Filed under: Etc., Euro, Government/Legal
UK cops give speeding tickets, take DNA sample
It seems a little unreasonable and over the top to us. UK drivers pinched for speeding may soon be compelled to surrender a swab, too. If the authorities get their way, it's not just speeders they'll nab to build their DNA database, but even litterbugs will be asked to "donate."The UK's DNA database has recently come under fire for concerns that the stockpile is overly heavy with children and minorities. Treating everyone like a fugitive shows the government's basic contempt for its citizenry, and collecting reams of biometric data on the population is fraught with the potential for future abuse or invasion. While having DNA on file will likely lead to the solution of some crimes, it seems out of the scope of consequence for speeding. It's one thing if you can opt out, but if it becomes compulsory, we'll remain glad to stay in the Colonies.
[Source: Pistonheads]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
ChucktownChuck 9:15AM (8/03/2007)
hmmm, 1984
Reply
Craig 10:15AM (8/03/2007)
UK treats their citizens like criminals, the US treats theirs like idiots...
We need a better way to make these pricks be accountable for what they do...
Don 4:43PM (8/03/2007)
Let's see them try that crap in the US.
1984 indeed.
Avinash machado 9:24AM (8/03/2007)
So the UK is becoming more and more like a dictatorship.
Reply
Snix 9:29AM (8/03/2007)
They banned all firearms and put video cameras on all street corners. (and crime has gone up).
Sounds like East Germany before reunification.
Glad I don't live there.....
Thank goodness for the founding fathers and the 2nd amendment.
Reply
Petar Pavlovic 9:48AM (8/03/2007)
Well... if USA, Mexico and Canada unite, then 2nd amendment will cease to exist.
MikeW 4:23PM (8/03/2007)
The 2nd amendment doesn't give you the right to keep and bare arms. It is the protection of that right.
You have that right: organically, inherently, intrinsically, however you want to say it.
Take it away, and you still have that right. The bill of rights was a reminder for the politicians, these are the people's right.
But it is still a damn important thing to know.
Speeding may be illegal, but it isn't criminal.
It is time for a revolution in the U.K.
pavel 9:39AM (8/03/2007)
I'm really glad the feeling of repulsion towards these kind of policies is ingrained in every single American. Give me Liberty or give me death resounds with all of us.
Reply
Toy Yoda 12:10PM (8/03/2007)
is that why about half the people on autoblog were in favor of the cops getting GPS info from a MB without a warrant, because they believed a guy was guilty of a hit and run?
Don't think for a second that your liberties in America are free from assault from the government. Vigilence is the price you pay for liberty; and in America, everyone wants things for free.
mdm-adph 1:55PM (8/03/2007)
Yeah... that's why, in response to stuff like this, the average person I talk to usually says something along the lines of "If you're doing nothing wrong, what have you got to hide," right?
Dazza 10:41AM (8/03/2007)
Americans typically believing any old sensationalist rubbish.
Banning all handguns was also a good thing - Brits generally don't idiots mowing down school students and office employees in frequent firearms frenzies.
Reply
Big Rocket 11:54AM (8/03/2007)
Dazza @ Aug 3rd 2007 10:41AM wrote:
"Americans typically believing any old sensationalist rubbish. Banning all handguns was also a good thing..."
Then the BBC, the *British* Broadcasting Corporation, has more sensationalist rubbish for you:
"A new study suggests the use of handguns in crime rose by 40% in the two years after the weapons were banned. The research, commissioned by the Countryside Alliance's Campaign for Shooting, has concluded that existing laws are targeting legitimate users of firearms rather than criminals... The Centre for Defence Studies at Kings College in London... carried out the research..."
Source:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1440764.stm
Derek 7:47PM (8/05/2007)
Outlaw guns and only the outlaws will have guns.
If you are going to commit a crime with a gun, you DON'T buy the gun through legal channels anyways.
BILL 11:23AM (8/03/2007)
We need to jump all over our governments and tell them to shove this stuff up their collective asses. The biggest welfare programs going are our governments. Other than the U. S. military I cannot find one government agency that is worth a shit.
Reply
Aki 11:24AM (8/03/2007)
"Brits generally don't idiots mowing down school students and office employees in frequent firearms frenzies."
School shootings are statistically insignificant compared to the frequent drug-related shooting homocides. A highly publicized school/office shooting isn't exactly the best measure of instituting gun control. Plus, the Virginia Tech shooting might've been averted if the school wasn't declared a gun-free zone (nobody else had guns, hence everybody was pretty helpless). Point is, it's never as simple as "more guns = more crime."
Reply
Carlos 11:24AM (8/03/2007)
2nd amendment discussion aside... I'm surprised the Brits keep letting their government go further and further. Are they really okay with all of it?
Reply
DriftPunch 1:16PM (8/03/2007)
You got it!
TheVoiceOfReason 12:10PM (8/03/2007)
There is a reason that "V for Vendetta" was based in England, and not in the United States. People may complain all the time about right-to-privacy organizations and organizations like the ACLU, but they do provide a beneficial service to society.
Reply
lawtrainee 12:51PM (8/03/2007)
This kind of crap is illegal in the US and will continue to be.
Its a 4th Amendment, unreasonable search and seizure.
Watch Out! The USSC likes to lower our rights when we are traveling in cars. Because, of "lower expectations of privacy in a car" and all the "government regulation of cars."
Basically the 4th Amendment has been eroded away with numerous warrantless search exceptions for cars. Every decade or so there is a new way to trample civil liberties. Ever since Reagan told the USSC to get tough on crime our judges have found ways to do so at the expense of everyone.
This is the idea, get tough on criminals, yet the problem is that those rights are meant to protect the innocent as well. We are thus all criminals in the eyes of the law first.
Reply
Dazza 1:00PM (8/03/2007)
Then the BBC, the *British* Broadcasting Corporation, has more sensationalist rubbish for you:
"A new study suggests the use of handguns in crime rose by 40% in the two years after the weapons were banned. The research, commissioned by the Countryside Alliance's Campaign for Shooting, has concluded that existing laws are targeting legitimate users of firearms rather than criminals... The Centre for Defence Studies at Kings College in London... carried out the research..."
I've no doubt - but an increase of 40% on an insignificant rate to begin with remains an insignificant rate - especially in comparison with countries such as the United States and South Africa.
Sorry, but the US has no more liberties than anyone else - for example, they even censor live television over events as trivial as a ten-nanosecond breast shot on live programming.
Reply