Comments on: Creepy To Catch a Predator http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/ It rankles me when somebody tries to tell somebody what to do. Fri, 10 Feb 2012 18:23:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2 By: SmileyJohnsen http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-403062 SmileyJohnsen Mon, 28 Jun 2010 20:16:24 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-403062 I think the idea is noble but also is riddled with legal issues. 1. Entrappment in most the cases 2. Wiretap laws broken Why Entrapment, the preditors are encouraged to meet with the underage person, Mean while this chat group perverted justice is paid to do this so there is money at stake here. ok now for the the wiretap law. Since the location of the meeting place is a house (residence) it is not a public place. When the preditor enters the home, they are video taped in secret for the first 15 minutes. Now during this time, the preditor is unaware of the taping. His/Her rights have been violated and the flip side is "To Catch A Preditor" Or Dateline have just committed a Federal Felony , not to mention any local state laws on wiretap. Think of it this way, The president of the united states comes in to your home (Not public but private residence) Can you secretly record your conversation with him and not tell him about the secret video taping? No the Secret service will be so far up your @$$ that it wouldn't even be funny, not to mention you will end up in jail. Why do you think DA's are not touching these cases. Each person who is not convicted can sue the police for False arrest , False imprisonment and walk away with millions. I think that this process of Dateline needs to be thought out completely. Like ask their lawyers or a criminal law lawyer what they can and can't do. Not to mention the guys who get off can sue Dateline for Slander..... I think the idea is noble but also is riddled with legal issues.

1. Entrappment in most the cases
2. Wiretap laws broken

Why Entrapment, the preditors are encouraged to meet with the underage person, Mean while this chat group perverted justice is paid to do this so there is money at stake here.

ok now for the the wiretap law.

Since the location of the meeting place is a house (residence) it is not a public place.
When the preditor enters the home, they are video taped in secret for the first 15 minutes.
Now during this time, the preditor is unaware of the taping.
His/Her rights have been violated and the flip side is “To Catch A Preditor” Or Dateline have just committed a Federal Felony , not to mention any local state laws on wiretap.

Think of it this way, The president of the united states comes in to your home (Not public but private residence) Can you secretly record your conversation with him and not tell him about the secret video taping?

No the Secret service will be so far up your @$$ that it wouldn’t even be funny, not to mention you will end up in jail.

Why do you think DA’s are not touching these cases. Each person who is not convicted can sue the police for False arrest , False imprisonment and walk away with millions.

I think that this process of Dateline needs to be thought out completely.
Like ask their lawyers or a criminal law lawyer what they can and can’t do.

Not to mention the guys who get off can sue Dateline for Slander…..

]]> By: Mr Hate http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-384075 Mr Hate Mon, 08 Feb 2010 03:14:34 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-384075 "The State must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as government is perceived as working for the benefit of children, the people happily will endure almost any curtailment of liberty." - Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf “The State must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as government is perceived as working for the benefit of children, the people happily will endure almost any curtailment of liberty.”

- Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

]]> By: Paul http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-369586 Paul Sun, 04 Oct 2009 12:57:47 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-369586 How come with all the female teachers getting busted for having sex with minors, a woman is never nabbed on To Catch a Predator? How come with all the female teachers getting busted for having sex with minors, a woman is never nabbed on To Catch a Predator?

]]> By: Rob http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-236482 Rob Mon, 02 Feb 2009 03:00:27 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-236482 I would love to see every sex offender behind bars...but the their does seem to be some entrapment involved with these "alleged offenders"..After watching some of the "To Catch a Predator" investigative programs I believed that many of the offenders had intentions of meeting an under aged child but! I don't agree with the tactics the show used. Many of these alleged offenders were led to believe that Chris Hanson was a police officer by Chris Hanson himself. I felt that Hansons actions , questions, and instructions to the offenders to keep their hands out their pockets, sit down, answer the question went a little bit too far..these are tactics that a law enforcement official would utilize. not something an investigative reporter should be doing. I also believe that most of these men were complete idiots to speak to Hanson or the police without legal representation..I'm sure the Producers of "To Catch a Predator" have alot of clips of the other men who refused to answer questions because it would obviously effect the ratings of the show. It's unfortunate but it appears that show was more interested in humilating these men on television, and showing only what would sway an audience. How many of these offenders were actually convicted? released, and not convicted? I would love to see every sex offender behind bars…but the their does seem to be some entrapment involved with these “alleged offenders”..After watching some of the “To Catch a Predator” investigative programs I believed that many of the offenders had intentions of meeting an under aged child but! I don’t agree with the tactics the show used. Many of these alleged offenders were led to believe that Chris Hanson was a police officer by Chris Hanson himself. I felt that Hansons actions , questions, and instructions to the offenders to keep their hands out their pockets, sit down, answer the question went a little bit too far..these are tactics that a law enforcement official would utilize. not something an investigative reporter should be doing. I also believe that most of these men were complete idiots to speak to Hanson or the police without legal representation..I’m sure the Producers of “To Catch a Predator” have alot of clips of the other men who refused to answer questions because it would obviously effect the ratings of the show. It’s unfortunate but it appears that show was more interested in humilating these men on television, and showing only what would sway an audience. How many of these offenders were actually convicted? released, and not convicted?

]]> By: Stef http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-214443 Stef Thu, 04 Dec 2008 20:21:39 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-214443 I still don't understand what law these men have broken. The "victims" are fictitious, the decoys are not underage. How could they attempt to have sex with a minor that doesn't exist? I understand that this is supposed to prevent them from ever being able to try it with a real underage girl or boy, but this is America. Our justice system is supposed to only punish crimes, people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty of a crime. These men are convicted for crimes that they couldn't possibly commit, no matter how much they want to. I still don’t understand what law these men have broken. The “victims” are fictitious, the decoys are not underage. How could they attempt to have sex with a minor that doesn’t exist? I understand that this is supposed to prevent them from ever being able to try it with a real underage girl or boy, but this is America. Our justice system is supposed to only punish crimes, people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty of a crime. These men are convicted for crimes that they couldn’t possibly commit, no matter how much they want to.

]]> By: Unreality Primetime | » Odd Programmes of the Week http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-188738 Unreality Primetime | » Odd Programmes of the Week Wed, 08 Oct 2008 12:35:57 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-188738 [...] the absolutely brilliant show, ‘To Catch a Predator’ is on FX at 10pm. American TV presenter Chris Hansen, along with local police and a team of [...] [...] the absolutely brilliant show, ‘To Catch a Predator’ is on FX at 10pm. American TV presenter Chris Hansen, along with local police and a team of [...]

]]> By: wifeneedsanswers http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-185682 wifeneedsanswers Sun, 28 Sep 2008 23:01:44 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-185682 ted, i am praising your comment as i'm typing. although i do understand that the implication between the adult and teen is that there will be sex, you don't ACTUALLY KNOW that all of these men would have actually gone through with sex. The fact that it didn't happen, period, should be taken into consideration. I think that some men are going through what you might call a midlife crisis, need to feel young again, and it manifests itself in this "game" that they are playing with these girls. I am actually associated with a man who spoke to a 16 year old about sex. He says that it would have never gone the whole way, it was only talk. He realized that having sex with her was a crime, but never did he realize that TALKING only was just as serious in the eyes of the law. Although still a little strange, he just wanted to know that he COULD if he wanted to. It's a midlife crisis ego thing. Sixteen represents the prime of his life. He is now labeled a sex offender, albeit for 10 yrs. instead of for life, but has all of the same consequences and limitations that a man who lurked in a schoolyard, kidnapped a 5 yr. old and raped her would have during his 10 yr. labelling. I think this is absolutely rediculous. Books on the subject will tell you that a person who is attracted to a 16 yr. old is not attracted to a 6 yr old and their incidence of reoffending is about 2%. It's indecent solicitation they're charged with, not aggrevated child abuse. And although I do feel sorry for the girl he did this to, I do not believe that his behavior warrants jail time and a sex offender labeling. Any thoughts? This subject just gets me so wound up. ted, i am praising your comment as i’m typing. although i do understand that the implication between the adult and teen is that there will be sex, you don’t ACTUALLY KNOW that all of these men would have actually gone through with sex. The fact that it didn’t happen, period, should be taken into consideration. I think that some men are going through what you might call a midlife crisis, need to feel young again, and it manifests itself in this “game” that they are playing with these girls. I am actually associated with a man who spoke to a 16 year old about sex. He says that it would have never gone the whole way, it was only talk. He realized that having sex with her was a crime, but never did he realize that TALKING only was just as serious in the eyes of the law. Although still a little strange, he just wanted to know that he COULD if he wanted to. It’s a midlife crisis ego thing. Sixteen represents the prime of his life. He is now labeled a sex offender, albeit for 10 yrs. instead of for life, but has all of the same consequences and limitations that a man who lurked in a schoolyard, kidnapped a 5 yr. old and raped her would have during his 10 yr. labelling. I think this is absolutely rediculous. Books on the subject will tell you that a person who is attracted to a 16 yr. old is not attracted to a 6 yr old and their incidence of reoffending is about 2%. It’s indecent solicitation they’re charged with, not aggrevated child abuse. And although I do feel sorry for the girl he did this to, I do not believe that his behavior warrants jail time and a sex offender labeling. Any thoughts? This subject just gets me so wound up.

]]> By: Ted http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-133370 Ted Sat, 14 Jun 2008 03:59:44 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-133370 You know instead of busting 100's of guys, who may or ****MAY NOT ( You do not always know whats going through one's head)****** have intentions of having sex with these underaged girls, I think that their time could be better spent finding ways to make the internet safer for children. To me it just seems like they are more concerned about " getting the ratings up" rather than true justice. Also has anyone ever noticed how they only have men on the show? I mean come on there are creepy women out there as well. You know instead of busting 100′s of guys, who may or ****MAY NOT ( You do not always know whats going through one’s head)****** have intentions of having sex with these underaged girls, I think that their time could be better spent finding ways to make the internet safer for children. To me it just seems like they are more concerned about ” getting the ratings up” rather than true justice. Also has anyone ever noticed how they only have men on the show? I mean come on there are creepy women out there as well.

]]> By: Mark, FL http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-90570 Mark, FL Sat, 26 Apr 2008 07:09:06 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-90570 It also seems to me Perverted Justice's hands are tied. While they must follow specific rules to prevent from being sued for entrapment, a real teen will not follow any rules. This makes it too easy for a potential predator to tell the difference between a setup or the real thing, but, not necessarily, a premeditated hate crime against a possible predator. I'm sure that happens. It also seems to me Perverted Justice’s hands are tied. While they must follow specific rules to prevent from being sued for entrapment, a real teen will not follow any rules. This makes it too easy for a potential predator to tell the difference between a setup or the real thing, but, not necessarily, a premeditated hate crime against a possible predator. I’m sure that happens.

]]> By: Mark, FL http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-90569 Mark, FL Sat, 26 Apr 2008 07:01:18 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-90569 As many years as "To Catch a Predator" has been on TV, the stupidity still remains with the potential predator who thinks he may possibly have sex with somebody under sixteen. Most have been married men with families and good careers. While teens may be curious about sex with somebody that much older it is the responsibility of the adult to keep the chat appropriate or terminate the chat, nevermind, attempting, to meet the teen alone or sending pornographic pictures online after being told the other person is fifteen or younger. It's true. Real teens will be inappropriate. I may not be aware of any laws regarding chatting with minors but obviously requesting sex online from a minor, sending naked photos or attempting to meet these minors while unsupervised is the real issue, especially since these same people wouldn't want a grown man they don't know to meet their children while unsupervised. As many years as “To Catch a Predator” has been on TV, the stupidity still remains with the potential predator who thinks he may possibly have sex with somebody under sixteen. Most have been married men with families and good careers. While teens may be curious about sex with somebody that much older it is the responsibility of the adult to keep the chat appropriate or terminate the chat, nevermind, attempting, to meet the teen alone or sending pornographic pictures online after being told the other person is fifteen or younger. It’s true. Real teens will be inappropriate. I may not be aware of any laws regarding chatting with minors but obviously requesting sex online from a minor, sending naked photos or attempting to meet these minors while unsupervised is the real issue, especially since these same people wouldn’t want a grown man they don’t know to meet their children while unsupervised.

]]> By: wifeneedsanswers http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-86307 wifeneedsanswers Mon, 14 Apr 2008 17:21:12 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-86307 anyone know what the common sentencing is for these people on the first offense? aren't they charged with "indescent solicitation of a child"? anyone know what the common sentencing is for these people on the first offense? aren’t they charged with “indescent solicitation of a child”?

]]> By: thinker http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-71965 thinker Fri, 01 Feb 2008 20:00:01 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-71965 What I find so strange about the whole thing is that 50 years ago a 27 year old man could marry a 14 year old girl. Now this is a crime? Why? Social standards have changed, human psychology has not. Males are naturally attracted to young, HEALTHY, females. This applies to all mammals, humans are no exception. 18 is a number modern law puts out there and means nothing biologically. When you see a teenage girl showing cleavage, dont check it out. or else your might " need to have a seat right over there". What I find so strange about the whole thing is that 50 years ago a 27 year old man could marry a 14 year old girl. Now this is a crime? Why? Social standards have changed, human psychology has not.

Males are naturally attracted to young, HEALTHY, females. This applies to all mammals, humans are no exception. 18 is a number modern law puts out there and means nothing biologically.

When you see a teenage girl showing cleavage, dont check it out. or else your might ” need to have a seat right over there”.

]]> By: Pete Walker http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-70512 Pete Walker Wed, 23 Jan 2008 14:13:04 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-70512 "Men’s attraction to sexually developed women/girls has a proper and necessary biological function. Pedophilia, while it may be “hard wired” in some sense does not." Actually, there is psychological evidence that adult-child relationships of all types, including sexual or pseudo-sexual, do indeed have an important function throughout the development of most cultures. Examples include Leonardo Davinci's relationship with his Uncle, the prophet Mohammad, Mahatma Gandhi, and countless clergy of every denomination. It turns out that the extra attention the sexual attraction brings is beneficial to the social development of the child and to the inspiration and self-esteem of the adult. Past cultures have even institutionalized such relationships, but western culture has never come to terms, nor is modern legal theory capable of the nuances needed to separate harmful and beneficial relationships. Adding the media paradigm to this puritanical confusion defies even metaphorical description. “Men’s attraction to sexually developed women/girls has a proper and necessary biological function. Pedophilia, while it may be “hard wired” in some sense does not.”
Actually, there is psychological evidence that adult-child relationships of all types, including sexual or pseudo-sexual, do indeed have an important function throughout the development of most cultures. Examples include Leonardo Davinci’s relationship with his Uncle, the prophet Mohammad, Mahatma Gandhi, and countless clergy of every denomination. It turns out that the extra attention the sexual attraction brings is beneficial to the social development of the child and to the inspiration and self-esteem of the adult.
Past cultures have even institutionalized such relationships, but western culture has never come to terms, nor is modern legal theory capable of the nuances needed to separate harmful and beneficial relationships. Adding the media paradigm to this puritanical confusion defies even metaphorical description.

]]> By: parse http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-67934 parse Thu, 03 Jan 2008 13:03:55 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-67934 Zeb, the problem is that "normal" has a number of different connotations, and it's not clear to me which one Radley wants to invoke here, or what useful information is conveyed by the label. One meaning of normal is "occuring natually," so if you agree that pedophilia is hard wired, then it is by definition normal. The primary meaning, according to Merriam Webster online, is that normal means confirming to a norm; in that sense, Radley's comment is close to tautology. I'm not saying he's wrong; I'm saying I don't know what he means. Zeb, the problem is that “normal” has a number of different connotations, and it’s not clear to me which one Radley wants to invoke here, or what useful information is conveyed by the label. One meaning of normal is “occuring natually,” so if you agree that pedophilia is hard wired, then it is by definition normal. The primary meaning, according to Merriam Webster online, is that normal means confirming to a norm; in that sense, Radley’s comment is close to tautology. I’m not saying he’s wrong; I’m saying I don’t know what he means.

]]> By: Zeb http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-67835 Zeb Wed, 02 Jan 2008 14:54:46 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-67835 Of course the one is normal and the other not. Men's attraction to sexually developed women/girls has a proper and necessary biological function. Pedophilia, while it may be "hard wired" in some sense does not. Nothing happens when you turn 18, but there certainly is a real difference between pre- and post- pubescent children. Of course the one is normal and the other not. Men’s attraction to sexually developed women/girls has a proper and necessary biological function. Pedophilia, while it may be “hard wired” in some sense does not. Nothing happens when you turn 18, but there certainly is a real difference between pre- and post- pubescent children.

]]> By: parse http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-67832 parse Wed, 02 Jan 2008 14:13:54 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-67832 <i>I also think there’s an important distinction between men who arrange for with sex post-pubescent girls below the age of consent, and men who prey on young girls and boys who haven’t yet reached sexual maturity. The former is a natural, hard-wired attraction.</i> I won't quarrel with your claim that there's a distinction between men attracted to post-pubescent but underaged partners and pedophiles--who are attractred to pre-pubescent children. But I don't think you've captured the distinction by labeling the former a "natural, hard-wired attraction." Are you claiming that the basis of pedophile attraction is not "hard-wired" in the sense that the sexual orientation of others is? What evidence do you know that supports that claim? Or are you trying to suggest that, while both are based on biological factors, the attraction to post-pubescent adolescents is "normal" while pedophile attraction is "abnormal"? Are you trying to say something other than the fact that one is more common than the other? I also think there’s an important distinction between men who arrange for with sex post-pubescent girls below the age of consent, and men who prey on young girls and boys who haven’t yet reached sexual maturity. The former is a natural, hard-wired attraction.

I won’t quarrel with your claim that there’s a distinction between men attracted to post-pubescent but underaged partners and pedophiles–who are attractred to pre-pubescent children. But I don’t think you’ve captured the distinction by labeling the former a “natural, hard-wired attraction.” Are you claiming that the basis of pedophile attraction is not “hard-wired” in the sense that the sexual orientation of others is? What evidence do you know that supports that claim? Or are you trying to suggest that, while both are based on biological factors, the attraction to post-pubescent adolescents is “normal” while pedophile attraction is “abnormal”? Are you trying to say something other than the fact that one is more common than the other?

]]> By: John David Galt http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-67781 John David Galt Tue, 01 Jan 2008 21:42:25 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-67781 I see no problem with a large number of stings if nearly all of the people they catch would have committed the crime anyway. But I'm not at all convinced that the current crop of stings meets this standard. I would like to see the law require that all interactions, especially the initial communication, between the decoy(s) and the suspect be recorded and that the prosecution can't keep the jury from seeing any of them for any reason. Only then can we be sure that entrapment (in the legal sense: creation of crimes that would not otherwise occur) isn't taking place. I would also like to see the law take the whole situation into account. It's always unacceptable abuse when a family member, or a trusted person like a teacher, babysitter, or priest, takes advantage of a child. But I've known people who got in trouble because a teenage girl successfully posed as an adult for the purpose of going to an adult party and getting laid -- and it seems to me that in that case, the guy has done no wrong, whether he sees through the deception or not. I see no problem with a large number of stings if nearly all of the people they catch would have committed the crime anyway. But I’m not at all convinced that the current crop of stings meets this standard.

I would like to see the law require that all interactions, especially the initial communication, between the decoy(s) and the suspect be recorded and that the prosecution can’t keep the jury from seeing any of them for any reason. Only then can we be sure that entrapment (in the legal sense: creation of crimes that would not otherwise occur) isn’t taking place.

I would also like to see the law take the whole situation into account. It’s always unacceptable abuse when a family member, or a trusted person like a teacher, babysitter, or priest, takes advantage of a child. But I’ve known people who got in trouble because a teenage girl successfully posed as an adult for the purpose of going to an adult party and getting laid — and it seems to me that in that case, the guy has done no wrong, whether he sees through the deception or not.

]]> By: Sam http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-67704 Sam Mon, 31 Dec 2007 22:15:21 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-67704 The morality of the activities involved and the question of entrapment are important issues, but I think fade behind an obvious issue that most people seem to breeze over after reading a story like Balko's. We have limited criminal justice system resources and they are insufficient to stamp out every crime that exists. The percentage of these resources put towards dealing with sex offenses is rather great compared to the number that occur, and are certainly applied inefficiently. Police officers regularly tell me, an offender, that they wish they could stop spending all their time keeping track of people who will likely never reoffend and couldn't be stopped by our policies if they did. I ask every one I come into contact with, and 9 of the last 12 (last 26 months, I keep track) I spoke to say our media-driven obsession with catching "pedophiles" keeps them from investigating complaints that might prevent an actual crime from occurring. The "media-driven obsession" comment comes from one of them. We can feel like we're doing something with all this feel good crap, or we can actually do something. It's your choice, my choices no longer exist...I just get to call you blind, weak, and foolish. The morality of the activities involved and the question of entrapment are important issues, but I think fade behind an obvious issue that most people seem to breeze over after reading a story like Balko’s.

We have limited criminal justice system resources and they are insufficient to stamp out every crime that exists. The percentage of these resources put towards dealing with sex offenses is rather great compared to the number that occur, and are certainly applied inefficiently. Police officers regularly tell me, an offender, that they wish they could stop spending all their time keeping track of people who will likely never reoffend and couldn’t be stopped by our policies if they did. I ask every one I come into contact with, and 9 of the last 12 (last 26 months, I keep track) I spoke to say our media-driven obsession with catching “pedophiles” keeps them from investigating complaints that might prevent an actual crime from occurring. The “media-driven obsession” comment comes from one of them.

We can feel like we’re doing something with all this feel good crap, or we can actually do something. It’s your choice, my choices no longer exist…I just get to call you blind, weak, and foolish.

]]> By: Russ 2000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-67683 Russ 2000 Mon, 31 Dec 2007 17:02:55 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-67683 I'll be sure to catch the show... the next time their sting operation nets a police officer trolling for tweenagers. I’ll be sure to catch the show… the next time their sting operation nets a police officer trolling for tweenagers.

]]> By: Ultima Ratio http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/comment-page-1/#comment-67661 Ultima Ratio Mon, 31 Dec 2007 14:25:49 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/30/creepy-to-catch-a-predator/#comment-67661 Tom Paine: in the same sense that we defend free speech for people we vehemently disagree with (because otherwise it's not truly "free"), we defend due process for people we find despicable. Tom Paine: in the same sense that we defend free speech for people we vehemently disagree with (because otherwise it’s not truly “free”), we defend due process for people we find despicable.

]]>