Catch them (well their DNA) when they're young

Gary Pugh, the DNA spokesman for ACPO thinks it would be a good idea to make primary school children

eligible for the DNA database if they exhibit behaviour indicating they may become criminals in later life,

and how, pray tell, is he going to determine that they are exhibiting such behaviour? Big of him to admit that this is potentially deeply controversial.

A well-established pattern of offending involves relatively trivial offences escalating to more serious crimes. Senior Scotland Yard criminologists are understood to be confident that techniques are able to identify future offenders.

What about those that don't escalate?

A recent report from the think-tank Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) called for children to be targeted between the ages of five and 12 with cognitive behavioural therapy, parenting programmes and intensive support. Prevention should start young, it said, because prolific offenders typically began offending between the ages of 10 and 13.

Surely CBT and other support has to be targeted appropriately. Is the IPPR suggesting that they can determine what type of offence these prolific offenders are going to perform and therefore how to treat them.

I wonder whether anyone has done any research into the house numbers of offenders, the colour of their front doors, their favourite sandwiches at school etc etc More opportunities for pre-emptive DNA capture.

I loved this from Pugh

'Fingerprints, somehow, are far less contentious,' he said. 'We have children giving their fingerprints when they are borrowing books from a library.'

He obviously hasn't come across LeaveThemKidsAlone