it sounds funny, but that's what i'm hearing here.

I, or people I know, have experienced incidents involving pedophiles abusing their positions of trust in the fields of law, law-enforcement, and/or politics. The three specific incidents that I'm thinking of all happened over 15 or more years ago.

The goobers that get entrapped on that TV show are nowhere in the league of the peds I'm talking about. If you feel violently moralistic towards the hapless goober pedos, would you feel just as passionately self-righteous if bringing the sex abuse to the attention of the authorities might be dangerous, perhaps life-threatening to yourself and those close to you, because those abusers themselves are in positions of authority and have means at their disposal that the hapless goobers don't.

frelnamp wrote:
If you feel violently moralistic towards the hapless goober pedos, would you feel just as passionately self-righteous if bringing the sex abuse to the attention of the authorities might be dangerous, perhaps life-threatening to yourself and those close to you, because those abusers themselves are in positions of authority and have means at their disposal that the hapless goobers don't.

...what are you talking about? Are you posting from Germany in 1938?

The Code is Almighty wrote:

frelnamp wrote:
If you feel violently moralistic towards the hapless goober pedos, would you feel just as passionately self-righteous if bringing the sex abuse to the attention of the authorities might be dangerous, perhaps life-threatening to yourself and those close to you, because those abusers themselves are in positions of authority and have means at their disposal that the hapless goobers don't.

...what are you talking about? Are you posting from Germany in 1938?

What part of what I wrote did you want me to elaborate on?

I don't know what you are insinuating exactly, but I should clarify that I believe it is a small minority of people in the law, law-enforcement or political fields that would be involved, if they are, in child abuse. I don't suggest an elaborate network of kiddie porn freaks in government and the wealthier professions. I'm not even sure to what extent such a network would exist. I'm only referring to specific incidents that I or people I know have told me, all of them over fifteen years or more ago. One involving a police officer, one a judge, the other a politician.

I asked a hypothetical question about how one would deal with pedophiles such as the type of pathetic cases seen on To Catch a Predator, as compared with a pedophile in a more authoritarian and influential position who could create problems for you if he knew that you knew.

Is it easier to bring child abuse by the type of authoritarian figures as I mentioned into the open now as compared to fifteen years ago? I don't know.

A show like To Catch a Predator generates concern and anxiety about pedophiles but interestingly, only a certain type of mostly powerless loser pedophile.

Does that make what I was saying any clearer? What did you mean about Germany in 1938 exactly?

what wise guy changed the title to this hilarious variation: "Internet Pedophile: Sting?"

hilarious.

The 'I support this technique in this case' argument is a dangerous one to embark on. These investigative techniques won't be confined to one area of criminal law.

Once a law is passed allowing entrapment-style sting operations it can and will be used for whatever the fuck the authorities want to use it for.

Here, anti-terror legislation is used by a local council to spy on people whose dog shits the path.

and here we have a family spied on using the same set of laws for possibly 'lying on a school application form'.

When the anti-terrorism laws were being passed people used this 'If you're not a terrorist you have nothing to worry about argument'. See how that worked out?

that damned fly wrote:what wise guy changed the title to this hilarious variation: "Internet Pedophile: Sting?"

hilarious.

The burning question is whether it's referring to the wrestler or the singer.

that damned fly wrote:what wise guy changed the title to this hilarious variation: "Internet Pedophile: Sting?"

hilarious.

The burning question is whether it's referring to the wrestler or the singer.

Christopher J. McGarvey wrote:

that damned fly wrote:what wise guy changed the title to this hilarious variation: "Internet Pedophile: Sting?"

hilarious.

The burning question is whether it's referring to the wrestler or the singer.

well...i mean...they both are.

madmanmunt wrote:Seeing this thread, I thought for a moment that Sting ("are you blond?") of The Police fame had been caught looking at dirty pictures of kids on his computer.

I thank you.