calls herself a Conservative.
@Tonk
ReplyDeleteAgree with all you say except we don't need to be fitted with a chip. Our mobile phones, our newer cars and, as you say, our online activities monitor our movements 24/7.
Sadly, I forget the source but I read recently that a survey of the younger generation revealed most of them just don't care.
Nanny has won by attrition.