TAdamson said:
[
I've challenged you before to provide evidence beyond your anecdotal rubbish and you've failed to come through. As such you're just another person perpetuating dangerous myths about perfectly normal people.
If you're claiming experience because you are "a trained observer" (What ever the fuck that means, are you a cop? A social worker? Private investigator? Vigilante?) I think you're probably suffering from exposure bias.
Regardless previous statements you've made have been fundamentally disgusting and in no way "middle of the road".
You want to claim that homosexuals are more likely to be paedophiles, provide statistical evidence from peer reviewed research or fuck off. Your creepy claims that your "experience and training" (Care to name the organisation?) and being "enabled to spy on people"(?????????) provided you with knowledge about the "truth" about homosexuals do not fucking wash and are pretty horrific in and of themselves.
You make it sound like you spy on homosexuals appropo of nothing. What I'm assuming is that you've been asked (or you do it off your own back for fucked up reasons of your own.) to watch those accused or convicted of child sex offences against boys. This is selection bias which you've turned to bigotry.
Or you're making the scientificcally fallaceous argument that because 3% of men are gay and 33% of child sexual offenders target boys, that homosexuals are more likely to offend. This disregards the evidence that the mechanics in the psychology between homosexual and hetrosexual paedophilia and that of androphilia and gynophilia are completely different and that.
It also ignores the massive body of evidence that paedophiles do not display erectile response when shown pictures of adults of the same sex as their preferred child gender.
In cases like this it's not my job to provide "evidence" for you, especially seeing as the truth is out there and easily obtainable. As someone I've done this dance with before apparently, it's pretty obvious that anything I provide will just be called bigoted or debunked, so there is no point. You'll either find the truth and accept it, or you won't.
That said, I don't need evidence, as again, I'm speaking from personal experience and observation. I'm exactly the kind of source someone doing any real research on this topic would use.
Oddly, I find it funny that you claim to have gone down this road with me before, and be oh-so familiar with me and my arguements, and yet you don't even know where this experience comes from? Despite me having just laid it out for you in the previous post? Really, are you serious?
Okay, again. I'm a criminal justice/forensics major who for financial reasons had to drop out of school. I wound up working as security for two of the three largest casinos in the world (Mohegan Sun and Foxwoods). In addition to just working floor security I wound up working their monitoring systems, and being effectively used as one of their investigators. While working these jobs I was regularly assigned to do training with both state and federal groups for the sake of their paperwork (in reality it was a dog and pony show). I've done everything from anti-terrorism training with homeland security, to emergency fire and rescue (including how to work tribal fire's decontamination equipment), to small unit tactics, and was required to attend "Code Adam" training on numerous occasions. "Code Adam" training deals specificially with child predators and child protection and such.
Despite being fairly disgruntled there are some things I won't say about what I did, and how, for obvious reasons, but the bottom line is I followed people, I watched people with cameras, I even had special cameras rigged up sometimes to watch specific people. I've dealth with rapes, assaults, car accidents, and pretty much anything you can think of, I've done security for dressing rooms, I've been in vaults with millions upon millions of dollars, and done VIP and celebrity escorts, and perhaps most relevent to cases like this I've run security for children's arcades and actually had to identfy and chase the real freaks, as well as deal with the problems of a few "misses" when we didn't stop something in time. Understand also, that unlike the movies, gamblers are not a refined crowd, most are obsessive sleazebuckets who care about nothing but stuffing coins into slots. They tend to drag their children to the casinos and then abandon them on the concourse, and then in many cases go out and totally lose track of the time gambling. They aren't supposed to do this, but really casino management doesn't give a crap if you have kids running around out there, all they care about is how much money they are making, and it was our job to make sure nothing happened to those kids (lol) despite being little more than a dog and pony show for the most part.
To say that casinos are pedo hunting grounds is a bloody understatement, and as someone who acts largely as a deterrant and who can only watch so many people at once, guess who trips our flags.... and you know, gay men trying to lure young boys, outnumbers just about everything else when it comes to this area of crime. Both from personal experience, from training (and warnings about NAMBLA given their legal support), and as well as from what the State Police and FBI will tell you when your sitting down for Code Adam updates.
Now yes, I understand, you find this all politically offensive, you don't want to believe it. The differance is I've actually seen it. What's more anyone telling you otherwise is pretty much full of it, because anyone who is in a position to know any better, and has done a job like this, pretty much agrees with me having wound up in the same place due to experience. In training they tell you the same basic thing "when you do it, you'll understand". Even so they are all concerned about the political correctness brigade, with liberal politics basically being a barrier to getting the job done properly.
In short, what you might have heard or read, or feel has been debunked is irrelevent before real experience, and someone who has actually met and worked with real experts (having become one myself). Let's just say that the nicest and safest seeming people in the world will show you an entirely differant side if you dig through thir bags (was an anti-terrorism protocol at casino entrances), shadow them and eavesdrop on them, or follow them around with cameras. Oppertunity, or someone believing they have it, is key. The guy whose going to try and get a little boy to go into a stairwell with him, or leave the casino with him, or whatever else, isn'g going to do it like an out of control dog, but because they believe they can get away with it. The thing is that unless your looking for that kind of thing constantly your not going to know. Your typical guy with a "gay friend" for example could never tell you with authority that they aren't a pedophille or would never do something like this, as by definition you aren't going to be around when an oppertunity presented itself, or was manufactured. That's the problem, and why only people in very specific situations like mine have any right to an opinion as only someone who has done this kind of thing can possibly have the nessicary breadth of experience.
On a side note it's also why I've argued a minimum of 4 years of non-administrative police experience should be required to hold public office or be in any kind of position to have say on domestic or social policy. This would omit me of course given that I was NOT a cop (though in a purely hypothetical sense, if the Security was ever used as anything other than a dog and pony show, and scapegoat, in theory I might have had more power than most cops. Acting as the represntitive of a property owner on an Indian Reservation where the tribe had great latitude to set laws and policies...), but basically I feel someone needs to be able to see the world the way a cop or someone trained to observe and experience things that way does before they can make any desicians about people. You need to know not what people say and show you, but what they do when they think nobody is watching, know what they keep in their bags, and how the subject of private conversations is not always entirely innocent, and set policies accordingly, based on what people actually are going to be like.
