NationStates Jolt Archive

The following is proposed to the UN for consideration:

WHEREAS the security and well being of a nation's citizens is primary the following is a proposal for the National / International DNA Database.

The National / International DNA Database is designed to store DNA for use in crime prevention and resolution as well as identity of victims of a catastrophic event when traditional means are not viable.

Implementation of the NIDB would be grandfathered whereas existing citizens of the implementing nation would have the choice and be encouraged to submit a DNA sample into the NIDB.

All government employees, emergency workers and military will be required to submit a sample of their DNA to the NIDB.

New born children will have a sample of their DNA submitted to the NIDB as part of delivery proceedure by medical staff either at hospital or private practician.

Immigrants and visitors to the country will be required to submit a sample of their DNA to the NIBD upon arrival and prior to being cleared by customs.

Those convicted of crimes will have their DNA submitted into the NIBD upon processing at the retention facility.

The information will be stored in a protected database with back up, in which RSA keys as well as touch scan capability will be required to access. The database will only be accessible within the specialized network of which only law enforcement and military should have access.

The goal of the NIBD is to curb if at all eliminate such acts as, but not limited too, murder, rape and terroristic acts.

No. Next you'll want to bar-code everyone.

Oh, and no for using the non-word "terroristic."

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadnerb bin Cluich
Cluichstani Ambassador to the UN

Barcoding is somewhat archaic and doesn't necessarily have the same purpose. Barcoding was used to keep track of people at all times.

The NIDB is used as a method to identify those involved in criminal acts, such as rape and catastrophic events, such as plane crashes.

People don't leave their barcode behind when they rape or kill you, now do they?

Under no circumstances would we be willing to support such an intrusive piece of mandatory authoritarian rubbish.

Sheik Nadnerb, we are beginning to worry that one or other of us needs to see a doctor. Or more likely a barman.

Under no circumstances would we be willing to support such an intrusive piece of mandatory authoritarian rubbish.

Sheik Nadnerb, we are beginning to worry that one or other of us needs to see a doctor. Or more likely a barman.

Let's hit the bar, mate.

OOC: Correct me if I'm wrong, but there was some book written about barcoding people, wasn't there? Or maybe my memory is failing me...

This just wouldn't be practical in some of the larger nations, when you have 8 billion people where are you going to put all of this stuff at?

The Blue Eyed Man
Cookeslandic UN Ambassador

The following is proposed to the UN for consideration:

WHEREAS the security and well being of a nation's citizens is primary...Your first clause, New Klymaxia, is false. Preservation of liberty is the first principle of many of this body's member nations.

*slaps forehead* My Grod, I'm agreeing with the Cluichstanis. I think I need to lie down.

--L.T.

This just wouldn't be practical in some of the larger nations, when you have 8 billion people where are you going to put all of this stuff at?

The Blue Eyed Man
Cookeslandic UN Ambassador

DNA is run through a processor, it outputs the information onto a computer, the computer stores the information. You wouldn't keep the swabs.

And if there's a computer malfunction? Or there is mixed DNA in a sample? What about genetic chimaeras?

Your first clause, New Klymaxia, is false. Preservation of liberty is the first principle of many of this body's member nations.

*slaps forehead* My Grod, I'm agreeing with the Cluichstanis. I think I need to lie down.

--L.T.

Other body members not agreeing with security being a primary concern, doesn't make my statement false. The proposal is based on security being a primary concern.

Preservation of liberty does not protect against rape, murder or any other ill of society.

This proposal is really not any different than having your fingerprints kept in the judicial system after being convicted of a crime.

And if there's a computer malfunction? Or there is mixed DNA in a sample? What about genetic chimaeras?

Computer crashes are dealt with through back ups, mirrored drives, etc. Proceedures are in place to prevent cross contamination. Those diagnosed with Genetic chimaeras would obviously have two DNA entries on their file.

This proposal is really not any different than having your fingerprints kept in the judicial system after being convicted of a crime.

Except that you want to do it to everyone, whether they have committed a crime or not. Everyone born, living in, or visitting the nations would have to be swabbed. That is hardly the same thing as printing convicted felons.

Proceedures are in place to prevent cross contamination.
Really? How do you prevent cross-contamination in the event of a bomb blast? Or a train crash? Or gang rape?
Those diagnosed with Genetic chimaeras would obviously have two DNA entries on their file.
And those who don't know? Genetic chimaerism was only realised to happen in the real world when a woman had a paternity test carried out on her child, only to find out that genetically she wasn't the mother.
Kudos to you for actually recognising the term, though. Not many do.

Other body members not agreeing with security being a primary concern, doesn't make my statement false.You, however, didn't label it as a primary concern. And if passed, as you have worded it, security as the primary concern would be a statement of fact for this body.
Preservation of liberty does not protect against rape, murder or any other ill of society.Neither does maintaining genetic profiles on all citizens... unless, of course, you plan on preemptively punishing those your profiles identify as likely to commit such crimes.
This proposal is really not any different than having your fingerprints kept in the judicial system after being convicted of a crime.It is very different in that it proposes to identify and record all members of society whether or not they have shown themselves to be needing such scrutiny. This proposal is baldly and blatantly fascist and conflicts in spirit if not in detail with many of the civil rights protections this body as already endorsed.

--L.T.

We would never lend our support to such a liberty infringing resolution.

This proposal is really not any different than having your fingerprints kept in the judicial system after being convicted of a crime.

We find the representative’s statement preposterous. The two are radically different because in the instance the representative cited individuals have been found guilty of a crime against other persons thus are a known danger. They’ve violated the individual sovereignty of another and thereby surrendered some of their freedom, in our view.

This resolution would advocate taking the DNA of innocent individuals based the presumption that they’re capable of crimes, it's intrusion into their privacy without a single shred of evidence to justify it.

We’d comment more but believe this doesn’t stand a chance of reaching quorum let alone a general vote so it would merely be a waste of breath.

Anravelle Kramer.

Edit:I need to remember to press submit.

Neither does maintaining genetic profiles on all citizens... unless, of course, you plan on preemptively punishing those your profiles identify as likely to commit such crimes.

Where exactly does it discuss the use of the DNA database to pre-emptively identify those who are likely to commit crimes? There is no discussion of psychological evaluation, criminology or forensic psychology. It is a database, which contains DNA profiles that will be used under specific circumstances.


It is very different in that it proposes to identify and record all members of society whether or not they have shown themselves to be needing such scrutiny. This proposal is baldly and blatantly fascist and conflicts in spirit if not in detail with many of the civil rights protections this body as already endorsed.

--L.T.

Which civil rights protections does this conflict with? The use of the information to supplement law enforcement and identification only when required?

We would never lend our support to such a liberty infringing resolution.



We find the representative’s statement preposterous. The two are radically different because in the instance the representative cited individuals have been found guilty of a crime against other persons thus are a known danger. They’ve violated the individual sovereignty of another and thereby surrendered some of their freedom, in our view.

This resolution would advocate taking the DNA of innocent individuals based the presumption that they’re capable of crimes, it's intrusion into their privacy without a single shred of evidence to justify it.

We’d comment more but believe this doesn’t stand a chance of reaching quorum let alone a general vote so it would merely be a waste of breath.

Anravelle Kramer.

Edit:I need to remember to press submit.


However it was neglected that the DNA profiles are used for identification and not presumption of guilt nor innocence.

It appears that the UN delegates focus on part of the proposal and not any of it in it's entirety.

Your credit information is gathered every time you take out a loan. It's not placed into their database on the presumption that you might default on their loan.

WHEREAS the security and well being of a nation's citizens is primary the following is a proposal for the National / International DNA Database.

Why? What do you use as basis of this assumption? Does this mean that, for the safety of our citizens, we should lock up all members of high-risk groups (that is, groups that have high rates of homicide, rape, etc)? Does this mean that, for the safety of our citizens, we should stamp barcodes on their heads so that we know exactly when something happens, who committed the act, and be able to remove that person from society immediately? Does this mean that, for the safety of our citizens, we should have our governments authorize every activity our citizens do?

No matter how important or how much of a priority some item is, there is always a limitation to how far we should take this priority - for the well being of our citizens, our government, and our society.

The National / International DNA Database is designed to store DNA for use in crime prevention and resolution as well as identity of victims of a catastrophic event when traditional means are not viable.

I should note that the latter part of this is difficult to impractical when the hospital and medical facilities do not have access to the database. That said, I don't think the database is a bad thing, I just think mandatory supplement of DNA information to the database is.

Implementation of the NIDB would be grandfathered whereas existing citizens of the implementing nation would have the choice and be encouraged to submit a DNA sample into the NIDB.

All government employees, emergency workers and military will be required to submit a sample of their DNA to the NIDB.

New born children will have a sample of their DNA submitted to the NIDB as part of delivery procedure by medical staff either at hospital or private practitioner.

Immigrants and visitors to the country will be required to submit a sample of their DNA to the NIDB upon arrival and prior to being cleared by customs.

Those convicted of crimes will have their DNA submitted into the NIDB upon processing at the retention facility.

Bolding indicates spelling corrected.

No. While any national or more local databases you may wish to force to contribute there already existing data and subsequent updates, I see no reason why any nation should be forced to make such contributions if they do not already do so. You are asking us to take away freedoms and privileges our citizens currently enjoy and we gladly grant them with the accepted risk that sometimes, a person will walk away from a crime without a charge that should've been charged. It is a risk we gladly accept in favor of other factors that we feel bring about a better society

The information will be stored in a protected database with back up, in which RSA keys as well as touch scan capability will be required to access.

Ok, the nations that don't have RSA key and touch scan technology and those that have already considered these technologies obsolete will be wanting to know what their forms of access will be.

The database will only be accessible within the specialized network of which only law enforcement and military should have access.

If you are talking about closed-loop specialized network, you're talking about INSANE costs for nations to lay down the lines. If you are not talking about this sort of thing and instead talking about a network that is still based upon the major 'Net lines, you are looking at something that is impossible to secure. PICK.

The goal of the NIBD is to curb if at all eliminate such acts as, but not limited too, murder, rape and terroristic acts.

How do these eliminate such acts? How do they even curb them? All they do is decrease the ability for a perpetrator to get away with it - but even then, they still have to leave their DNA lying around and as knowledge of DNA gets better, so does the knowledge of hiding DNA.

DN what?

*slaps forehead* My Grod, I'm agreeing with the Cluichstanis. I think I need to lie down.

It's not such a bad thing. We're generally a fun-loving, libertarian bunch, y'know.

Except that you want to do it to everyone, whether they have committed a crime or not. Everyone born, living in, or visitting the nations would have to be swabbed. That is hardly the same thing as printing convicted felons.

Zigactly.

DN what?

Oh, that's right. The whole double-helix thing is lost on y'all. :p

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadnerb bin Cluich
Cluichstani Ambassador to the UN

His Majesty's Government vehemently opposes this proposal as it has a disproportionate potential to lead to infringements of basic human rights.

And also, how about those nations whose inhabitants might not have DNA? (Um, other life-forms... elves, humanoids, robots?)

Carina Talchimio-Spicolli (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Carina_Talchimio-Spicolli)
Permanent Representative of Brutland and Norden to the United Nations

Oh, and no for using the non-word "terroristic."Irregardless, terroristic is a perfectly cromulent word.

One word: no.

A few more words: this proposal would be excessively intrusive to the point of being draconian and Big Brother-ish. Altanar would never support such legislation, and we seriously doubt many other nations would either.

- Markus Paulanus, Deputy Ambassador for Security Concerns

Your credit information is gathered every time you take out a loan. It's not placed into their database on the presumption that you might default on their loan.
* ooc: I doubt this is the case in all NSUN nations *

Those who sacrifice liberty, etc.

I recommend you pursue other options if you wish to address the security issues that concern you. You will not get very far with this proposal, I can assure you.

Benedictions,

Irregardless, terroristic is a perfectly cromulent word.

Touché. ;)

Where exactly does it discuss the use of the DNA database to pre-emptively identify those who are likely to commit crimes? There is no discussion of psychological evaluation, criminology or forensic psychology. It is a database, which contains DNA profiles that will be used under specific circumstances.

Which civil rights protections does this conflict with? The use of the information to supplement law enforcement and identification only when required?Your proposal doesn't in so many words. However, you argue that
The National / International DNA Database is designed to store DNA for use in crime prevention... [and]... The goal of the NIBD is to curb if at all eliminate such acts as, but not limited too, murder, rape and terroristic acts.The well-known weakness of law enforcement agencies is their inability to prevent the commission of a crime. With rare exception, they are limited to the role of reacting to a crime and bringing the perpretrator to justice. To eliminate all crime as you've indicated the NIBD would do, one must prevent said crimes from occurring. The mere existence of your universal database no more prevents crime than the currently existing databases of criminal information. Unless it is used preemptively, identifying those likely to commit crimes, thus violating the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty as guaranteed in "Definition of Fair Trial". The use of this database for its stated purpose, makes all citizens in all NSUN member states default criminal suspects. *slaps forehead* My Grod, I'm agreeing with the Cluichstanis. I think I need to lie down.
It's not such a bad thing. We're generally a fun-loving, libertarian bunch, y'know.Yeah, but the delegation might have to change all its passwords. :pIrregardless, terroristic is a perfectly cromulent word.A small, wizened person of indeterminate sex, walks up behind The Most Glorious Hack and begins beating him with a worn and notched ruler. Delegates nearby hear mumbling about grammar, ruining the mother tongue and young whippersnappers.

I'm afraid I must agree with my fellow representatives. Perhaps an international DNA database for internationally recognized criminals. Or a database that countries could submit the DNA of criminals they deemed worthy of international concern.

However, forcing every person of every member nation to be genetically profiled for international use goes a bit far. It's fine if a particular nation keeps such records of their own citizens, but its really none of the UN's business.

Would the military or police force who have access to this database have the right to study this dna for research purposes, strictly humanitarian and medical of course in the military sense. It after all would be a massive population database very good for studying different human traits from a variety of cultures. There would be nonhumans in there as well, I'd assume.

The National / International DNA Database is designed to store DNA for use in crime prevention and resolution as well as identity of victims of a catastrophic event when traditional means are not viable.


As a nation with 83% of it's citizens clones who share a common DNA this makes no sense.

Also they said the same thing about a central fingerprint data base on crime. Thus the crimes are still being committed and nothing shows many have declined as a result of such a data bases even on national levels. Thus why would it do any better to have a UN/world wide data base?


Heedache Malloary Aspain,
Minister of Justice Zeldon

Ironically, I would say that if you want a world without any form of criminality, you should kill all your citizens... ;)

The only prevention that we could do as Authorities is to ensure that our citizens are happy and do not need to commit a crime and to promote a "proximity" police who can help people. Further, we can't avoid the risk of a crime being committed neither with DNA databases nor with death penalty...

So I consider that this proposal goes against liberty, privacy and physical integrity in a to large way for the little gains in security.

I'm afraid I must agree with my fellow representatives. Perhaps an international DNA database for internationally recognized criminals. Or a database that countries could submit the DNA of criminals they deemed worthy of international concern.

However, forcing every person of every member nation to be genetically profiled for international use goes a bit far. It's fine if a particular nation keeps such records of their own citizens, but its really none of the UN's business.

In that case, it might be more effective to set up a Most Wanted list for the UN countries. People who want to bring to justice certain criminals, like terrorists, could submit DNA of criminals and fingerprints, along with information on the criminal, and why the criminal does such a thing. He could also post a bounty on that criminal, to attract the many bounty hunters who want to bring the criminal to justice.

(Once the criminal is arrested, he can be extradiated unless the nation has a right to refuse extradition.)

Would be a mild resolution, and might not do that much.

Time for somebody to renew work on the 'Interpol' concept, perhaps?

Time for somebody to renew work on the 'Interpol' concept, perhaps?

DEFCON's already on it (http://z15.invisionfree.com/UN_DEFCON/index.php?showtopic=236).

In that case, it might be more effective to set up a Most Wanted list for the UN countries. People who want to bring to justice certain criminals, like terrorists, could submit DNA of criminals and fingerprints, along with information on the criminal, and why the criminal does such a thing. He could also post a bounty on that criminal, to attract the many bounty hunters who want to bring the criminal to justice.

(Once the criminal is arrested, he can be extradiated unless the nation has a right to refuse extradition.)

Would be a mild resolution, and might not do that much.
I'll review everyone's issues, concerns, etc and amend my proposal where appropriate.

Following is the amended NIDD UN Proposal.

WHEREAS a citizen's safety is a country's concern; the National / International DNA Database serves to assist local, national and international law inforcement offices by containing the genetic make up of an individual for identification purposes under specific circumstances.

WHILE citizens of a country with this database are not required to donate a sample of their DNA, they may be encouraged to volunteer a sample of their own accord.

MILITARY personel will be required to submit a sample of their DNA into the Military National-International DNA Database, a subsection of the NIDD while in service for identification purposes. Upon retirement from military service, military personel will have the option to remove their DNA from the system.

DANGEROUS criminals will be required to submit their DNA into the NIDD under the Criminal National-International DNA Database. A subsection to the NIDD. Dangerous criminals will be considered as such through consensus of the judicial committee assigned. The list must include, but is not limited too, rapists, child molesters and murderers.

The goal of the NIDD and it's subsections is to assist national and international law enforcement as well as military personal to identify victim remains as well as genetic evidence at crime scenes.

Quickly (because I don't have time to do the full Monty)

Dangerous criminals will be considered as such through consensus with UN Delegates.

Illegal under rules of metagaming and committees. Either make a committee or leave for individual nations to define for their own purposes, Delegates can't make decisions post-passing of a resolution.

Quickly (because I don't have time to do the full Monty)



Illegal under rules of metagaming and committees. Either make a committee or leave for individual nations to define for their own purposes, Delegates can't make decisions post-passing of a resolution.

amended to include judicial committee and remove UN delegates

How are nation's without the technology for DNA testing or even knowledge of DNA (such as ours) supposed to comply to this?

Psst...you just pretend.

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadnerb bin Cluich
Cluichstani Ambassador to the UN

DANGEROUS criminals will be required to submit their DNA into the NIDD under the Criminal National-International DNA Database. A subsection to the NIDD. Dangerous criminals will be considered as such through consensus of the judicial committee assigned. The list must include, but is not limited too, rapists, child molesters and murderers.

While we still have no intention of supporting a proposal of this sort, this is at least not outright offensive in its drafting. We suggest that the author looks again at the paragraph quoted above, though, since the second sentence isn't a sentence. We also object somewhat to the term "National-International." Is the database a national one, or an international one, one pretending to be the other, or what?

While we still have no intention of supporting a proposal of this sort, this is at least not outright offensive in its drafting. We suggest that the author looks again at the paragraph quoted above, though, since the second sentence isn't a sentence. We also object somewhat to the term "National-International." Is the database a national one, or an international one, one pretending to be the other, or what?

I'll add a comma between the first and second sentences. :p

National being, the nation is capable of using it nationwide, International being that other nations would be able to access a nation's database outside of their own.

I guess I'll have to add more detail to it, as some nations may not want their citizens or military personels genetic make up available to other nations, but have no issues letting other nations access the criminal database. I'll add to it that citizen and military peronel databases aren't compulsary, so they could just partake in the international database.

The criminal database would be useful in areas where smaller nations are clustered together, and say the rapist, is active in several nations, then the law enforcement entities of each nation could work together to capture the person. They wouldn't otherwise know this unless they could match DNA found on the victim.

For nations that don't have the capability of DNA, they could seek the assistance of nations who do have it to build one.

I'll redraft it in a day or two, to give other people a chance to bring up anything else they have concerns with or additions.

How are nation's without the technology for DNA testing or even knowledge of DNA (such as ours) supposed to comply to this?

Nations such as yours can ask for assistance in obtaining the technology and building the database. We are willing to assist you in building your core database and provide any training required by your personel to build, maintain and expand as required on your own.

Nations such as yours can ask for assistance in obtaining the technology and building the database. We are willing to assist you in building your core database and provide any training required by your personel to build, maintain and expand as required on your own.

Screw that technology. We're willing to sell Cobdenia some mothballed Z-95 (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Z-95_Headhunter) starfighters. They'd be a helluva lot more useful than this silly DNA stuff.

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadnerb bin Cluich
Cluichstani Ambassador to the UN

We'll be voting for. It will reduce man hours the police have to spend investigating crimes. It might even deter some crimes.

How are countries without a centralised police force supposed to implement this, should it be passed by the General Assembly? Emen Un contains numerous organisations which each maintain their own guard networks. And the Guardians of the Prince don't have anything to do with plebeian affairs if they can help it.

~ Sebastian Ennuk

We recommend creating a centralised bureaucracy that can indefinitely delay -- ahem, we mean that can handle data validation and entry centrally while providing secure controlled international access to the international-pretending-to-be-national database.

Screw that technology. We're willing to sell Cobdenia some mothballed Z-95 (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Z-95_Headhunter) starfighters. They'd be a helluva lot more useful than this silly DNA stuff.

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadnerb bin Cluich
Cluichstani Ambassador to the UN

Remember the last time you tried to sell me those F16, Your Sheikness, old bean? After they arrived through the temporal vortex, we ended up with these:

http://www.rhiw.com/hanes_pages/raf_porth_neigwl/avro_anson.jpg

I hate to think what DNA testing and database facilities would come out like. Probably a Belgian detective, four fat constables and a filing clerk...

OoC: I think that's the first time an Avro Anson has been used as picture spam...

DRAFT 2007-0410-3

Following is the amended NIDD UN Proposal.

WHEREAS a citizen's safety is a country's concern; the National / International DNA Database serves to assist local, national and international law inforcement offices by containing the genetic make up of an individual for identification purposes under specific circumstances.

WHILE citizens of a country with this database are not required to donate a sample of their DNA, they may be encouraged to volunteer a sample of their own accord. Nations not wishing to have their citizens genetic make up in the international portion of the NIDD can opt-out.

MILITARY personel will be required to submit a sample of their DNA into the Military National-International DNA Database, a subsection of the NIDD while in service for identification purposes. Upon retirement from military service, military personel will have the option to remove their DNA from the system. Nations not wishing to have their military personel genetic make up in the international portion of the NIDD can opt-out.

DANGEROUS criminals will be required to submit their DNA into the NIDD under the Criminal National-International DNA Database, a subsection to the NIDD. Dangerous criminals will be considered as such through consensus of the judicial committee assigned. The list must include, but is not limited too, rapists, child molesters and murderers. All nations are required to grant access to other UN nations to this portion of the NIDD.

The goal of the NIDD and it's subsections is to assist national and international law enforcement as well as military personal to identify victim remains as well as genetic evidence at crime scenes.

Including Category and Effect/Strength is always a good idea.

Much better. We would still vote against it on principle, but much better. Our major concern over drafting is now the looseness of the phrase "the judicial committee assigned." We are uncertain what this is supposed to mean: who assigns the committee, what precisely is it assigned to, who is intended to man it (if it is not a UN committee and therefore gnomed instead), what purpose is it intended to fulfil? Not all of these questions need to be answered, clearly, but some indication of intent at least would make for better law.

Like Gobby says, I'd still vote against on principle but at least it's not just patently offensive anymore.

Just a couple of spelling/grammar nitpicks. You might also want to drop the capitalisation of the words like "while" and "military" which are not clauses like "whereas", though that's really just stylistic and if you think it looks better with the first word of every paragraph in caps, go wild.

The list must include, but is not limited to, rapists, child molesters and murderers.

The goal of the NIDD and its subsections is to assist national and international law enforcement as well as military personal to identify victim remains as well as genetic evidence at crime scenes.

The Commonwealth of Schwarzchild rises OPPOSED to this piece of garbage; it is our fond hope that someone sets it on fire, burns it to ashes, then urinates on it.

Lynniston
a very drunk Ambassador to the UN

Remember the last time you tried to sell me those F16, Your Sheikness, old bean? After they arrived through the temporal vortex, we ended up with these:

http://www.rhiw.com/hanes_pages/raf_porth_neigwl/avro_anson.jpg

Yeah, but if we shipped you Z-95s, you might actually get those F-16s this time.

The Commonwealth of Schwarzchild rises OPPOSED to this piece of garbage; it is our fond hope that someone sets it on fire, burns it to ashes, then urinates on it.

Don't tempt me.

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadnerb bin Cluich
Cluichstani Ambassador to the UN

We support the creation of the NIDB.

However, there may be other uses for such of database besides law enforcement. Such as medical research.

Perhaps a broadening of the purpose the creation of a NIDB may be included in the proposal, where member nations are required just to contribute to the database.

This would mask the authorian nature of the proposal.
Subsequent proposals can address the uses of the NIDB.

Don't even start with the false premise of "benefits" to such a system.

The ways such a system could be horribly abused outnumber any "hidden" or unintentioned "benefits." I'm not even fully certain that limiting it STRICTLY to hardened, career criminals would garner my vote. The definitions change too easily and too conveniently in the modern world.

I'm kind in comparison to the good Sheik, I would just piss on the burned document and leave it to that...Sheik Nadnerb has a disconcerting way of shooting first and he rarely apologises for shooting first.

Lynniston

I'm kind in comparison to the good Sheik, I would just piss on the burned document and leave it to that...Sheik Nadnerb has a disconcerting way of shooting first and he rarely apologises for shooting first.

When I shoot first, the target's not around to receive an apology.

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadnerb bin Cluich
Cluichstani Ambassador to the UN