THE very mention of human rights is enough to send my temperature soaring.
The minute someone comes up with a constructive idea aimed at advancing the quality of 21st century life, up pop the PC brigade (not you constable, I mean those holier-than-thou do-gooders) to kill it off.
Take the brilliant concept of banking a DNA sample from every new-born baby in the UK (or ideally the world).
The idea is that by the end of this century, police will know in an instant the identity of the perpetrator of EVERY crime where DNA is present – even if tracking them down might not be so easy.
I mean, the sort of person we are talking about is unlikely to be waiting for the local PC (that’s you, constable) to knock on his mum’s front door. Or to greet him with a jolly ‘It’s a fair cop, guv’.
But babies certainly won’t object to having their DNA taken. Neither, surely, would any law-abiding parent, knowing that the DNA bank would be contributing to a safer world for our children and grandchildren.
We have the technology, so let’s use it to the maximum (are you listening, FIFA?). That’s simple common sense.
But of course the PC plonkers won’t have it. I mean, taking a baby’s DNA would be impinging on the little innocent’s human rights because we don’t know if ‘goo goo’ means ‘yes’ or ‘no’.
Then there’s the baby’s parents. Their feelings have to be considered, of course, particularly if mum is a junkie alcoholic whose other five kids are in care and dad’s is doing 15 years for bludgeoning his best friend half to death.
Well, something like that.
Since the objection lobby would be made up largely of those with something to hide, we’re back in the world of victim and perpetrator.
And in a week in which British law took a deserved battering from the despairing Dowlers, as ever it’s the baddie who wins.
The minute someone comes up with a constructive idea aimed at advancing the quality of 21st century life, up pop the PC brigade (not you constable, I mean those holier-than-thou do-gooders) to kill it off.
Take the brilliant concept of banking a DNA sample from every new-born baby in the UK (or ideally the world).
The idea is that by the end of this century, police will know in an instant the identity of the perpetrator of EVERY crime where DNA is present – even if tracking them down might not be so easy.
I mean, the sort of person we are talking about is unlikely to be waiting for the local PC (that’s you, constable) to knock on his mum’s front door. Or to greet him with a jolly ‘It’s a fair cop, guv’.
But babies certainly won’t object to having their DNA taken. Neither, surely, would any law-abiding parent, knowing that the DNA bank would be contributing to a safer world for our children and grandchildren.
We have the technology, so let’s use it to the maximum (are you listening, FIFA?). That’s simple common sense.
But of course the PC plonkers won’t have it. I mean, taking a baby’s DNA would be impinging on the little innocent’s human rights because we don’t know if ‘goo goo’ means ‘yes’ or ‘no’.
Then there’s the baby’s parents. Their feelings have to be considered, of course, particularly if mum is a junkie alcoholic whose other five kids are in care and dad’s is doing 15 years for bludgeoning his best friend half to death.
Well, something like that.
Since the objection lobby would be made up largely of those with something to hide, we’re back in the world of victim and perpetrator.
And in a week in which British law took a deserved battering from the despairing Dowlers, as ever it’s the baddie who wins.
