DNA & Crime

[FTA Lawyer]

FTA, if you look at the date of the OP, you'll notice that the thread was started in May 2006.

According to the press release (October 2004) in your link, Canada's National DNA Data Bank dates from June 2000. The press release is about expanding whose DNA can be added to the databank. (Were these amendments passed? The list is quite restricted.)

But your point is taken. The question in the thread subtitle wonders whether we should have a Data Bank when in fact we already had one. In fact though, I don't think there's any issue about having such a bank. The question concerns whose DNA should be included.

It's also not clear when or who is now requesting DNA samples. For example, are DNA samples taken for background or security checks?

I see that this was an old thread, but as you've noted, the DNA bank was already around for years even then.

All I can tell you about is the situations where DNA is taken for Criminal Code convictions. Section 487.04 of the code tells you, but for ease of reference I'm pasting in the relevant offences.

Primary designated offences are ones where the court must order a DNA sample, unless an extremely rare exception can be shown warranted by the offender. These offences now include the following:

“primary designated offence” means

(a) an offence under any of the following provisions, namely,

(i) section 75 (piratical acts),

(i.01) section 76 (hijacking),

(i.02) section 77 (endangering safety of aircraft or airport),

(i.03) section 78.1 (seizing control of ship or fixed platform),

(i.04) subsection 81(1) (using explosives),

(i.05) section 83.18 (participation in activity of terrorist group),

(i.06) section 83.19 (facilitating terrorist activity),

(i.07) section 83.2 (commission of offence for terrorist group),

(i.08) section 83.21 (instructing to carry out activity for terrorist group),

(i.09) section 83.22 (instructing to carry out terrorist activity),

(i.1) section 83.23 (harbouring or concealing),

(i.11) section 151 (sexual interference),

(ii) section 152 (invitation to sexual touching),

(iii) section 153 (sexual exploitation),

(iv) section 155 (incest),

(v) subsection 212(4) (offence in relation to juvenile prostitution),

(vi) section 233 (infanticide),

(vii) section 235 (murder),

(viii) section 236 (manslaughter),

(ix) section 244 (causing bodily harm with intent),

(x) section 267 (assault with a weapon or causing bodily harm),

(xi) section 268 (aggravated assault),

(xii) section 269 (unlawfully causing bodily harm),

(xiii) section 271 (sexual assault),

(xiv) section 272 (sexual assault with a weapon, threats to a third party or causing bodily harm),

(xv) section 273 (aggravated sexual assault),

(xvi) section 279 (kidnapping),

(xvi.1) section 279.01 (trafficking in persons),

(xvii) section 279.1 (hostage taking),

(xviii) section 431 (attack on premises, residence or transport of internationally protected person),

(xix) section 431.1 (attack on premises, accommodation or transport of United Nations or associated personnel), and

(xx) subsection 431.2(2) (explosive or other lethal device),

( an offence under any of the following provisions of the Criminal Code, chapter C-34 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1970, as they read from time to time before January 4, 1983, namely,

(i) section 144 (rape),

(ii) section 146 (sexual intercourse with female under fourteen and between fourteen and sixteen), and

(iii) section 148 (sexual intercourse with feeble-minded, etc.),

© an offence under paragraph 153(1)(a) (sexual intercourse with step-daughter, etc.) of the Criminal Code, chapter C-34 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1970, as it read from time to time before January 1, 1988,

(c.1) an offence under any of the following provisions of the Security of Information Act, namely,

(i) section 6 (approaching, entering, etc., a prohibited place),

(ii) subsection 20(1) (threats or violence), and

(iii) subsection 21(1) (harbouring or concealing), and

(d) an attempt to commit or, other than for the purposes of subsection 487.05(1), a conspiracy to commit an offence referred to in any of paragraphs (a) to ©;

Secondary designated offences are ones where the court can exercise its discretion whether or not to order a DNA sample...by weighing the privacy of the offender against the interests of the public. These offences now include:

“secondary designated offence” means

(a) an offence under any of the following provisions, namely,

(i) to (v) [Repealed, 2001, c. 41, s. 17]

(vi) subsection 160(3) (bestiality in the presence of or by child),

(vii) section 163.1 (child pornography),

(viii) section 170 (parent or guardian procuring sexual activity),

(ix) section 173 (indecent acts),

(x) section 220 (causing death by criminal negligence),

(xi) section 221 (causing bodily harm by criminal negligence),

(xii) subsection 249(3) (dangerous operation causing bodily harm),

(xiii) subsection 249(4) (dangerous operation causing death),

(xiv) section 252 (failure to stop at scene of accident),

(xv) subsection 255(2) (impaired driving causing bodily harm),

(xvi) subsection 255(3) (impaired driving causing death),

(xvii) section 266 (assault),

(xviii) section 269.1 (torture),

(xix) paragraph 270(1)(a) (assaulting a peace officer),

(xx) [Repealed, 2001, c. 41, s. 17]

(xxi) section 344 (robbery),

(xxii) subsection 348(1) (breaking and entering with intent, committing offence or breaking out),

(xxiii) subsection 430(2) (mischief that causes actual danger to life),

(xxiv) section 433 (arson — disregard for human life), and

(xxv) section 434.1 (arson — own property),

( an offence under any of the following provisions of the Criminal Code, as they read from time to time before July 1, 1990, namely,

(i) section 433 (arson), and

(ii) section 434 (setting fire to other substance), and

© an attempt to commit or, other than for the purposes of subsection 487.05(1), a conspiracy to commit an offence referred to in paragraph (a) or (;

Here's the link if you want to look into it more:

Criminal Code s. 487.04

As you can see, we have a pretty broad scope to allow for convicted criminals to have their DNA stored for future reference.

FTA

[DrGreenthumb]

I see that this was an old thread, but as you've noted, the DNA bank was already around for years even then.

All I can tell you about is the situations where DNA is taken for Criminal Code convictions. Section 487.04 of the code tells you, but for ease of reference I'm pasting in the relevant offences.

Primary designated offences are ones where the court must order a DNA sample, unless an extremely rare exception can be shown warranted by the offender. These offences now include the following:

Secondary designated offences are ones where the court can exercise its discretion whether or not to order a DNA sample...by weighing the privacy of the offender against the interests of the public. These offences now include:

Here's the link if you want to look into it more:

Criminal Code s. 487.04

As you can see, we have a pretty broad scope to allow for convicted criminals to have their DNA stored for future reference.

FTA

Good post FTA, people should know how rampant this kind of collection already is. I had to give a DNA sample about 5 years ago for a drive over.08 charge. I thought that was pretty friggin stupid. I can see it for murders, and sex crimes but it seems they are using any excuse they can think of to get a copy of your genetic blueprint nowadays. More police state bullshit if you ask me. I think they should have to give very good reasons why they deserve to aquire that kind of highly personal info, it shouldn't be just given for any bloody reason they want it.

As for security cameras in public places, I'm all for them, the more the better, just don't try and install one in my home.

[DangerMouse]

no the government should not build a dna data bank

One word -democide.

cause governments, throughout history kill more of their own people then all wars

Rummel defines democide as "The murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder"

democide rampant unchecked government power.

Now with such history only the most foolish person would argue to arm the government with the further means to oppress a population.

Considering your comments here and what has been done to aboriginal people in Canada since the arrival of the boats from Europe...every last one of you will be in the DNA data bank

[Qwerty]

Absolutely.

We should also fingerprint and store the DNA of all new immigrants.

[DrGreenthumb]

Absolutely.

We should also fingerprint and store the DNA of all new immigrants.

Why just new immigrants? If you think its such a great idea why don't you toddle off down the police station and give a swab and your prints? you don't seem to need to scratch very deep beneath the surface of most conservative supporters to see the underlying fear and loathing of anyone different than themselves. So is it all immigrants you want printed or just the darker skinned ones?

[Canadian Blue]

Why just new immigrants? If you think its such a great idea why don't you toddle off down the police station and give a swab and your prints? you don't seem to need to scratch very deep beneath the surface of most conservative supporters to see the underlying fear and loathing of anyone different than themselves. So is it all immigrants you want printed or just the darker skinned ones?

Impossible, I think the more Mexican women we have coming to Canada the better.