It's a sting operation. Dude comes in expecting underage girlie, walks out in the silver bracelets.ghettoperson wrote:
What's their goal? The rape one talked about meeting up, do they meet up and kick their asses/call the cops or something?
Last edited by Hurricane2k9 (2009-07-07 12:42:10)
Ah right, I somehow got the impression they were some kind of vigilante site.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
It's a sting operation. Dude comes in expecting underage girlie, walks out in the silver bracelets.ghettoperson wrote:
What's their goal? The rape one talked about meeting up, do they meet up and kick their asses/call the cops or something?
edit: can_i_rape_you_anally is gonna be my new screenname for games
If there weren't any scumbag pedophiles on these sites than the so called vigilantes wouldn't be catching anyone...KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
I've had discussions here before about this psuedo-justice thing they think they have down. I honestly wonder - if you take away all the "investigators" trying to flood internet chat rooms with seemingly nubile young fawns, how many children are left actively searching for older men to exploit them? Also, does the prevelance of vigilantes trolling these chat rooms actually draw more men in thinking there are easy targets? How many people actively talking with young women in chats are actually looking to meet up? There's a fine line between entrapment and busting a pedo - and I won't condone wannabe vigilants taking this stuff into their own hands.
And then you have the whole perverted justice/dateline thing where the laws in certain jurisdictions weren't followed, conflict-of-interest questions (perverted justice was getting something like $100k to deliver suspected perverts to Chris Hanson for public humiliation through dateline), plus the realization that these sort of sting operations actually don't do much, and in fact may be overstepping the line in regards to legal conduct in "catching a predator".
As far as I am concerned this outfit is seriously little more than a profit-motive scheme based on somewhat of a social lightning rod (child porn/abduction/lolita complex). Perhaps the owners read Nabakov one too many times and saw the profit to be made.
I think they need to take it on a case by case basis... If you are on that site you don't have much of an excuse though...Macbeth wrote:
Pretty honorable thing to do but what worries me is the concept of entrapment. I wonder how much the PJ people are pushing the men into doing things that are illegal.
I could if I wanted to go through your entire post history and cut it up in a way that makes you look like a raging lunatic or a complete sociopath. Not saying you are but it would be possible to manipulate texts files and leave out entire conversations and such if you wanted to get a conviction.[TUF]Catbox wrote:
I think they need to take it on a case by case basis... If you are on that site you don't have much of an excuse though...Macbeth wrote:
Pretty honorable thing to do but what worries me is the concept of entrapment. I wonder how much the PJ people are pushing the men into doing things that are illegal.
You could just quote all his posts verbatim to do that.Macbeth wrote:
I could if I wanted to go through your entire post history and cut it up in a way that makes you look like a raging lunatic or a complete sociopath. Not saying you are but it would be possible to manipulate texts files and leave out entire conversations and such if you wanted to get a conviction.[TUF]Catbox wrote:
I think they need to take it on a case by case basis... If you are on that site you don't have much of an excuse though...Macbeth wrote:
Pretty honorable thing to do but what worries me is the concept of entrapment. I wonder how much the PJ people are pushing the men into doing things that are illegal.
This is why vigilante justice like this site fails because it is exploitable.
that's just mean.ghettoperson wrote:
You could just quote all his posts verbatim to do that.Macbeth wrote:
I could if I wanted to go through your entire post history and cut it up in a way that makes you look like a raging lunatic or a complete sociopath. Not saying you are but it would be possible to manipulate texts files and leave out entire conversations and such if you wanted to get a conviction.[TUF]Catbox wrote:
I think they need to take it on a case by case basis... If you are on that site you don't have much of an excuse though...
This is why vigilante justice like this site fails because it is exploitable.
Which is why this stuff should be left to the feds. I bet that there are tons of people who are sexually attracted to children, but only a minority of them actually intend to have sex with kids. PJ seems like it is the kind of outfit to try to lure the former group into doing something wrong.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
Macbeth does raise a good point though. What's the line between just being creepy and actually committing a crime? As sick as it is, pedophilia doesn't hurt anyone unless the pedophile acts on his impulses.
I agree, but at the same time could it not be argued that what PJ does shows that some people would eventually act on their impulses given enough stimuli?DoctaStrangelove wrote:
Which is why this stuff should be left to the feds. I bet that there are tons of people who are sexually attracted to children, but only a minority of them actually intend to have sex with kids. PJ seems like it is the kind of outfit to try to lure the former group into doing something wrong.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
Macbeth does raise a good point though. What's the line between just being creepy and actually committing a crime? As sick as it is, pedophilia doesn't hurt anyone unless the pedophile acts on his impulses.
If pushed enough anyone of us here could kill an entire family with a hammer. Pushing people into doing something doesn't prove anything beside the said pushers were at best being dicks and at worst liable.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
I agree, but at the same time could it not be argued that what PJ does shows that some people would eventually act on their impulses given enough stimuli?DoctaStrangelove wrote:
Which is why this stuff should be left to the feds. I bet that there are tons of people who are sexually attracted to children, but only a minority of them actually intend to have sex with kids. PJ seems like it is the kind of outfit to try to lure the former group into doing something wrong.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
Macbeth does raise a good point though. What's the line between just being creepy and actually committing a crime? As sick as it is, pedophilia doesn't hurt anyone unless the pedophile acts on his impulses.
Yes, but would you not characterize a guy who tries to rape women cos he sees them dressed in revealing clothes as more of a threat to society than a guy who blows up a bank office after being royally fucked by them for years?Macbeth wrote:
If pushed enough anyone of us here could kill an entire family with a hammer. Pushing people into doing something doesn't prove anything beside the said pushers were at best being dicks and at worst liable.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
I agree, but at the same time could it not be argued that what PJ does shows that some people would eventually act on their impulses given enough stimuli?DoctaStrangelove wrote:
Which is why this stuff should be left to the feds. I bet that there are tons of people who are sexually attracted to children, but only a minority of them actually intend to have sex with kids. PJ seems like it is the kind of outfit to try to lure the former group into doing something wrong.