From The Guardian: “Primary school children should be eligible for the DNA database if they exhibit behaviour indicating they may become criminals in later life, according to Britain’s most senior police forensics expert.” Gary Pugh is a spokesperson for ACPO, the Association of Chief Police Officers.
Essentially, this is branding children as criminals before they have even committed a crime, before they are even old enough to really understand what what crime is. If you brand a child a criminal, there are well studied reasons why they are more likely to become one.
ACPO seem to have no regard at all for privacy or the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. They are constantly trying to take away our fundamental rights.
The usual response is “if you have nothing to hide…” but this case demonstrates very well why everyone has things to hide. Say you have a gene known to relate to aggressive behaviour, should the government know that so they can keep extra tabs on you? Considering you are already more likely to be stopped and searched if you are black, do you think the police are immune to prejudice and stereotyping? Do you trust the police to keep the fact that you are on the DNA database because of a few early childhood fights secret from the press when you want to stand for election or speak out on an issue?
“Of course the people don’t want war. But after all, it’s the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it’s a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger.”
– Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
I highly recommend reading the discussion on Slashdot, which for once is quite good.