They Don’t Know When to Shut Up

Alan Johnson, erstwhile fuckwit in chief at the home office home secretary, is still banging the drum about DNA and how keeping innocent people on the database is a good thing.

The DNA database has identified 410,589 crimes with a DNA match over the last decade.

Last year in 800 of the most serious cases – murder, rape and manslaughter – DNA was central to police inquiries.

The Government plans to reduce the DNA matches that the police can make in such cases because they think that Scotland has a better model. But the police in Scotland, where they have a 13 per cent lower success rate, want to move to the current system in England and Wales.

The Conservatives have got themselves in the terrible position
of supporting criminals in their efforts to evade capture and opposing the police.

Removing innocent people’s profiles is not “supporting criminals”. This is because they are innocent and therefore there is no reason to have them on the database.

Same old authoritarian fuckwittery from the same old authoritarian fuckwits.

Far from being confused, the Conservatives are doing the right thing. Not enough, and nothing like fast enough, but they are moving in the right direction.

6 Comments

  1. To these fuckwits, innocent people are just criminals who haven’t been convicted yet.

  2. I would actually support DNA retention and genetic testing if there was a test to identify stupid fuckers like Alan Johnson. We could terminate those babies before birth and in doing so increase the average IQ of the human race.

    Johnson is just another one of those New Labour cunts who will never admit he was wrong.

  3. Trouble is, from Blair onwards, they are convinced that CSI was a documentary. It is ALL based on that.

  4. “Last year in 800 of the most serious cases – murder, rape and manslaughter – DNA was central to police inquiries.”

    A thought – in how many of those 800 cases did the perpetrators have no previous record whatsoever?

    i.e. is it actually an argument in support of your contention or is it just meaningless flim flam?

Comments are closed.