More tough on crime goons: the disgusting unethical actions of "To catch a predator"

I actually read the whole article Water. I have to say the people running this show, and who have been behind this from the start, appear to be as truly sick in the head as the people they are after.

But, it's hard to feel sorry for a guy who was hitting on a 13 year old. So I don't.

I never watch the show, and wouldn't start. And I think the police would do well to take a close look at the activities of that main guy, the X one. He's a mental case, and who knows what lines he has crossed?
 
Darla said:
I actually read the whole article Water. I have to say the people running this show, and who have been behind this from the start, appear to be as truly sick in the head as the people they are after.

But, it's hard to feel sorry for a guy who was hitting on a 13 year old. So I don't.

I never watch the show, and wouldn't start. And I think the police would do well to take a close look at the activities of that main guy, the X one. He's a mental case, and who knows what lines he has crossed?
Click to expand...

It is very hard - but I simply believe the actions taken to "get" him to hit on the 13 year old were at least unethical. Perverted Justice has serious conflict of interest in these cases - 100,000 per a show, the more people caught the better.

This entire thread was worded really badly on my part, however, and it seems too much like I'm trying to defend would-be child molesters. I'm not - I just think that this whole issue is a red herring and some of the tactics used seem to be entrapment.

I tend to be a little emotional if I think that someone's being treated unfairly by the government - even if they are rather disgusting individuals.
 
Watermark said:
It is very hard - but I simply believe the actions taken to "get" him to hit on the 13 year old were at least unethical. Perverted Justice has serious conflict of interest in these cases - 100,000 per a show, the more people caught the better.

This entire thread was worded really badly on my part, however, and it seems too much like I'm trying to defend would-be child molesters. I'm not - I just think that this whole issue is a red herring and some of the tactics used seem to be entrapment.
Click to expand...

No, the owners of the original perverted justice, who still own it now, are stark raving crazy, and probably dangerous themselves in their own way. The whole thing is distastful and highly so. According to the article the show does not have much longer on MSNBC, and it's not popular with advertisers.
 
You can actually read messages from the Xavier guy on Wikipedia - he constantly moniters the Wiki entries about his organization, and deletes critiscism. I'm kind of surprised the Wiki editors haven't taken stronger action against him yet.
 
Darla said:
No, the owners of the original perverted justice, who still own it now, are stark raving crazy, and probably dangerous themselves in their own way. The whole thing is distastful and highly so. According to the article the show does not have much longer on MSNBC, and it's not popular with advertisers.
Click to expand...

That too Darla. But the conflict of interest claim holds up better in court.

I found what they did to that oppenent of them particualarly disgusting - what no life bastard chooses to ruin someone's life like that because of political opinions?
 
Watermark said:
"Come on over, we're not going to get caught," she says. "If we got caught, I would get into trouble, and everybody would call me a slut, and I don't want that, either. I'll pay for your gas. It's no big deal, trust me. My dad gave me plenty of money for the weekend." When the guy fails to take the bait, her voice rises in pitch. "OK, fine, whatever, lame. L-A-M-E. You're being a baby. I told you I've done it a million times!"
Click to expand...

You're starting to get creepy.

Your problem seems to be that the "14 year old" wasn't really as advertised, but had they actually been 14 year old CHILDREN, you'd have no problem with it.

That's sick.

I'm really glad you don't like me. I wish to be as opposite to what's going on in your head as I can possibly be.
 
I think the point Watermark's making is more that the media has created a situation in which parents are fearful of letting their children out of their sight for fear of being snatched by invisible predators, scared to let their kids use a computer incase there's a nonce hiding in cyberspace waiting to lure them away.

The fact that it isn't the authorities mounting this 'sting operation', but a television channel looking for ratings should be worrying to any right-thinking individual. These people may deserve whatever painful retribution you want to hand out but to bring commercial broadcasters in to sensationalise the issue for increased viewing figures is a little crass, no?

Thankfully, UK law wouldn't allow this to happen, but we've already got the same media campaign which has convinced the population that our children are probably going to be victims, despite the evidence showing the incidences of predatory paedophiles having remained virtually static for decades. Water's right in that sexual abuse is overwhelmingly more likely to occur in your own home by a relative or close family friend.

I'd recommend Chris Morris' BrassEye special on the media hype surrounding this issue. It's some of the best satire you'll ever see and sums up the hype perfectly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7jVnrfoZD8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcnQDYnGtS8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fA07Tw4iEFw

Although, i wouldn't watch it at work.
 
Do you remember the stories about razors in apples at halloween? About Mickey Mouse LSD stamps that the druggies were for some reason just giving away?

There is a myriad of the scare tactic stories that were false, in this case they are not.

While the majority of reported cases happen with somebody that the family knows, it is clear that the majority are not 'all'. This means that on occasion your child would actually be in danger from somebody if you don't teach them about it.

Now, any man who would seriously believe that a 14 year old girl would be out propositioning about a million people on the internet and jump in his car for a nice 6 hour drive has to be an imbecile. Not only was he going to victimize a 14 year old girl, but he was stupid enough to believe that the scenario was real.
 
Damocles said:
Do you remember the stories about razors in apples at halloween? About Mickey Mouse LSD stamps that the druggies were for some reason just giving away?

There is a myriad of the scare tactic stories that were false, in this case they are not.

While the majority of reported cases happen with somebody that the family knows, it is clear that the majority are not 'all'. This means that on occasion your child would actually be in danger from somebody if you don't teach them about it.

Now, any man who would seriously believe that a 14 year old girl would be out propositioning about a million people on the internet and jump in his car for a nice 6 hour drive has to be an imbecile. Not only was he going to victimize a 14 year old girl, but he was stupid enough to believe that the scenario was real.
Click to expand...

I agree, but read Charver's post, and read the entire article Water posted.

This is a complex situation, in that you have to be able to hold two conflicting ideas in your head, but, I think you are up to it...lol

The guys they are trapping, might very well be a danger, though I think it's relevant to point out that they appear to be very young themselves. These are not pervs your age they are catching. But that doesn't excuse it. The problem is, the two men who started this company, are, in my opinion, severely mentally disturbed themselves. This is a job for law enforcement, not disturbed citizen vigilantes.
 
Darla said:
I agree, but read Charver's post, and read the entire article Water posted.

This is a complex situation, in that you have to be able to hold two conflicting ideas in your head, but, I think you are up to it...lol

The guys they are trapping, might very well be a danger, though I think it's relevant to point out that they appear to be very young themselves. These are not pervs your age they are catching. But that doesn't excuse it. The problem is, the two men who started this company, are, in my opinion, severely mentally disturbed themselves. This is a job for law enforcement, not disturbed citizen vigilantes.
Click to expand...
Hence I said to teach your children about it. I didn't suggest that you should watch the show, or give them free money just because we should fear this so heavily.
 
Damocles said:
While the majority of reported cases happen with somebody that the family knows, it is clear that the majority are not 'all'. This means that on occasion your child would actually be in danger from somebody if you don't teach them about it.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is saying there is no danger whatsoever and any parent with an iota of intelligence would want to inform their children about the risks, even though they are very small.

What we have now is not a sensible risk management strategy rather it's a "don't talk to any men ever as they will kill you" attitude. Every man is apparently a potential child molester, you just have to see the looks a man with his child gets in the supermarket. It's a horrible climate of suspicion and paranoia.

Damocles said:
Now, any man who would seriously believe that a 14 year old girl would be out propositioning about a million people on the internet and jump in his car for a nice 6 hour drive has to be an imbecile. Not only was he going to victimize a 14 year old girl, but he was stupid enough to believe that the scenario was real.
Click to expand...

I don't have any sympathy for them, i would just prefer the police to be conducting operations rather than a money man at a TV station.
 
charver said:
I think the point Watermark's making is more that the media has created a situation in which parents are fearful of letting their children out of their sight for fear of being snatched by invisible predators, scared to let their kids use a computer incase there's a nonce hiding in cyberspace waiting to lure them away.

The fact that it isn't the authorities mounting this 'sting operation', but a television channel looking for ratings should be worrying to any right-thinking individual. These people may deserve whatever painful retribution you want to hand out but to bring commercial broadcasters in to sensationalise the issue for increased viewing figures is a little crass, no?

Thankfully, UK law wouldn't allow this to happen, but we've already got the same media campaign which has convinced the population that our children are probably going to be victims, despite the evidence showing the incidences of predatory paedophiles having remained virtually static for decades. Water's right in that sexual abuse is overwhelmingly more likely to occur in your own home by a relative or close family friend.

I'd recommend Chris Morris' BrassEye special on the media hype surrounding this issue. It's some of the best satire you'll ever see and sums up the hype perfectly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7jVnrfoZD8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcnQDYnGtS8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fA07Tw4iEFw

Although, i wouldn't watch it at work.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I have a 15 year old daughter and my rational stops at the point of child sexual predators. Absolutely the network is doing this for ratings, but at the same time it's giving pause to other predators who are considering molesting a child. Most of the bozos caught in the sting said they were worried that it was a setup.

People SHOULD be concerned about what their child is doing on-line.
 
Darla said:
I agree, but read Charver's post, and read the entire article Water posted.

This is a complex situation, in that you have to be able to hold two conflicting ideas in your head, but, I think you are up to it...lol

The guys they are trapping, might very well be a danger, though I think it's relevant to point out that they appear to be very young themselves. These are not pervs your age they are catching. But that doesn't excuse it. The problem is, the two men who started this company, are, in my opinion, severely mentally disturbed themselves. This is a job for law enforcement, not disturbed citizen vigilantes.
Click to expand...

I disagree.

Law enforcement usually gets involved AFTER the fact .. after a child has been abducted, raped, or abused.

According to the FBI only 1% to 10% of molestation cases are ever disclosed and according to a study conducted by the National Institute of Mental Health, the average molester of girls will victimize fifty girls before being caught and convicted and the average molester of boys will have victimized 150 boys before being caught and convicted. Further, the typical pedophile commits an average of 117 sexual crimes during his lifetime (280 for those molesting boys). The most vulnerable age for sexual abuse is between 7 and 13 years. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children reports that 54% of sexually abused children are victimized before the age of 7 and 84% before the age of 12.

Not all of the abuse comes from strangers, but I have absolutely ZERO sympathy for pedophiles no matter how they're caught.
 
blackascoal said:
I disagree.

Law enforcement usually gets involved AFTER the fact .. after a child has been abducted, raped, or abused.

According to the FBI only 1% to 10% of molestation cases are ever disclosed and according to a study conducted by the National Institute of Mental Health, the average molester of girls will victimize fifty girls before being caught and convicted and the average molester of boys will have victimized 150 boys before being caught and convicted. Further, the typical pedophile commits an average of 117 sexual crimes during his lifetime (280 for those molesting boys). The most vulnerable age for sexual abuse is between 7 and 13 years. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children reports that 54% of sexually abused children are victimized before the age of 7 and 84% before the age of 12.

Not all of the abuse comes from strangers, but I have absolutely ZERO sympathy for pedophiles no matter how they're caught.
Click to expand...

From reading this article, I don't think they are catching pedophiles, but rather 19 and 20 and 21 year olds, who are deciding to get it on with 13,14 and 15 year old girls. Is that pedophilia exactly? It strikes me as something short of that, but illegal and immoral all the same.

Also, in the article, I found the words and actions of the owners of this perverted justice program, to be mentally disturbed, unstable and vindictive. And not just to those they consider predators, but to those who merely question their methods. The story of what they did to the man who was writing and questioning their methods, but was in no way involved in predatory practices, is alarming, and telling.

"Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you."
 
Darla said:
From reading this article, I don't think they are catching pedophiles, but rather 19 and 20 and 21 year olds, who are deciding to get it on with 13,14 and 15 year old girls. Is that pedophilia exactly? It strikes me as something short of that, but illegal and immoral all the same.

Also, in the article, I found the words and actions of the owners of this perverted justice program, to be mentally disturbed, unstable and vindictive. And not just to those they consider predators, but to those who merely question their methods. The story of what they did to the man who was writing and questioning their methods, but was in no way involved in predatory practices, is alarming, and telling.

"Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you."
Click to expand...

A lot, if not most of the men caught in this sting are a lot older than 19 and 21. Sex with a 12 or 14 year old girl is a crime and those who would engage in it deserve no sympathy in my opinion. If those caught were 15 or 16 it would be different.
 
blackascoal said:
A lot, if not most of the men caught in this sting are a lot older than 19 and 21. Sex with a 12 or 14 year old girl is a crime and those who would engage in it deserve no sympathy in my opinion. If those caught were 15 or 16 it would be different.
Click to expand...

I agree. I just do not believe that the people running this are normal, and I think that nothing good can ever come from vindictive, obsessed, and fanatical people, having power over others.

Now, the FBI has programs like this, where trained fbi agents are monitoring the internet, and even posing as minors. I have no problem with that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top