There is no justification for not holding anybody's profile on the database - the database should include everybody, not just those involved with the police.

James E. Petts, Burnham, England

Grate all we need an Orwellian nightmare when will the uk population wake up and see that democracy is not working nay more our government moves against us with every law they pass.

any one would think that they believed Bush's secret climent change paper and they wanted a nice docile stupid population that was going to be easy to deal with when the country turns in to Serbia.

At the end of the day if we want to stop going down this road to an Orwellian nightmare then we need to vote some one else into power some one new that is not one of the 3 main party's maybe just maybe then they will do what we want, not what they want.

MR Jones, Liverpool, England (United Kin,

Police state// George Orwell// guilty before being proven innocent// destruction of freedom and liberty// right to privacy//
We as people have fought so long and through so many wars for what? for this??? to be shackled under a fear of the state where our every step is monitored?Did your forebears give their lives for this? and you call yourselves free? Shame on you!
"men fight for freedom until they accumulate laws to take it away for themselves"
"I prefer liberty with danger to peace with slavery."
"Freedom has its life in the hearts, the actions, the spirit of men and so it must be daily earned and refreshed - else like a flower cut from its life-giving roots, it will wither and die." ~Dwight D. Eisenhower

Chendu, Broadstairs,

It is this continual invasion and control of our lives that has made me make the decision to emigrate to new zealand, I have never been given the opportunity to debate or vote or id cards or DNA databases. I do not trust the police or politicians in this country with this level of controlling information.

james, southampton,

They would never dare!

Riots would ensue in hours...

george Dorman, Hempstead, kent

I wonder how many people truly have nothing to hid. Let's think of a few common crimes. Speeding, obviously. Drink driving (remember that strength and size of measures has gone up since the rules were introduced so 2 glasses of wine or a pint of beer might well put you over the limit). Paying the builder or the cleaner in cash to help them avoid tax (and get yourself a discount). Taking stationary from the office or even just using the office printer or photocopier for your personal use. Inflating expense claims. Inflating insurance claims. Claiming to be 18 when you were 17 so you could get a drink in a pub, or to be 15 when you were 16 to buy cigarettes. Going one stop further on the bus than your ticket allows. Driving anywhere with a child under the age of 12 who's not strapped into a car seat.

So, you without sin, step forward please. Everyone else, better start behaving.

Jonathan, London, UK

The Government can't even take care of NI numbers, RAF service details, NHS details, CSA details etc.....

These are the people that we are supposed to trust with our DNA?

Until they can prove that no-one will have access to it, no-one will be able to use it in a nefarious way then there is no way that a national database of DNA has my support.

If the police have reason, then they can have my DNA. The same goes to my house. If they have reason, they can enter. If they have reason. I do not see the need for policemen to come into my home, and invade my privacy like that.

The police can already get the DNA of anyone, WHEN THEY NEED TO.

When else do they need it??

Katie Watson, Wittering,

What about 'subsidiarity'? Or shouldn't I mention that inconvenient subject? It was much trumpeted a couple of years or more ago, as being our defence against over-arching rulings from the EU. We were supposed to be able to rely upon this newly coined 'beastie' if we didn't like what the were telling us what to do, and we disagreed.

S. Barraclough, Huddersfield, W. Yorkshire

If the police did their job thoroughly and apolitically, if the magistrates and judges applied the full force of the law they already have at their disposal, if the socialist politicians stopped diluting those very laws by their enactment of legislation intentionally designed to impede the deterrence of crime (for example, the legislation against corporal punishment - a godsend to every young thug) then we wouldn't need a DNA database at all. Socialist politicians always find it more fitting with their warped ideology to incrementally reduce the freedoms of the innocent than take severe action against the liberties of the guilty. I always fond it odd that whenever authoritarianism rears its head that the ignorant people scream "fascist" when what they really should be saying is "socialist".

Robert, Townley,

If only the police have access to the DNA data and it is only used for crime investigation; then only criminals would want there not to be a database! (which makes me concerned to read the contrary arguments here!).

Further more if a database of everyone in the UK existed, then crime would be significantly reduced in the UK through increased probability of being caught - we may even lead the world in crime reduction.

Rod, Southampton, Hampshire

I can't help noticing (and with a certain degree of shame!) that whenever this issue is raised, the strongest voices in support of compulsory DNA testing are invariably not male.

Sue Harkins, Coventry, UK

I was given a criminal record with my fingerprints and DNA sample taken, yet I was never charged with any offence and have never set foot in a criminal court of law. I discovered I had a criminal record after making a 'data protection' request to the police. Such is the state of British justice when the police alone can pin a criminal record on someone without their knowledge. What has happened to due process of law.

Gordon Bell, Spruce Grove, Alberta Canada.

A NATIONAL DNA DATABASE ??!!! That's just plain Orwellian! The whole point of liberty and privacy is that government MAY NOT make demands which intrude upon one's private personal details. No government in the World has any authority to demand DNA from any law abiding private citizen not suspected of a crime. Period. Such a system is ripe for abuse and the unintended consequences could be significant. (Want to frame someone? Leave one of their hairs at a crime scene.... etc.)

Furthermore, there is no crime on earth which would justify the creation of a "National" DNA database which comprises the DNA of persons not suspected of crimes. Period. What an incredible intrusion upon every individual's privacy. Unconscionable! Outrageous!!! Anyone suggesting this should be tarred and feathered post haste.

If you want to share your DNA voluntarily, go right ahead. But no one, NO ONE, can command it.

Scott, Durham, NC, USA

What I really question is whether this government, or indeed any future government, can be trusted to keep this information A) secure and B) restricted to detection and prevention of crime.

Taking the security issue we have already seen how government departments are struggling to keep our information secure and safe as things stand now. How are they going to ensure that our genetic data stays safe?

For me, the even more worrying issue, is the possibility of the information being more widely disseminated in future. This country is already facing a huge demographics problem. Our poplulation is aging and that is going to place a huge financial burden on this country and the government will have to find ways to raise the extra money needed to support this increasingly aged population. What is to stop any future government from selling our DNA information to health insurance companies or other companies in order to raise much needed revenues?

Oliver, York,

Gordon Brown won't be satisfied until everyone has something to fear from a knock on the door in the night. Not guilty of anything? Never mind, it won't be long before the law is changed so that you are. Presumption of innocence until proven guilty? Not for much longer, soon the burden of proof will be on YOU to show that you're NOT guilty of any charge they fancy pinning on you.

Whoever thought that Britain would end up under a crazed dictatorship? Freedom and democracy? Don't make me larf! We have neither.

Bev, Bucks, UK

What right do the police have to try to influence law and policy in this way?

They can give feedback or complain if conditions are bad but to try to launch an assault on our freedoms? They should shut up and get on with their job.

"Ifs" and "buts" are not good arguments anyway.

Yet another reason for my imminent exit from this country.

Chris, London,

How many of us trust any government and an increasingly politicised police service management not to misuse a universal DNA bank? I don't, but those that do will truly deserve the nightmare visited upon them.

Privacy is a protection for the innocent, not an indulgence. The fact that certain high-profile investigations are properly conducted and successfully concluded does not change the bigger picture.

Don, Tyne & Wear,

I don't know why we don't go the whole hog and have radio transmitters implanted into our skulls so the police know exactly where everyone is at any particular point in time. That, together with the DNA database, should stamp out all crime. Right??? Just another example of the argument for a police state - stuff the idea of people having the right to a private life.

H Belcher, Wokingham,

Because of the easy availabilty of technology, many Police Forces are currently over relying on it and almost using it as a shortcut.
This is especially pertinant as more and more of Police Officers are junior in service years and many lack extensive investigative experience. (Partially due to so many experienced Police retiring or moving on to other professions and abroad.)

Just last week our local paper broke the story of an innocent young couple who were awoken by a Police raid after a Police helicopter thermal imaging camera , picked up the heat from an attic Central heating boiler and mistook it for a Marijuana grow op!
A startling raid that was based on an assumption with no other background check...
The news of this DNA data base restriction is good news ...Bring back proper investigation and communication, where technology is just a back up!

Patricia (Trish) Vanderveer, Wallasey, near Liverpool, England

I think a DNA register which helps police catch criminals is no bad thing. To Dave in London, I'm sorry to hear of your experience. However if there was a national DNA database with EVERYONE's details on it (for the purposes of assisting police investigations ONLY obviously) then you wouldn't have been pulled up on that. I have nothing to hide and therefore have no qualms with my DNA being stored. EU interference as always makes things that much more difficult for those trying to bring order to our country.

Louise, London,

George Orwell never dreamed of such control as is made possible by DNA records.
In years to come when politicians can no longer contain the problem they will contain those who would complain.
Give biometric data,identity cards,surveillance by sound and camera to those who find our dispaproval inconvienient and the future will be not as we would wish.

robert everitt, wolverhampton,

Judge Stephen Sedley has been demanding a national DNA database for some time. I have repeatedly said that I will be happy to give mine voluntarily, so long as he is in front of me in the queue giving his. I have not read anywhere that he has agreed to this plan, so must assume that when people like him demand a 'national' database they mean me and you, but not them.

eric campbell, harrogate, uk

I wonder whether some of these objections would still be raised if a serious crime were committed in their own back yard.I suspect the feeling is if it doesn't happen to you it must happen on another planet.
I support the data base and the human rights of past/future victims and their families.

Barbara, Durham, United Kingdom

Finally, the EU does something useful. What, this is two useful things in 2 years? I'm starting to think this might be worth my money.

Mike, Runcorn, United Kingdom

I am amazed at the number of drones on this thread who want everyone to have their DNA forcibly taken by the state.
My DNA is MINE, not the state's, and until and unless I commit a CRIME, it will remain mine.
We have had fingerprints for over a hundred years, and nobody has called for mass fingerprinting, until the ID scheme came along.
The police have NO business calling for forcible DNA registration, politicians make laws in his country; sheep who willingly surrender their DNA and fingerprints to the state should be aware that government changes, as do the times.
Hitler and Stalin would have loved DNA.
A large percentage of the population will do ANYTHING authority tells them is good for them, it is up to those of us with analytical capability and a brain to save these sheep from the slaughterhouse.

katherine langton, Blackburn, England

Human rights? Really? Has anyone been burgled recently and subsequently been told by the police that the best thing to do is "NOTHING"? The law states that "minimum force" may be used but does not actually define "minimum force". What is "minimum force" for say an old lady of 100 against a 20 year-old? Shooting?
No her human rights mean nothing - the victim can suffer but the criminal MUST BE PROTECTED at all costs!
These people who yell for human rights - just what are they doing for the Human Rights of the victims of crime? I can tell you - SWEET FANNY ADAMS!

M. Cawdery, Portadown, UK

Agree with Mel Barrows. My primary reason for leaving the UK was having lost my previous & valued sense of being a free man due (?) to an increasingly intrusive Labour Government, which seeks to control & watch over ALL aspects of our lives.
It seems to me very sad and regrettable that a proud Englishman with honesty in his heart and a sense of fair play and respect for others, has been forced into living abroad to find these laudable attributes again. In truth, I will surrender these GOD-given, natural rights to no-one without a fight. What does it say about a once GREAT & FREE Britain, that its people have been led into a meek and abject acceptance of the erosion of our personal liberties by this Government? A universal DNA database, giving access to intimate personal & medical details on ALL of us, with all the potential implications this has for 2nd parties (ie: insurance companies but others may also claim a call on this information, which we would have no control over) is yet another step along this corrosive road and I add my name to those, who campaign to resist it and its ilk at all costs.

John Grimshaw, Plumaugat,, Brittany, FRANCE

There is NO such thing as European Human Rights! They vary hugely from country to country. In Italy you can keep a suspect uncharged in jail for a year. Its not against Italin version of human rights, but it is against the UK version.
Stop being fooled by the corrupt spin doctors.
The same kind of differences apply to DNA.

Andy, London,

DNA data must remain. I sometimes think Human Rights activists are slightly gone in the head.

J Waldo Gonzales, Munich , Germany

Police face DNA ban ... on treating innocent people as convicted criminals.

This is very good news.

If the police and politicians think otherwise then they should be the first to volunteer THEIR dna for this intrusive and dangerous database.

But of course, they won't, will they.

robert haw, london,

Why don't the police set a good example and give their dna first and I will follow straight away.

Frederick, London, UK

DNA testing is now seen in the same way fingerprints once were - proof positive of the owner being invoklved in a crime. However, as we can see from the case of Shirley McKIe in Scotland, there is no end to the lengths that the authorities will go to abuse such tests.
DNA test procedures can be very flawed. All the police and the CPS care about is wining a case. It would be very, very easy for the prosecution to present a flawed test as definitive proof of guilt to a jury completely unaware of the flawed procedures, treating such evidence as definitive.
The opportunities for mis-carriages of justice are legion.

Eddie Reader, birmingham, england

It's not surprising to read that a record number of people are leaving Britain. Never mind the awful climate, the over-crowding, what is far worse is the extraordinary amount of state control that exsists there now over the people and their lives. It's eroded day by day and you are watched all the time. Awful. Not for me thanks!

Mel Barrows, Tenerife, Canary Isalnds

The DNA database MUST only be used for those who have been convicted of a crime. In a free and fair society, the civil liberties of the citizen must be paramount.

Hamad Lone, London, England

Yes DNA is a very accurate means of identification providing the person it belongs to has left the sample at the scene of crime concerned. Massive data bases could lead to abuse of the system.

Robert El-Cid, Hull., East Yorks.,

Tom Grace, if you have nothing to hide perhaps you'd care to leave your address on here as well? That will allow a anyone wishing to plant evidence on you to take a quick rummage through your wheelie bin and drop said material at the scene of any crime. You should also go to your local police station and turn yourself in as a potential criminal.

Paul, Coventry,

I think it should be voluntary, then, apparently, you will have the 50% of people who are saying they have nothing to hide and perfectly willing to give it.
It apparently would be a help to police and nobody who didn't want their dna on record would have to worry, unless they were guilty of a crime.

Tim, Toronto,

The myth of fingerprints. I've seen em and man they're all the same.

Here we go again.

Tony, Bristol, Enhland

And if your DNA sample should be stolen /lost by these incompetents and placed at a crime scene by criminals to cover their tracks?

You will be fast-tracked by the unelected judges known as the CPS into court.

You will be found guilty according to "expert" testimony which seems to be prevalent than common sense in the courts.

Frank, Northants,

I hope they win their case, Only convicted criminals should be on the data base. We should not live in a police state, we are losing our freedoms bit by bit. I would never give my DNA under any circumstances.

Johnny Norfolk, Mileham, England

NO DNA of innocent people should be taken; if there is a crime; we pay the police to do it's job and find the offender. Why treat the entire nation as possible suspects to crime.
Anyway complete DNA database is unworkable; it needs constant update; as people are coming and going; third parties may obtain access to it; which has a serious implications for the subjects of the data; this maybe so, as government agenda and policy change continuously overtime.
DNA does not prove crime; it only proves association; therefore; it's value as crime fighting tool is limited.
The current legal power of the police encourages them to arrest people unnecessarily for the sake of expanding the database. Meaning the criminalisation of large number of people. Accordingly, the best thing is where no DNA is kept until post conviction in a proper British Court.

Michael, London, England

Peter Jones - the police do have their DNA taken for elimination purposes, since there is a reasonable chance they will leave DNA at a scene. However access to this is governed by strict rules.

As for DNA on your records, DNA is a distraction. The sad fact is that if you are arrested, even mistakenly, your chances of going to the US or becoming a teacher are massively reduced. It can have a devastating affect on the innocent person. This is the issue - the fact that any background check shows you've been arrested but not that you were entirely innocent.

DNA catches murderers and rapists, so a database has a use to society. A record showing you were arrested is of little investigative use but can wreck your life/career. This is what libertarians should focus on, not DNA.

The original TC, London,

I know of two police actions recently that show why the DNA database and the finger print database should be limited to convicts.

1) A man was arrested for having his finger prints found in the ransacked house of an elderly acquaintance of mine. After being arrested and interrogated by police for some time, it was discovered that the man was employed by the landlord of the house and had decorated it some months earlier.

2) A man was arrested for a brutal attack and rape, solely on the basis of DNA. After many days it transpired that the man was the hospital porter who looked after the young lady who had been raped (this incident was reported on TV news in the last 3 months).

There would be thousand of these unpleasant incidents (and not all would be resolved correctly) if everybody was on these databases.

Frank, Surrey, UK

Frank, Croydon, Surrey

This smacks of 'Big brother', and with such prominece being given to DNA evidenc in court cases, then my own personal opinion is that this isa step too far. Going back to the 70's and the way they planted evidence then, if I am not mistaken, this could be done in exatly the sameway. What would be done to stop them planting evidence at the crime scene to link it to a potential suspect. Are the police 100% trustworthy

philip, Westhoughton, England

As many have already commented, the innocent have an awful lot to fear. There was recently a case of a man disabled by Parkinson's disease arrested for an alleged burglary which he was unlikely to have been able to physically carry out. He had to go through a very stressful experience because his DNA was on the database and was ultimately cleared. We'll see more of that. The implications of DNA being "planted" by criminals to confuse police via cigarette butts and who knows what else (dust from hoover contents?) have also not been fully addressed. Nor have the many criticisms of the statistical likelihood of several people among 60 million having a similar profile. No, the innocent have much to fear even if ultimately not convicted. What are the government going to do if say 20 million refuse to submit to this tyranny, throw them all in prison? I hope Europe thwarts the ambitions of our nascent police state.

S P, Swansea, UK

Still the idle assumption of a benign state. It should be obvious from the reaction here why the elites are perfectly happy to trust us with 'freedom' and 'democracy' - because we haven't the first idea what these entail are thus too stupid to recognize threats to either. Talk about sheep!

Jack, Lincoln, England

My DNA is my property, and not the Government’s, the State’s, or the people’s. The authorities have no right, morally or otherwise, to steal my DNA unless I have committed a crime. The British have become a sad nation of control freaks. One reason (amongst many) that I no longer live on your nasty, overcrowded, cold, little island.

Steve Cox, Pattaya, Thailand

I'm fed up with people here reasoning that, just because a couple of police officers involved in high profile investigations support a universal DNA database, 'the police' as a whole do. I don't support such a move and I know other cops who feel the same as I do, believing that this is a step too far and verging on Orwellian. Try to remember that some of us didn't join the police implement a police state and destroy basic liberties.

The DNA database is a great tool. But only the people convicted by a court of a significant offence should have their profiles detained indefinitely.

Stuart, S Yorks, UK

How frightening that there are so many gullible and ignorant souls out there who want to give the police and the government even more surveillance powers. Please be aware... for every power we surrender there are countless ways in which it will be abused. A few of the sharper correspondents have listed several ways in which this will happen, not least the potential for criminals to put the innocent in the frame. Three cheers for Europe if they can stop this madness.

Ian Simpkins, Offley Hay,

Your report is (as often the case) anglo-centric, as it does not mention the fact that the law in England is different to Scotland. In England, DNA samples are taken from all people arrested, and retained on file. In Scotland, the law there is that DNA is destroyed for all suspects not convicted (except for violent or sexual allegations).
So, this would be a much bigger change in Scotland than in England. Although both countries would, of course, be subject to over-arching EU law, it seems remiss of The Times (who has readers in both countries) not to point out the differing laws in each nation at the current time, and - depending on the EU case result - might continue to differ significantly in the future.

Chris, Northampton, England

I was mistakely arrested. (actually i was the victim of the said crime). Although the police quickly realised they had made a mistake, they still took my DNA.

Some time later i needed a police record check for Residency in a foreign country. When i received it, it ran to 3 pages using such phrases as "non conviction data for fraud and kindred offences". The reason my Record check showed anything relating to this police mistake was once your DNA is taken, the reason for taking it is permanlty recorded.

After months of fighting, i eventually got the informtion cleared. Only with the approval of the deputy chief constable.

Remember i was the victim of the crime, not part involved or lucky not to be charged.

Anyone who thinks "law abiding citizens" have nothing to fear are very niave and sadly mistaken

dave, london, london

Of course the police should have everyones DNA. further more it should be taken and registered at every birth and from and from every person that enters this country no matter how short a time they say they intend to stay, and when they have time, take everyone else's as well till they have a complete register.

alan, plymouth,

Considering that even now CDs with DNA profiles of convicted criminals are lost/misplaced/sent on holiday, it would be unfair to burden the state with more data. Let them prove that they can handle the existing data properly and in accordance with the law, and then there might be a future legitimate debate about collecting more DNA data. For the time being, the idea is offensive to most people.

Martin Baldwin-Edwards, Athens, Greece

Here we go again, Human rights are against the law abiding people of this world. I would have my DNA on the system, why? Because I have nothing to hide. The only limitation I would have is its only used for crime perposes. I would not want any Tom, Dick or Harry having access.
As mentioned before why put Criminals into a society of there own. Prisons need to be prisons. The death penalty should be like the yanks do ... death row. Giving the chance to overturn convictions should new evidance come to light.

Tom Grace, Coventry,

A few years ago it was suggested that all Police should have their DNA taken for eliminate purposes only. As I recall the Police Federation went fairly ballistic at the idea.

Peter Jones, London,

Ah, the privacy versus crime protection debate.
One ridiculous extreme is that everyone has a probe implanted in their heads to monitor for criminal activity.
The other is for privacy to completely rule, restricting evidence to only eyewitnesses.

To be honest, I would be okay for my DNA to be on a database, as long as I fully knew if anyone was accessing it, and for what reasons.

I mean you wouldn't want insurance companies profiling you for genetic diseases and the like. Not to mention a future government misusing the data.

On a side note, the above article seems rather biased, the case for removing people's DNA only takes up the last two paragraphs. Also the people requesting the removal, have their 'crimes' listed in full even though these were dropped.

Doran, Leeds,

Six awful crimes cannot justify the 56 million crimes involved in stealing DNA from all those not currently on the database. If it is to be considered at all it should not be done in the over emotional shadow of recent events. Those currently calling for this gross invasion of our rights should be ashamed to be trying to cash in on these terrible events. The police in particular used to be expected to behave with integrity not to use any opportunity to ingratiate themselves with the control freaks in the Home Office. This is a disgrace.

D.L. Stephens, York, England

I never ever thought I would ever think/say that the Death Penalty should be re introduced. On the day that two high profile criminals are sent to prison, to serve out the remainder of their days, behind bars, and amidst reports that not one single prison space remains available, forcing the early release of some prisoners-one cant but wonder what it is all about. What is the purpose/point of having prisons full of people whom society has deemed are not fit to walk amongst us? The problem and costs of housing these people whilst inside& out has grown extensively. My problem being, whilst DNA can catch and convict them, what is the point, if upon release, they proceed to re-offend. Life is too short for most of us-certainly, the untimely and horrific nature of the deaths of the victims of these men seem to concede, that we, as a society value the life of the perpetrator- ahead of the victim,we can generously afford them the opportunity to live and breath out their natural life.

ann, mayo, Ireland

I hope that those who have not been convicted but whose DNA is retained are successful in having it removed from the database.

The idea that the government should demand all of the people of Britain to submit to DNA recording is completely incompatible with the concept of freedom. Why should the vast majority of law abiding citizens be treated as if they were all potential criminals.

I for one strongly resent the implication that I am anything like the people who have committed these atrocious crimes or that I should be considered a potential threat.

In a free society, people should be stopped from committing crimes by a lack of will to do so, not because they know that if they do that they will be caught.

Do parents install CCTV in their homes to gather evidence if their child misbehaves? No. They instead instill a knowledge of right and wrong and that all actions have consequences.

This government should also note that all oppressive regimes are ultimately destroyed.

TC, London, UK

Three Cheers for Strasbourg. If the Tories want hand over their DNA, let them. For those of us that value our civil liberties, we must fight to keep them with dignity. We are goose stepping down to the presumption of an infallible legal criminal justice system with no judicial oversight. It's disgraceful how blasé people are prepared to surrender their freedom for the illusion of security. - 'For those that do deserve neither' - Benjamin Franklin, 1759.

1984 was a stark warning, not an instruction manual.

George, Walkington, Yorkshire

"You have nothing to fear as long as you are a normal law abiding person...I don't see any problems with this idea."

You don't see any problems because you have no imagination. Alas criminals do. They will take cigarette butts from litter bins and put them in cars, or drop them in bank robberies. And who has their door kicked down at 6am and armed police burst in? You do. Just because you dropped a cigarette butt with your DNA on it in a litter bin. And once you've been arrested (and released after a few days if you're lucky to have a cast-iron alibi) you find you can't travel to America without getting a visa beforehand - because arrested people aren't eligible to go to America without a visa.

Kay Tie, York,

Like most policemen and MP's, the lot above are too ignorant to know what they are asking for. Everybody, except identical twins, has unique DNA but DNA profiling doesnt chart the 3 billion letter code of DNA, it 'profiles'. This is a bit like playing a second of music from half a dozen random places on a CD and comparing it with a second of music taken from half a dozen random places on another CD...if it matches then the odds are pretty good that they are the same CD. Some scientists say DNA profiling will randomly match 1 in 30,000 individuals. Others say that, because the population of a region or a country tend to have interbred over many many years, the odds are 1 in 10,000. Even if you allow the odds are 1 in 100,000 that means that a national database will have an average of 60 people who match each other and every time there is a crime, 60 people will get a knock on the door at midnight.

Boris, Deal, UK

It's all completely academic, pretty soon well have enough related DNA to identify large swathes of the country.

Every crime committed will just give the police more of an excuse to test entire families.

It's only a matter of time before crimes will be provable solely on DNA evidence and as a scientist I support this. As a father, I also support paternity testing, but for political re-election reasons I see this not happening.

A close second to all crimes being solved is all crimes but paternity fraud, so I support this idea,.

Charles, London,

You have nothing to fear as long as you are a normal law abiding person...I don't see any problems with this idea, only people with something to hide and troublemakers have objections to this. Bring it in sooner and stop all the messing around.

Paul, Liverpool, England

No innocent person should have to provide a DNA sample.
If they want to give it freely then that is a different matter.
There is no truth in the saying nothing to hide, nothing to fear.

AndyN, Reading,

Much as we criticise the European parliament for some of its petty decisions, I have to say - they're way ahead of us on human rights.

It astounds me that the police (and UK government) thinks its acceptable to keep the DNA of innocent people, who've never been charged.

I've no problem them keeping the DNA of those found guilty, but all other DNA (including those arrested but not charged, and those charged but found not guilty) should be destroyed.

Otherwise it just encourages the police to arrest people on some trumped up charge, not formally charge them, let them go but keep their DNA - hence progressing a de facto national DNA database.

Let's hear it for the Europeans !

Clive, Surrey,

No way should a person who has committed a minor traffic offence, or a non-recordable offence have their DNA taken and kept on a database.
If the person is found not to be connected to any recordable offence, then the DNA should be destroyed.

P.Robinson, Northants, UK