To Catch a Predator..

nsxotic911

nsxotic911

Legendary Member
Joined
6 November 2006
Messages
3,359
Location
Austin, TX
To Catch a Predator recently started airing another run, and it is shocking to see that these types of acts are being committed so profusely in today's society.

Let me first say that wrong is wrong, and that sexual involvement with a minor is a horrible crime that deserves to be punished, and perpetrator rehabilitated as it is a crime which leaves damage for the victim for a lifetime.

I've heard that 1 in 3 girls as sexually molested, as I know more than 3 females which are now adults the statistic appears to be appalling but accurate.

Nonetheless, I do wonder whether the methodology used and the 'overwhelming use of force' during the arrest is ethical and necessary and beneficial in rehabilitation....

Ethical:
It is said that the decoy *sometimes* initiates invitation for sex, which is entrapment (see article) This seems to meet the definition of entrapment.

Excessive Force:
4+ cops with guns, lasers, tasers & dogs is not really necessary imho, you're going after a psychologically sexually-ill individual (that needs help) and not Al Qeada. A few times when the person has put his hands up and/or is on the ground I've seen police officers drag the suspect down and knee him to the ground....I haven't seen anyone that has fought back, brought a gun or weapon. Yes it's possible, but is that much force really necessary? I believe everyone should receive a certain about of respect - including criminals - . Let's remember that the law says 'innocent untill proven guilty.'

Lastly, for anyone that is struggling or know someone that is or might be struggling with this type of issues, please get help. The world does not need one more victim and/or prisoner with lives and families destroyed.

Here's another pov:
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2006/02/07/publiceye/entry1290135.shtml

Let the discussion begin….
 
The way the police treat the suspects is just the way the militarized police forces of today act. That there are apparently so many men willing to risk so much is ... disturbing. I don't think it's entrapment in any way, shape or form though. The accused needs to come up with a better defense than that.

What I don't like it the commercialization of it by inserting the host of the show into the house to have his little conversation with the predator before the takedown. It's sleazy and pandering of the worst kind.

Of course the real problem is my wife likes the show so I have to listen to it while she watches. :)
 
What I don't like it the commercialization of it by inserting the host of the show into the house to have his little conversation with the predator before the takedown. It's sleazy and pandering of the worst kind.
Click to expand...

It's getting worse.

From the last episode.

Girl: "Hi, come in. I just made some Minute Maid lemonaide. Help yourself, I'm just putting some clothes in the dryer, did you ever notice how Downy makes your underwear smell April fresh? Did you have any trouble finding the place? Did you use Google maps like I recommended?"

NSX-Stalker
 
slownsxt said:
Nonetheless, I do wonder whether the methodology used and the 'overwhelming use of force' during the arrest is ethical and necessary and beneficial in rehabilitation....
….
Click to expand...

Rehabilitation?.....Castration is the only rehab I believe is effective for persons interested in having sex with minors.

And a good beating is a proper place to start.
 
slownsxt said:
Excessive Force:
4+ cops with guns, lasers, tasers & dogs is not really necessary imho, you're going after a psychologically sexually-ill individual (that needs help) and not Al Qeada. A few times when the person has put his hands up and/or is on the ground I've seen police officers drag the suspect down and knee him to the ground....I haven't seen anyone that has fought back, brought a gun or weapon. Yes it's possible, but is that much force really necessary? I believe everyone should receive a certain about of respect - including criminals - . Let's remember that the law says 'innocent untill proven guilty.'
Click to expand...

A "show of force" is different than excessive force. They could have 500 cops there to arrest the guy if they wanted, as long as they're not all there beating the crap out of him. The knee in the back is a method of control (a VERY good method, mind you) and is tought in the academy. The crimes that these guys are commiting are FELONIES! and are treated as such. As a police officer you are tought from the academy how to treat certain crimes/criminals, so a FELONY is treated as such, and a MISD is treated as such. I understand that there are exceptions, and for each crime category there are opposite ends of the spectrum, but these guys are being treated like FELON'S because that's what they are. Just consider them lucky that they are on the bottom end of the "FELON SCALE" when it comes to being a violent threat :rolleyes: ...
 
If you don't want a knee in the back don't accept a 13 year old's invitation for sex...:rolleyes:

Most of these guys suspect something's fishy right from the start--and they still show up!

These guys are as old as 40-60. Does anyone really think rehab is the answer?

On a more basic level many, many men would probably admit to being possibly attracted to a precocious 13 year old girl. But they would certainly not act upon it and would realize that it's not really going to be the wonderful experience they think it is and the more they thought about it the weirder it would seem. Reality kicks in for most people very early on, like within 10 seconds.

I contend most of these men are really delusional, selfish and lonely people who really think that a 13 year old girl would be attracted to an overweight, ugly 50 year old man--not even considering that if that were the case perhaps the 13 year old girl needs some help and they would be throwing gas on a fire.

Having done a lot of psychological research in this area back in the day I learned that there is a big, big difference between diddling a pre-pubescent versus a post-pubescent. Note that none of the decoys on "Predator" are younger than 13 and they all appear to be post-pubescent in pics and chats, etc.

I would categorize these particular men as having more of a socio/sexual problem before I would call them child molesters. But either way, while very different, both problems are very deep-seeded. My point here is that rehab is rarely an effective answer. The only feasible thing to do is to scare them into not ever trying it and let them know the communities will not tolerate these actions and the law is watching.

Pursuing 13-14 year olds is not good, it only does harm, and is illegal. I hope they get all sorts of knees stuck in their backs. The only way these people will think twice is if they know they might get caught and when they do it won't be pleasant.

Of course the program is a little schticky. They are trying to get ratings and yes, I do believe they exploit the suspects. But I'd rather have 1000 exploited creeps than 1 abused adolescent.
 
My favorite is when these jerk wads admit that they watch the very same show in their free time, and they still are so dim witted that they go ahead and solicit minors for sex on the internet. Mo-Rons!

My question is, if this problem is this bad here in the USA, imagine how bad it is in other countries that put less of a focus on such behavior. The world is getting so wierd that I actually fear the day I have kids of my own.
 
I agree with NEO.

Also how is it that MSNBC can show the face of the perp. Did they have to sign a waiver? Seems like a persons life would be ruined after their face is blasted all over the TV trying to have sex with a minor. I also feel there is a bit of entrapment going on with that show, but as some of the people caught have said it is not the first time they have done this. Seems if they are found not guilty but have already had their picture on TV they could sue MSNBC.
 
did you guys see the one before this one? the guy just went to court for the same reason (got caught the first time), then came back for seconds. his response was "oops" and he didnt want to go outside cuz he knew what was waiting for him.
 
FeetFxr said:
That's because he wanted her to do something sexual with the cat. EEEWWWW...that's just plain wrong!!! :redface:
Click to expand...

Was that the episode where the ASPCA was waiting outside to arrest him?:biggrin:
Cats can chat inbetween solitare you know.
attachment.php
 
my point is these guys are first sick then criminals. It's similar to turrets (?) where the person is unable to control themselves or other mental illnesses where the person is a danger to him/her self and others without being controlle (some would say demon possed)...incarceration yes, rehabilitation and treatment a absolute must. They have to go together. I don't know if that happens and if it does not you are releasing a criminal that was temporarily delayed back on the street, usually a little more shrewd
 
steveny said:
I agree with NEO.

Also how is it that MSNBC can show the face of the perp. Did they have to sign a waiver? Seems like a persons life would be ruined after their face is blasted all over the TV trying to have sex with a minor. I also feel there is a bit of entrapment going on with that show, but as some of the people caught have said it is not the first time they have done this. Seems if they are found not guilty but have already had their picture on TV they could sue MSNBC.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure but on COPS they always show the actual suspects face but often the witnesses/bystanders are blocked out. I would imagine there is some kind of waiver involved and they might even be paid.

As far as entrapment, if it really were such the ACLU and everyone else would be all over it. To me it's no different than an undercover prostitute walking the street. Is the prostitute "enticing" and "inviting" the john by looking the way she does? Of course.

BTW I'm not comparing prostitution to soliciting a minor.
 
NSXGMS said:
I'm not sure but on COPS they always show the actual suspects face but often the witnesses/bystanders are blocked out. I would imagine there is some kind of waiver involved and they might even be paid...
Click to expand...

Having personally been filmed by "Real Stories of the Highway Patrol", I can tell you that you don't get paid. :biggrin: You must however sign a release that states that they can use the footage on television. In my situation, I was on the side of the road with a few buddies on motorcycles and the trooper stopped to see if we were causing trouble. Fortunately we were waiting for a friend who showed up while our credentials were being checked and no one was given a violation. I guess I didn't the image of a "Hells Angel's" member. :wink:

Back on topic. I think all of the people caught in this sting need counseling. They are sick and some are even dangerous. On the flip side, why aren't there any shows where older women are trying to seduce younger boys? The show is somewhat sensational, but it does make for good TV.
 
Hopefully, not stirring up a hornets nest here....

The people who were caught during this operation, they definitely deserve to be put away, no question about that.

However, am I the only one that finds the methods used to catch them a bit disturbing? It sets a dangerous precedent for thought crimes and thought police.

The people who were caught during this, sick as they may be, haven't actually done anything wrong. Since the decoys are all adults, they did not actually correspond with an underage person, they did not actually have any contact with an underage person. Even if we look past that though, they haven't actually engaged in any illegal acts with the decoy. Strictly speaking, they haven't actually *done* anything wrong.

What it seems they are being busted for is *thinking* about taking advantage of an underage person.

Let's say, one day, you talk to someone online about robbing a bank. The word goes out that you talked about robbing a bank, and operatives are sent to your local banks to watch for you. While at the moment, you thought about and had the intention of robbing a bank, the next time you show up at the bank, any number of things could happen. It could be that you are just visiting the bank to do normal business before you actually rob it. It could be that you get cold feet. You could develop a conscience at the last minute. The underlying thing is that you didn't actually do anything other than think about robbing the bank. Now, what if, by simply showing up at the bank, you could be arrested and charged for what amounts to just thinking of robbing the bank.

What if you could be pulled over and given a speeding ticket at any time because you happened to be on the freeway, and at one time online, you had talked about exceeding the speed limit. What if that were grounds enough to issue you a speeding ticket?

A very dangerous precedent indeed.

The notion of a thought police sounds scary if you ask me.

Some food for thought.
 
Ben said:
Hopefully, not stirring up a hornets nest here....

The people who were caught during this operation, they definitely deserve to be put away, no question about that.

However, am I the only one that finds the methods used to catch them a bit disturbing? It sets a dangerous precedent for thought crimes and thought police.

The people who were caught during this, sick as they may be, haven't actually done anything wrong. Since the decoys are all adults, they did not actually correspond with an underage person, they did not actually have any contact with an underage person. Even if we look past that though, they haven't actually engaged in any illegal acts with the decoy. Strictly speaking, they haven't actually *done* anything wrong.

What it seems they are being busted for is *thinking* about taking advantage of an underage person.

Let's say, one day, you talk to someone online about robbing a bank. The word goes out that you talked about robbing a bank, and operatives are sent to your local banks to watch for you. While at the moment, you thought about and had the intention of robbing a bank, the next time you show up at the bank, any number of things could happen. It could be that you are just visiting the bank to do normal business before you actually rob it. It could be that you get cold feet. You could develop a conscience at the last minute. The underlying thing is that you didn't actually do anything other than think about robbing the bank. Now, what if, by simply showing up at the bank, you could be arrested and charged for what amounts to just thinking of robbing the bank.

What if you could be pulled over and given a speeding ticket at any time because you happened to be on the freeway, and at one time online, you had talked about exceeding the speed limit. What if that were grounds enough to issue you a speeding ticket?

A very dangerous precedent indeed.

The notion of a thought police sounds scary if you ask me.

Some food for thought.
Click to expand...

I see where you're coming from but unfortunately "solicitation of sex" is a crime, not actual sex. Undercover prostitutes are not actual prostitutes. And they don't actually have sex. The crime is "solicitation" of sex. The undercover prostitute might actually walk over to the car herself and ask the mark if he wants sex. No entrapment there, at least not so far in the court system.

Also, your bank analogy is flawed. One might go to the bank to do normal business regardless of their plan to rob it. However one does not show up at the home of a 13 year old during their normal life.

Also, there is no law prohibiting talking about anything with the exception of threatening to kill the president or saying "bomb" or "fire" in a public place or airport. That's an irrational jump you're making to speeding citations given for talking about it.

One can even talk about killing someone without consequence. However, when plans are made, that becomes solicitation of murder, i.e. hiring a hit man, etc.

The crime in question is committed when a plan is made to meet for sex and addresses are given, not simply dirty talking on the internet.

BTW, if you really believe that 9/10 of those men that entered the house (some with lube, condoms and sex stimulators) would not have had sex with those kids had it been possible you're very mistaken.
 
Ben said:
Hopefully, not stirring up a hornets nest here....

Strictly speaking, they haven't actually *done* anything wrong.

What it seems they are being busted for is *thinking* about taking advantage of an underage person.

Let's say, one day, you talk to someone online about robbing a bank. The word goes out that you talked about robbing a bank, and operatives are sent to your local banks to watch for you. While at the moment, you thought about and had the intention of robbing a bank, the next time you show up at the bank, any number of things could happen. It could be that you are just visiting the bank to do normal business before you actually rob it. It could be that you get cold feet. You could develop a conscience at the last minute. The underlying thing is that you didn't actually do anything other than think about robbing the bank. Now, what if, by simply showing up at the bank, you could be arrested and charged for what amounts to just thinking of robbing the bank.

A very dangerous precedent indeed.

The notion of a thought police sounds scary if you ask me.

Some food for thought.
Click to expand...

In Texas it is actually against the law to solicit a minor in ANY way. Whether it be over the phone, in person, over the internet. So the bank robbery theory is not the same. I think if we are headed for a police state(bad, very bad), it's not because of something like this. If you were to stop and ask a "lady" for 'company' and she were a Cop, you get to spend the night in the pokey(there is a reason they call it this). This is not my personal experience. Just a fact. :biggrin: So these guys did KNOW what they are doing 'could' be wrong. Don't do the crime if you don't want to do the time. Does that last statement have the same punch since 'he' didn't do the time?:rolleyes:
But what do I know?
T
 
NSXGMS said:
However one does not show up at the home of a 13 year old during their normal life.
Click to expand...

This is very true, but then it goes back to the fact that the people involved never actually had any contact with a 13 year old, because the decoys are all adults. This further supports the fact that you are being busted for your thoughts, and not what you actually did.

NSXGMS said:
BTW, if you really believe that 9/10 of those men that entered the house (some with lube, condoms and sex stimulators) would not have had sex with those kids had it been possible you're very mistaken.
Click to expand...

I am in full agreement there. These guys definitely need to be taken out and put away.

What I have somewhat of an issue with is the method used to catch them, and how it may later be used as a precedent to be applied to other things as well.
 
Ben said:
This is very true, but then it goes back to the fact that the people involved never actually had any contact with a 13 year old, because the decoys are all adults. This further supports the fact that you are being busted for your thoughts, and not what you actually did.



I am in full agreement there. These guys definitely need to be taken out and put away.

What I have somewhat of an issue with is the method used to catch them, and how it may later be used as a precedent to be applied to other things as well.
Click to expand...

you would prefer that they use a few 13 yr olds so that the involvement can be 'authentic'?

sometimes it IS the thought that counts. there does not seem to be the need for the paranoia that you have described.

sitting around your living room THINKING about it is one thing... getting off your ass and driving a great distance to meet what you think is a 13yr old is another. that isn't thought, that is ACTION.
 
OneRedNSX said:
you would prefer that they use a few 13 yr olds so that the involvement can be 'authentic'?

sometimes it IS the thought that counts. there does not seem to be the need for the paranoia that you have described.

sitting around your living room THINKING about it is one thing... getting off your ass and driving a great distance to meet what you think is a 13yr old is another. that isn't thought, that is ACTION.
Click to expand...

Very good points indeed....

Paranoia it definitely is....but often times, precedents are how the ball gets rolling.
 
Ben said:
This is very true, but then it goes back to the fact that the people involved never actually had any contact with a 13 year old, because the decoys are all adults. This further supports the fact that you are being busted for your thoughts, and not what you actually did.
Click to expand...

Not sure what the difference is between a "pretend" prostitute and a "pretend" 13 year old.
 

Similar threads

Madhatter10-6
Cooling the NSX: Fixing a Rare OEM Oversight
2
Replies
40
Views
3K
Zoom
Z
R
A supercharged NSX.. revert back to stock or keep it?
Replies
10
Views
855
peiserg
peiserg
heyhey
Picked up a 1994 NSX, Immobilizer makes it not driveable
Replies
8
Views
786
m3brendan
m3brendan
jsullyboy
Need Help Assessing a car i am looking to buy
Replies
8
Views
1K
jsullyboy
jsullyboy
EuroBoutique
Comparing our 2022 Type-S to a Ferrari SF90 on a recent test drive....
Replies
6
Views
3K
EuroBoutique
EuroBoutique
Back
Top