Who Should be on The DNA Register?谁应该对DNA的注册？
Balancing the responsibilities of the State against the rights of the individual is one ofthe most difficult things for politicians to get right.平衡的责任，国家对个人权利的，是一个之最困难的事，政治人物来获得正确的。 The tendency is to be all in favour of civil liberties while in opposition but to revert to authoritarian type when in government.趋势是将全部赞成在公民自由，而反对，但要回复到威权型时，在政府。 That’s certainly happened with this Labour government.这当然是发生在这工党政府。 And in times of threats to national security, politicians need to be quite courageous to resist all the demands to impose authoritarian measures on the populace.并在时代的国家安全的威胁，政客需要相当勇敢抗拒所有的要求强加威权措施对安乐窝。
The argument surrounding DNA evidence is a perfect example of the dilemmas faced.论据周围的DNA证据，是一个完美的例子之一，所面临的两难问题。 At the moment only someone interviewed by Police has their DNA taken.截至目前，只有有人采访警方已经他们的DNA 。 If they are charged it is kept on their records, but not removed if they fail to be convicted.如果他们被指控是保持对他们的纪录，但不能完全取消，如果他们不被定罪。 Some argue that if the government had everyone’s DNA on record it would make the Police’s life far easier and crimes would be solved much more quickly.有些人认为，如果政府当时每个人的DNA的纪录，它将使警察的生命更容易和犯罪行为将得到解决更为迅速。 It’sa similar argument to ID cards.这是类似的道理，以身份证。
This week European judges will consider the case of two people who were charged with a crime but never convicted who want their DNA wiped off the national database.这周欧洲法官将考虑的情况下两个人被落案控以一项罪行，但从来没有被定罪的人希望他们的DNA抹掉国家数据库。 This case has far reaching implications and could lead to more than 500,000 other people’s DNA being wiped.这宗案件有深远的影响，并可能导致50多万人的DNA被抹去。
This is a really difficult one for people like me who believe that the rights of the individual must be protected from the pervasive influence of the State.这是一个真正的困难之一，为人民和我一样的人认为，个人的权利必须受到保护，免受无孔不入的影响力的国家。 In theory I would support the right of the innocent individual to have their records wiped if they had been found not guilty of a crime, or not even charged.在理论上，我会支持的权利，无辜个人有自己的记录抹去，如果他们被发现不认罪的犯罪的，或者甚至不收费。 However, the real world does not operate in this way.然而，现实世界并不具有这样的。 The individual also has the right to be protected from harm by others, and it is the role of the State to introduce laws which enable that to happen.个人也有权利受到保护，免遭伤害别人，这是国家的作用，以引进的法律，让这种情况发生。
As I understand it the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives believe that only those convicted of a crime should be on the DNA database.据我所知，自由民主党和保守党认为，只有那些被判定有罪，就应该由DNA资料库。 It’sa consistent position and easy to argue.这是一贯的立场，并容易争辩。 The fact that 100,000 innocent children are on it and should never have been, 26,000 police-collected samples have been left off it and half a million entries have been misrecorded lend weight to the view that the government is incapable of managing such sensitive data.事实说，有10万无辜儿童的意见，并应永远都没有， 26000名警察采集样本已不放过，它和50万条目已misrecorded借给重认为，政府无能力处理这些敏感的数据。
And yet, and yet.可是，可是。 What worries me is that sex attackers and murderers are more difficult to find without full access to DNA records.我担心的是，性攻击和杀人凶手就比较难找到，没有充分接触到的DNA纪录。 So I wonder if a messy compromise isn’t something we should be considering.所以，我不知道，如果一个混乱的妥协，是不是我们应该考虑的。 My only exceptions to the “No DNA record unless charged” rule would be for people interviewed on suspicion of rape or murder.我唯一的例外，以"无DNA的记录，除非控"的规则，将人们约谈涉嫌强奸或谋杀罪。 I accept that it would mean some innocent people being added to the DNA register, but it would undoubtedly reduce the time it takes the Police to solve these two heinous crimes, and therefore prevent others from taking place.我承认，这将意味着一些无辜的人正在加入到DNA的登记，但它无疑将减少所花费的时间，警方为了解决这两个犯下的滔天罪行，并因此阻止他人发生。 Of course one can take this further and use the same argument in favour of everyone having their DNA taken, as it would then lead to other crimes being solved more quickly.当然可以借此进一步，并使用相同的论点支持，人人有自己的DNA所采取的，因为这将导致其他罪行的解决更加迅速。 I realise that.我才意识到这一点。 But I’m afraid that murder and rape are crimes which merit a different and stronger approach.不过，我看，恐怕谋杀和强奸罪，值得不同的，更强的做法。
UPDATE: Martin corrects me in the comments: “Actually Iain you’re wrong to say:”If they are charged it is kept on their records, but not removed if they fail to be convicted.”People who are arrested but not charged remain on the DNA database.”Before 2001, the police could take DNA samples during investigations but had to destroy the samples and the records derived from them on the Database if the people concerned were acquitted or charges were not proceeded with.The law was changed in 2001 to remove this requirement, and changed again in 2004 so that DNA samples could be taken from anyone arrested for a recordable offence and detained in a police station.”http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/science-research/using-science/dna-database/So the dataabse is already being populated with the DNA of people who have never been charged just in case they later go on to commit a crime. 更新：马丁改正，我在评论： "其实伊恩错啦说： "如果他们被指控是保持对他们的纪录，但不能完全取消，如果他们不被定罪"的人被捕，但未被指控留关于DNA数据库" ， 2001年之前，警方可以采取DNA样本，在调查期间，但已销毁样本，并记录来自他们对数据库的，如果人被宣告无罪或收费不接着with.the法改变2001年，以消除这一要求，并改变了在2004年再次使DNA样本，可以采取由任何人被捕，可录式的罪行，并被关押在一个警察站" 。 http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/science-research/using -science/dna-database/so该dataabse已被人口与DNA的人，从来没有被起诉只是在情况下，他们稍后会去上犯下的罪行。 Either they should be removed or everyone should be added. 要么是应去除或每个人都应该加入。
Database State 数据库状态 Section has more related reports 科更多相关报道 Help keep RINF going..有利于保持rinf去..Comment on 'Who Should be on The DNA Register?' : 评论'的人应该是对的DNA注册？ ' ：
Related News: 相关新闻：
