Poll: Morality of To Catch a Predator.

[Dorian6]

Using deception to arrest dangerous individuals. Personally, I don't have a problem with the idea.

It's not entrapment, that would mean that Dateline was coercing people into performing actions they wouldn't do otherwise. These predators are all too eager to go and have sex with what they think is a young child. It's comparable to a police officer going undercover as a prostitute in order to catch solicitors (granted, prostitution isn't nearly on the same level as having sex with a minor).

If Dateline didn't lure the predators to their trap-house, these pedophiles would have just tried to get with a real child

 

[Mathak]

Another thing, if you tell a pedo were you live and that you want sex, IT'S FUCKING CONCENT!

Congratulations, you do not understand the definition of 'informed consent'.


"An informed consent can be said to have been given based upon a clear appreciation and understanding of the facts, implications, and future consequences of an action. In order to give informed consent, the individual concerned must have adequate reasoning faculties and be in possession of all relevant facts at the time consent is given. Impairments to reasoning and judgment which may make it impossible for someone to give informed consent include such factors as basic intellectual or emotional immaturity, high levels of stress such as PTSD or as severe mental retardation, severe mental illness, intoxication, severe sleep deprivation, Alzheimer's disease, or being in a coma."

Children cannot give informed consent. They are simply too young to fully understand the consequences of their actions, not to mention adults can easily coerce them due to their position of authority.

If your son opens the door for a salesman and the salesman sells him a house, is that a legally binding agreement? Of course not. Same deal here.

 

[Snake Plissken]

Morally questionable? Perhaps at one time, but not anymore. Rationale?

It is very reasonable to expect a pedophile to accept any forward offer of underage sex, or propose any offer. I don't condone it, but it is to be expected from a pedophile. What is morally questionable is that it has been broadcast all over our nation. They have the right to broadcast whatever they choose, but it is fundamentally unnecessary for me to see exactly what happened.

After a few seasons (seriously, how long has this been on the air?), all they are doing is warning pedophiles to be more careful in their predatory ways. Most people have seen this show, and damn near everybody at least knows about it. THIS INCLUDES PEDOPHILES. If they know there is now a greater chance that they will not only be caught, but humiliated by Chris H. as well, why would they be so stupid as to try to do the same stupid shit every other pedophile on the show has done? All the show is doing is forcing pedophiles to change their tactics. That, friends, is what is fucked up. Pedophiles don't need to be warned not to do something in order to avoid jailtime, they just need to be arrested.

Congratulations, Chris Hansen, you have now ushered in the new wave of smarter, more aware pedophiles. You are a fucking idiot.

If you really want to catch perverts by using the same fucking tactic, keep that tactic on the fucking down-low. Does this really need an explanation?

P.S. - This is really no different that the squad of bait cars in Minneapolis. The more people know about it, the less overt they will be about their crimes.

 

[UmbrellaAssassin]

Note: This thread is a discussion of the NBC program "To Catch a Predator". For those of you who aren't familiar with it, it involves police posing as young girls online and enticing men to come to a house. Once the person arrives at the house, he is greeted by cameras and eventually arrested by police.

I was recently watching To Catch a Predator on the internet out of curiosity when something stuck me.

Is this show morally right?

Now, for the most part - I believe that the show does arrest and weed out dangerous individuals. But sometimes I get the sense that they have been conned into doing it.

Take a look at the gentlemen in this video:


Would they of done this if it wasn't for the show enticing them to do so?

Discussion: Is the act of enticing people to commit a crime morally wrong?

EDIT: I'm editing this post to include the fact that a man was killed because of the show. He was a well known district attorney who was talking to a minor online and arranged a meeting. The district attorney decided not to go through with the meeting, so the police went to his house to arrest him anyway (Texas law enabled them to do so - even without him physically doing anything). They knocked at his door and got no response, they broke in and encountered him in the hallway where he shot himself in head. He is dead. Because of the show.

THIS IS UR 1200 post congrates !!!

 

[Eisenfaust]

don't the victims technically have to sign a release? sort of seems odd that anyone would consent to have it televised regardless of whether it's moral or not

 

[TaboriHK]

It's not morally wrong because a morally right-minded person CAN'T be talked into driving over to a 13 year old girl's house to have sex. It's like saying someone talked you into murdering someone. It doesn't really work that way.

 

[Grayjack]

The way I see it, televising it to millions of viewers is morally wrong. That shit's embarrassing.

 

[BlueCollarTweaker]

I have no problem with this show's existence or practices. If they're pedos, they go to jail, if they aren't, they don't.

That's not true. If they aren't paedos, they are still treated as one by NBC and their face and name is spewed all across the program. They loose their job, their friends don't want to know them anymore and they are humiliated.

And OP, that guy is dead because he shot himself, not because of the show.

Yeah. I hear the fact they had 2 camera crews and several fully armed SWAT men cramming to get in his door had nothing to do with it.

[/u]

After mulling this over, I don't like their practices as mentioned in the first thing you said here. however, he could have simply handed himself over and eventually have been proven innocent. There were other possible outcomes, but he did choose to pull the trigger himself.

 

[Kyuubi Fanatic]

I'm on the fence with this. I personally think To Catch A Predator doesn't give a damn about catching actual predators as much as getting easy ratings outta exploiting the public's hate of pedophiles thru public humiliation of them.

Police use bait and snare tactics all the time, and arrest individuals who attempt the crimes they are baited for even if they haven't done the crime yet. This I am okay with for the most part; fact is there is way more crime than the authorities can stop. Preventative measures were inevitable.

But barging into a public officials house when his conscious get the better of him (or not, he may have simply gotten suspicious) is excessive. And he might not have committed suicide if he knew he wouldn't be paraded and stripped of his dignity on national television.

Tough call. But in the end I don't support it.

 

[Krafty_Krocodile]

Honestly, I don't think its morally wrong. if there wasn't police decoys then the paedophiles could go on and abuse other young children, now think this, your a mother/father of a young 12 year old boy who is on the internet a lot, you think he online gaming so you don't think nothing of it, one day he says to you "I'm going over to a friends house ill be back at 4" and he doesn't return, the fear of him would be excruciating to bear let alone know that he was raped, abused and possibly murdered by a person he met online.

As for the laughing at them thing, they deserve what they get.

 

[Kortney]

Putting down a man who has rabies is still murder.

Try again.

So no, it's not, it's humane.

Uhh no it's not. It's murder or if you are lucky it would be "assisted suicide" which is illegal whether he wants you to or not. Point is, you'd go to jail for it either way. I don't think someone who doesn't know this should be arguing about the law.

 

[Kortney]

however, he could have simply handed himself over and eventually have been proven innocent.

The thing about suicide is that people aren't thinking in their right mind when they do it. And also, even if he was innocent (and it seems he never did do anything physical) he still would of lost his job (which he would of deserved) had his name and reputation tarnished. As a DA that's very bad.

There were other possible outcomes, but he did choose to pull the trigger himself.

Same could be said about all suicides. Doesn't take away the tragedy of it.

 

[spartan1077]

I think this is terrible. Some people do get caught be people and sexually abused- but he is right, fantasy takes over reality. Video Games are the same way and pedophiles are just people with different sexual prefrences

 

[Cheery Lunatic]

First Japan's age of concent is 13. Japan is Not a 3rd world country either. Puberty, and the desire for sex starts at 13 years old.

Japan might not be a third world country, but it IS fucking insane.

Spoiler: Case in point.

Japan -really- isn't a country you should hold standards to when it comes to age of consent.