Page 2 of 29
Internet Pedophile: Sting
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 12:02 pm
by Rotten Tanx_Archive
I just can't agree with the media being involved in catching criminals. Innocent til proven guilty? Not if your face is on tv at the time of arrest.
It's like Michael Jackson. Found innocent twice but the whole world thinks of him as a kiddy fiddler because of the media.
Carry out the sting operations if you must, but don't film the fucking thing.
Internet Pedophile: Sting
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 2:01 pm
by dipshit jigaboo_Archive
Catching pedophiles before they fuck up someones life = not crap.
Using this for entertainment and as a ratings ploy for some shit tv show = crap
Internet Pedophile: Sting
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 2:18 pm
by Linus Van Pelt_Archive
I think the filming and televising it has several aims:
One - to get ratings. Everyone seems to think this is Crap, and I tend to agree.
Two - to serve as a deterrent. If people see this, they might be less likely to try to pick up youngsters on the web. This is Not Crap.
Three - because it's news. This is something that's happening; why not report on it?
Four - to shame the criminals. I am okay with this; almost nothing is too harsh for these monsters.
Internet Pedophile: Sting
Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 11:45 pm
by instant_zen_Archive
full point wrote:instant_zen wrote:i have more of a problem with the fact that people watch this for entertainment than the actual manner in which they catch the guys. i mean c'mon, that's like pantsing someone in public and putting it on television. pretty low-brow stuff.
I don't have a problem with this at all. If these were adults dealing with adults and it was aired on TV, I would, indeed, have a problem with it. (See "COPS" prostitution stings).
However, the best way to create a shitty adult is to sexualize them as children and that's exactly what these "geniuses" are doing.
They deserve to be "pantsed" on tv and publicly humiliated. There's really no question as to whether or not they're guilty, no? They show up looking for hot, 13 year old action and instead get a camera crew. Good for them.
Have these guys ever heard of masturbation? I mean, really..........going through all of that hassle for a 13 YEAR OLD GUY/GIRL?!! Wtf?
i'll point out that most child molesters were themselves molested at some point in their lives.
Internet Pedophile: Sting
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 6:45 am
by simmo_Archive
matthew wrote:Linus Van Pelt wrote:Dateline NBC is on and they've got "To Catch a Predator III," wherein they work with
Perverted Justice and local law enforcement to lure would-be child molesters to a home where they are caught on camera and arrested. Does anyone see anything wrong with this? I can't think of anything. What boggles my mind is how many people they can catch with this. It seems like they can catch as many pedophiles as they want to. 14 men the first day! 21 the second! Any thoughts on this? I don't normally go in for vigilantism, but this seems all right.
I actually know an individual who helped out Pee-Jay.......what this individual, and I in turn, found astounding is how many of the trickledicks go after boys (or what they THINK are boys) rather than girls............hmm.....
YES MATTHEW BECAUSE ALL GAYS ARE PAEDOPHILES YOU ARE PRECISELY RIGHT.
Cunt.
Internet Pedophile: Sting
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 6:54 am
by Gramsci_Archive
I guess all those gay priests fucking all those kids must have twisted his mind...*
*Gay doesn't = Kiddie fiddler
Internet Pedophile: Sting
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 8:17 am
by Tom_Archive
Linus Van Pelt wrote:Dateline NBC is on and they've got "To Catch a Predator III," wherein they work with
Perverted Justice and local law enforcement to lure would-be child molesters to a home where they are caught on camera and arrested. Does anyone see anything wrong with this? I can't think of anything. What boggles my mind is how many people they can catch with this. It seems like they can catch as many pedophiles as they want to. 14 men the first day! 21 the second! Any thoughts on this? I don't normally go in for vigilantism, but this seems all right.
My initial reaction to this is wow. Awesome. get these lolliholders.
Then I start worrying about things like entrapment and police overstepping their bounds.
Then I come to the same conclusions you did. It seems like there is something wrong with it, but I can't think of anything.
And yeah, the numbers are absolutely shocking.
Internet Pedophile: Sting
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 8:21 am
by Tom_Archive
Mazec wrote:Not trying to stick up for the kiddie fuckers, but from a general civil rights perspecitve:
doesn't this seem like borderline entrapment?
When you create an opportunity for someone to commit a crime and then pinch him when he bites, that's pretty much entrapment.
It's similar for the female cops posing as prostitutes so they can bust the johns: They have to be very careful not to insinuate that they're selling sex and wait for the johns make the incriminating statement about money, or else the case is likely to be thrown out on entrapment.
Granted, in the particular case of pedos on the internet, there's going to be a lot less sympathy for those caught in such a sting-op, and rightfully so.
But keep in mind that the sting-op tactics can be applied in just about every sphere of crime imaginable, anywhere from the sale of sex to 3 grams of marijuana to a stolen car.
As I understand it, the cops online have very strict scripts to follow. They are essentially there just talking to their friends. I'm sure this line does get crossed, but if it's done by the books It's not entrapment.
Is it entrapment to have an undercover cop dressed like an easy mark to catch muggers?
Internet Pedophile: Sting
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:33 am
by instant_zen_Archive
Tom wrote:Is it entrapment to have an undercover cop dressed like an easy mark to catch muggers?
run into a little trouble the last time you tried to mug that bag-lady that "lives" in the dumpster in the alley behind your building?
Internet Pedophile: Sting
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:38 am
by sack of smashed assholes_Archive
Not Crap, as long as their is strict laws for it, as these operations evolve, could they go as far as using 17 year olds, who look 18, or would the person willing have to know that their a minor, but still 17, that's very little difference.
I'm only 22 but last year I ran into an instance where I overheard this chick at a party and her air-head friends telling people their in college... she looked even older than me.
I don't know the law well enough to expand, but yeah... if the body looks too good, it's too true. most college chicks have shapes, and structure.