EPTKeep in mind child molesters harm young children while drug addicts only harm themselves.
Cyberspace Sexual Predators Exposed - Page 8
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
gameguard
Korea (South)2132 Posts
Keep in mind child molesters harm young children while drug addicts only harm themselves. | ||
Hot_Bid
Braavos36402 Posts
On October 27 2006 17:09 alphaentity wrote: In the USA, there's a thing called Entrapment. "American law focuses on the motivation of the accused. In the United States, entrapment exists if the accused's main motivation was the offer made by the police. If the accused was more motivated by other concerns, such as financial gain, then it is not entrapment despite police actions." I think this case can be argued either way. But I don't think police should convince someone to commit a crime by coercion or repeated tempting. Think about it, you are a recovering drug addict. An undercover cop invites you to this lavish party, naked girls everywhere, ppl smoking and snorting coke. He then asks you if you want some cocaine, you say no. Then he lines a line of coke on a naked girls body and says "go sniff it" and you can fuck her. The moment you start leaning your head down, he arrests you for doing drugs (because he KNOWS you will do it)...no very fair in my book. please stop making extremely flawed analogies. the pedos are in the chat room where little kids are. why are they there? i do not think they were lured there by perverted justice, the PJ people don't seek out reformed pedophiles and invite them to kiddie chatrooms. and if you read the logs, the PJ people don't exactly say, hey, im an 11 year old, come fuck me, if you do ill give you $1000! it's quite different and of course we can think of outlandish situations like the one you outlined, hey a cop breeds dinosaurs and unless you buy this weed, the trex will be let out of its holding cell and rampage around your old neighborhood. its not fair! | ||
|
j0ehoe
United States2705 Posts
"However, when a person is predisposed to commit a crime, offering opportunities to commit the crime is not entrapment, a widely held misconception similar to the idea that police officers must answer questions truthfully if they are asked the same question three times, or that they must say "yes" if asked if they are a police officer." these guys werent pick up randomly, they hung around channels where they talked about this shit. | ||
|
pr0n
United States277 Posts
On October 26 2006 22:34 Servolisk wrote: If they are deterring child rape...how is it bad? WOW...just WOW. You realize killing off all Muslums would "deter suicide bombing," don't you? Or imprisoning all priests to reduce child molestation? In this country we don't punish people for the way they think, but rather for commiting illegal actions (which very few "offenders" on that site do). Perhaps some of them would have engaged in sex with an underage (but based on their conversation, willing) individual, but it goes without saying some would not. When Blackstone said, "better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer," he was on to something. Maybe when you're falsely convicted, or even just falsely accused of something horrible, you'll understand. I pray it doesn't have to come to that. And yes, pedophilia is a mental condition much like homosexuality. The difference is that acting on your tendencies in the latter can often be legally done between consenting adults. Repressing pedophilia's urges is just as difficult as a homosexual repressing his urges, yet most pedophiles do manage to limit themselves to less harmful activities than molestation and rape. It's scary how much today's society treats and looks down on ANY TYPE of pedophile (rapists, molestors, and the VAST, VAST MAJORITY that NEVER commit a crime) so similarly to how we used to look down on homosexuals. Parallel to what I say to homophobes, "as long as there have to be pedophiles, I hope your children are them. Maybe then you'll understand." | ||
|
gameguard
Korea (South)2132 Posts
Secondly, stop all this ideological bullshit. You would let 10 child molesters go just to save one peodphile who had no intension of actually going through with the shit he was spewing out? Homsexuals can agree as adults to have sex. Victims of pedophilia do not have the sufficient maturity level to even grasp what they are getting into. | ||
|
NonYold
United States2814 Posts
| ||
|
Newbistic
China2912 Posts
Let us make this one fact clear- there is a difference between the scenarios of "asking someone of he/she wants to seduce little boys/girls, then arresting them when they say yes," and "posing as an actual little boy/girl, and arresting someone who expresses his want to commit sexual acts on the said little boy/girl." What the website does is the latter scenario, and I think it is a perfectly valid and solidly viable method of catching pedophiles. The former scenario is not viable because while the person may be a pedophile, the person may also be simply joking (perverted sense of fun?), or a pedophile in the manner that he would do it IF offered, but not otherwise. In this sense, the person does not have an actual intention to actively perpetrate the crime, and thus should not be arrested. The latter scenario is viable because the person actually actively approaches the "victim", and initiates the crime. Therefore, that person does have the intention of committing the crime, and is actively trying to seek "commission" of the crime (grammar?). A key assumption that people make in condemning pedophilia is wrong is that, even if a child gives his/her consent, most adults are convinced that the child does not truly know what he/she is getting into, and that there is concern that the child would harm his/her self through the experience in a way that the child him/herself did not forsee. The child is not capable or responsible enough to think about his/herself. The former scenario does not have adequate evidence, while the latter does. Here's an analogy of the scenarios- one, if an undercover cop asks people around if they want to do drugs, and arrests them if they say yes. Two, if the cop goes into the underworld with drugs and waits for people to approach him to make deals, and arrests them. In scenario 1, the person might be joking, or might not take the situation seriously. In scenario 2, it is near impossible to make an excuse that the person was "only joking," because the person was the initiator of the crime, in this case selling drugs. | ||
|
FeeLdAfuRy
Australia290 Posts
I'm not so sure. I think anyone cyber-fantasising (as these people may very well just be doing - and thats not a crime) acknolwedges the possibility that the person with the handle 'hot14fcheerleader' may really be a sweaty 45year old bloke on the other end. This is often irrelevant because, hey, its a fantasy. In this case, especially in the wankers section of that website which shows guy exposing themsevles on cam to supposed 12 year olds and what have you, probably have real reason to suspect that there is no young girl or boy on the other end. But it indulges their fantasy to play along anyhow. There is just too much ambiguity here on the nature and intentions of the people on the other end of this system, this kind of vigilantism seems pretty wrong to me. | ||
|
RowdierBob
Australia13536 Posts
Case solved. 25 to life. | ||
ManaBlue
Canada10458 Posts
If they go in, volutarily, looking to talk to underaged kids and they do so in a sexual mannor it's not even close to entrapment. | ||
|
Chibi[OWNS]
United Kingdom10597 Posts
| ||
|
Chibi[OWNS]
United Kingdom10597 Posts
| ||
|
L!MP
Australia2067 Posts
| ||
|
alphaentity
United States525 Posts
Lets say a cop is undercover outside of a gun store. He notices that Person B is trying to buy guns but the owner of the store refuses to sell a gun to Person B because Person B was a convicted felon. Cop then offers to sell a gun to Person B. Person B accepts gun, gets arrested for possession of gun. Obviously Person B wanted to buy a gun and should be arrested....right? | ||
|
yubee
United States3826 Posts
that is an accurate analogy | ||
|
j0ehoe
United States2705 Posts
On October 28 2006 02:35 alphaentity wrote: Well, the idea that you set someone up is extremely disturbing. Lets say a cop is undercover outside of a gun store. He notices that Person B is trying to buy guns but the owner of the store refuses to sell a gun to Person B because Person B was a convicted felon. Cop then offers to sell a gun to Person B. Person B accepts gun, gets arrested for possession of gun. Obviously Person B wanted to buy a gun and should be arrested....right? ...theres nothing wrong with that situation at all? he isnt allowed to legally buy it as a felon. | ||
|
Chibi[OWNS]
United Kingdom10597 Posts
| ||
|
Chibi[OWNS]
United Kingdom10597 Posts
| ||
|
Alborz
Canada1551 Posts
| ||
|
j0ehoe
United States2705 Posts
On October 28 2006 16:10 Chibi[OWNS] wrote: i wonder what happens when some 17 year old tries to chat them up 'sorry im looking for 50 year old man to molest me...dont suppose you know any?' its still illegal. statutory. no different then a 16 year old girl tryin to get with a 21 year old guy. even if she wants it, she legally can not consent to it. | ||
| ||
