To Catch a Predator

[Manny Calavera]

Originally Posted by A Canuker

No one in their right mind would do these things unless you were a perv. As for the vet who went there, hire a coat hangers or something. There is no reason, except a twisted mind, anyone would show up at that house.

This is why I'm so conflicted. These people aren't of right mind. I really doubt anyone wants to find themselves sexually attracted to children. To exploit them for entertainment is just as sick and morally reprehensible as these people who act on their desires instead of seeking help.

 

[hi-val]

Originally Posted by mrpologuy

I don't see why so many folks on here defend these perverts.

I have really big, Constitution-sized problems with what amounts to vigilante justice.

 

[dusty]

Originally Posted by hi-val

I have really big, Constitution-sized problems with what amounts to vigilante justice.

+1. And doesn't everybody see what a slippery slope we're on with using peoples' pain as entertainment?

 

[johnapril]

Cantor et al. 2008. Cerebral white matter deficiencies in pedophilic men

Abstract

The present investigation sought to identify which brain regions distinguish pedophilic from nonpedophilic men, using unbiased, automated analyses of the whole brain. T1-weighted magnetic resonance images (MRIs) were acquired from men who demonstrated illegal or clinically significant sexual behaviors or interests (n = 65) and from men who had histories of nonsexual offenses but no sexual offenses (n = 62). Sexual interest in children was assessed by participants' admissions of pedophilic interest, histories of committing sexual offenses against children, and psychophysiological responses in the laboratory to erotic stimuli depicting children or adults. Automated parcellation of the MRIs revealed significant negative associations between pedophilia and white matter volumes of the temporal and parietal lobes bilaterally. Voxel-based morphometry corroborated the associations and indicated that the regions of lower white matter volumes followed, and were limited to, two major fiber bundles: the superior fronto-occipital fasciculus and the right arcuate fasciculus. No significant differences were found in grey matter or in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). Because the superior fronto-occipital and arcuate fasciculi connect the cortical regions that respond to sexual cues, these results suggest (1) that those cortical regions operate as a network for recognizing sexually relevant stimuli and (2) that pedophilia results from a partial disconnection within that network.

 

[Douglas]

Originally Posted by retronotmetro

Let's not pretend that the targets are totally harmless shut-ins who present no risk to the public and who just need a shoulder to cry on. These are guys who drive long distances to show up (many times with pot or booze and condoms) at what they believe to be the homes of 13-15 y.o girls.

Originally Posted by A Canuker

I've watched the show and I think its a blast to watch these morons drive for hours, bring beer and condoms to some house where they think some teen is waiting for them.

Did you guys even read the article? The thing that has most of us riled, because it reveals the true motives of the show's producers, is the example when the target did not drive anywhere. The show came to him. He had neither beer nor pot nor condoms, an illegal search warrant was rushed through, and Dateline convinced law enforcement to storm into this guy's house for the sake of entertainment. He subsequently blew his brains out. In the post-mortem of the whole mess, they found his chats with the "target" (who had repeatedly begged him to come over on the telephone, because it was Dateline's last night in town), but no other evidence of anything suspicious on his computer.

So this man was guilty of being tempted (but notably did not yield to temptation) by a pseudo-teen only one time that anyone knows of, that pseudo-teen not being a member of law enforcement but rather an employee of a sensationalist show, with no real legal guidelines to constrain the extent of this entrapment. The answer was to go to his house, guns drawn, and send in a SWAT team?

You think this American? You think this should be legal? This is a witch hunt.

Imagine you're walking down a city street, and a smoking hottie starts flirting with you. She teases, she begs you to come back to her hotel room. You're tempted... very tempted... she mentions that it's $500 for the night and you can stick it in her @$$ if you'd like. Damn, she's hot. You say yes, you start to walk with her, then you decide, no, this really isn't a good idea. You go home.

The next day, Chris Hansen comes over to your house and wants an interview for his new show - "To Catch a Sodomite John." Turns out the hooker wasn't a hooker but an actress they had playing the part. Too bad, you solicited her, regardless of whether or not you acted on it. And besides, you wanted to have ******** with her, you filthy pervert. Why would anyone defend a pervert like you?

 

[A Canuker]

Originally Posted by Douglas

Did you guys even read the article?


I must admit that I did not. Granted if what else you wrote was true then Mr. Hanson and his crew should be sued in a true American fashion. I cannot see how they could defend themselves and as such lose their collective shirts, end of show.

However, I still stand by the fact that the vast majority of SF members would never be caught in the current TCAP show and as such tough luck for the "stars".

 

[Douglas]

Originally Posted by A Canuker

Granted if what else you wrote was true then Mr. Hanson and his crew should be sued in a true American fashion. I cannot see how they could defend themselves and as such lose their collective shirts, end of show.

They are being sued, in true American fashion. $100 mil, by the sister of the accused/deceased.

 

[A Canuker]

Originally Posted by Douglas

They are being sued, in true American fashion. $100 mil, by the sister of the accused/deceased.

Good.

 

[mrpologuy]

Why are you happy they are being sued?

 

[dusty]

Originally Posted by mrpologuy

Why are you happy they are being sued?

Did you miss the rest of this thread?

 

[Reggs]

I think people who enjoy the show have a perversion of their own.

 

[Eason]

Originally Posted by dusty

Did you miss the rest of this thread?

polyguy truely is something...

 

[Brian SD]

Originally Posted by retronotmetro

Let's not pretend that the targets are totally harmless shut-ins who present no risk to the public and who just need a shoulder to cry on. These are guys who drive long distances to show up (many times with pot or booze and condoms) at what they believe to be the homes of 13-15 y.o girls. Do you think they would all turn around and go home if there really was a willing girl there, or is it more likely that they'd go on with the plan? Do you think these guys would self-report and seek treatment if they were never caught, either in a sting or in the act?

I do agree that these are the types of people who do need help and assistance, but they are also the types of people who won't seek it without some kind of third party assistance--like law enforcement.

They're not all harmless shut-ins, but if they're harmful they should be taken in for the sake of justice, not for the sake of entertainment. I don't disagree with your sentiment, and I made sure in my OP to state that I'm aware these guys blew it and are getting their just desserts, so to speak. However, the premise of the show is morally reprehensible.

 

[mrpologuy]

The moment these men see that the person says they are underage should be the end of the conversation. It doesn't matter if the "teen" asks you to call or come over. You are an adult and should no better. He must have been feeling real guilty about what he did to kill himseld. Do these men start the convesations? Yes. Do these men start that sexual talk? Yes. Do the men on the show see the age before they start talking about sex? yes. The decoys even say " you know I am under age right?" The men say yes an dmost say they are worried about getting caught. Everyadult knows it is wrong to have a sexual conversationw ith someone you think is a teenager. Children and teens are hurt everyday be horrible people online and those men need to be punished. Some of you are more worried about keeping these men safe than keeping kids safe. I just don't understand it. Don't have these convos with children at all. that is the bottom line.

 

[Rome]

Originally Posted by Brian SD

They're not all harmless shut-ins, but if they're harmful they should be taken in for the sake of justice, not for the sake of entertainment. I don't disagree with your sentiment, and I made sure in my OP to state that I'm aware these guys blew it and are getting their just desserts, so to speak. However, the premise of the show is morally reprehensible.

I think this show started out serving a good purpose and then imploded due to the ratings race. It brought attention in a very visceral way to a real problem of the internet age and hopefully urged more parents into having this type of conversation w/ their kids. First is the medium, its the internet, I cant think of a better way to catch predators in that context than to bait them. I wont go into the pseudo-psychology of what it takes to pretend to be a horny neglected 13yro, I dont want to, but I dont think it stems from perversion masked as righteousness. Second, yes it is entertaining. I think of all those cop dramas where the good guys catch the bad guy, justice gets served in under an hour. Its like that but in real life minus the horrible camera gimmicks of CSI.