For years supposed experts and laymen alike have debated: What makes a person the way they are…Nurture? Nature? A Combination of the two?
Well, a recent forensics ‘expert’ from world-renown Scotland Yard apparently thinks that we shouldn’t leave things up to chance when trying to identify future criminals (yes, you read that right: future criminals…)
You can read about his statements online at the Guardian website here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/mar/16/youthjustice.children
Here part of the beginning of the article, if you are curious (note- emphasis mine):
“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, director of forensic sciences at Scotland Yard and the new DNA spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo), said a debate was needed on how far Britain should go in identifying potential offenders, given that some experts believe it is possible to identify future offending traits in children as young as five.
‘If we have a primary means of identifying people before they offend, then in the long-term the benefits of targeting younger people are extremely large,’ said Pugh. ‘You could argue the younger the better. Criminologists say some people will grow out of crime; others won’t. We have to find who are possibly going to be the biggest threat to society.’
Pugh admitted that the deeply controversial suggestion raised issues of parental consent, potential stigmatisation and the role of teachers in identifying future offenders, but said society needed an open, mature discussion on how best to tackle crime before it took place. There are currently 4.5 million genetic samples on the UK database – the largest in Europe – but police believe more are required to reduce crime further. ‘The number of unsolved crimes says we are not sampling enough of the right people,’ Pugh told The Observer. However, he said the notion of universal sampling – everyone being forced to give their genetic samples to the database – is currently prohibited by cost and logistics.”
Where do we go from here? Are we truly prohibited from going after potential criminals because it is not cost effective or logistically feasible? What about privacy concerns? Or do we even have any privacy rights in this new post 911 world? What has changed…or has anything changed regarding giving up freedom for safety?
Are we seeing this virtual prison…the coming bondage of our youngest children? Or is this technology and science finally finding the genetic difference between a future responsible citizen versus a future hard core criminal?
What do you think?
Recent Comments