Poll: Morality of To Catch a Predator.

[Rednog]

There was a whole investigation done by 20/20. I really recommend watching it. It shows a lot of the bullshit behind To Catch A Predator and all Chris Handson and his producers did that stepped over the line.

 

[Kanlic]

I can see the argument in support of the show, but I'm against the whole idea of pedophilia laws anyway. It's really kinda stupid. As long as both parties are consenting, regardless of age, nobody (except maybe the minor's parents) has the right to interfere. If the child is willing, and maybe even happy about it, I don't really get why people get up in arms over it.

That said, anyone that forces an unwilling participant (again, regardless of age) needs to be shot with a nail gun a few dozen times then thrown in a vat of sulfuric acid.

Just think where you were at at 13 years old. Assuming you are a boy, you were looking around at girls seriously for the first time, you are not too sure how to act on your emotions. Your views at relationships is juvenile at best, and you hadn't had the time to develop those feelings.

The guys who are preying on young boys and girls are only looking for sex, they will fuck these kids and leave them confused and broken. Those kids they essentially rape will be even more confused, they will feel like outcasts in their social groups because everyone else who is developing naturally (i.e. avoiding sex with adults) won't understand the problems that the kid is going through, and their views on relationships in the future would be totally fucked out. They could very easily develop abandonment issues, take up drugs, become sexually promiscuous without any emotion behind any of their trysts ever. It will break them down to the core and leave a wound that would never heal. You are not consenting to sex at 13 years of age, no matter what you think.

 

[Rednog]

also if they are conviceted they cna show more things

Hadn't thought of that. Thought that would mean... what, nearly a year between primary photography and air?

needless to say, if its up its not doing much illegal to teh people being busted or it would of been taken down by now. and i dont think its targeting "hicks" just hicks are more likely to trust some cheerleader on the internet wants o sleep with them more.

This actually raises a statistical question. How well have cases they've instigated held up?

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that all of the guys from the show walked off scott-free once a lot of the details on how the investigation was conducted came out and I think almost all of them got out on the simple grounds of entrapment.

 

[nomadic_chad]

I agree with most of the people in this thread stating that they find the televising of the perpetrators as distasteful. Personally, I see the molestation of children highly disgusting, immoral, perverted, etc. I also see it continuing to happen as long as we live in a society that insists on sexually suggestive ads and fashion, while simultaneously pushing a sexually repressive agenda. Kids are seeing more and more sexually suggestive material at younger ages while being told that those natural urges they're likely feeling are wrong and inappropriate. Come on, that's going to f*ck people up in the long run.

Again, I'm not saying it's right, just that maybe we should attenuate our disgust and hate with a little compassion and not show the shit on television when people are at the lowest point of their lives. I can't account for those who show up on the show multiple times, nor would I want to, but those one-timers...I can't just flip a switch and hate them for something they haven't actually done, even though I may want to. Yes, they're probably guilty of the lesser child molestation laws (can't remember the names of them at the moment -- verbal sexual abuse or something). However, we'll never know if they would have come to their senses and caught control of themselves before committing the act (and yes, I'm aware of the consequences if they don't and there was a child there, not a cop) and it still makes them shitty human beings. The thing is, those that would stop before going through with it...I see them as capable of rehabilitation. Those who wouldn't, should probably stay locked up until they're dead. As we do things now, we don't differentiate.

It may sound like I'm commiserating with these people, which isn't the case. I just know that when I see or hear about stuff like the "predator" tv show, I find myself gladly wanting to hate those caught in it, and I know myself enough to know that if I feel that way, it's because I don't want to think about the moral ambiguity of how the catching is done.

 

[commodorejohn]

I hate it when society forces me into sympathizing with sick fucks, but no. Chris Hansen Ruins A Life is a cheap, sensationalist ratings-grab based on publically flogging people while resting safe in the knowledge that they're the only real acceptable targets left in the world, using techniques that would be rightfully called entrapment if it were the police doing it instead of a private group. Fuck them.

 

[PhiMed]

This show, its producers, and its viewers are disgusting. The disdain I feel for all those involved is eclipsed only by that which I feel for the offenders themselves.

 

[Kraj]

Logic teaches us that morality can never be truly right or wrong, because all moral judgments have multiple points of reference.

annoying considering moral judgments obviously exist, but there are definitely and solidly no true moral judgments.

so; do as they will. I don't mind. I'm not a predator.

 

[PhiMed]

Logic teaches us that morality can never be truly right or wrong, because all moral judgments have multiple points of reference.

annoying considering moral judgments obviously exist, but there are definitely and solidly no true moral judgments.

so; do as they will. I don't mind. I'm not a predator.

Logic doesn't teach anyone anything. It's a method for arriving at a conclusion. If you're suggesting that logic leaves absolutely no room for morality in any case, I'm going to have to call shenanigans.

 

[Akalistos]

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.

I always wonder something. How can you catch someone that doesn't play fair? The guy that committed suicide was a dirtbag. He solicited a meeting with a minor to purpose now leave no doubts. But, then i think of all the guys that were release because of procedure, lack of proof, muting witnesses (if not killing them), Noncooperation, and there's some that even go to hold hostage (even themself) so they can't go to jail. Yeah, cops can't even argue with a guy who put a gun to his own head... it in the book. I also think of all the time other cop where pretty much threaten, no by criminal but by the population. Like that kid that tried to steal a officer's gun. He shouldn't but when his parter though the kid manage to get the weapon, he was shot.

So, Online bating. I'm ok with that may it be moral or not.

 

[Girl With One Eye]

Haha I love this show! I think it's good that they are catching potentially dangerous people. And many of them have admitted to having sex or contacting other children not from the show, so it just goes to show that it does actually do some good.

 

[Dogstile]

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.

Honestly that's a pretty clear case of entrapment. Which is, quite frankly: illegal.

Texas law enabled them to do so - even without him physically doing anything
Texas law enabled them to do so
Texas law
law


If a man approaches a prostitute a solicits sex from her, and is arrested for soliciting sex from a prostitute, he has still broken the law. Even if there is no physical touching.

If a man approaches a minor and is arrested for soliciting sex from a minor, he has still broken the law. Even if there is no physical touching.

It's not entrapment to get nailed soliciting sex from a minor. Even if you do nothing physical, you have still broken the law by soliciting it from a minor. This is not a case of entrapment.

The only thing illegal was a grown adult tried to solicit sex from a minor. The fact he decided to eat a bullet instead of face the consequences is another matter altogether.

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.

no he is dead because he couldnt face the fact he was engaging a minor online for sexual favors and didnt want to pay the penalty for his actions, the show had nothing to do with it, his own insecurities and issues are why he is dead.

So the fact that he thought better of it and decided not to do it makes him a criminal?
How does that work? Am I a criminal for wanting to punch you in the face right now?

 

[Dogstile]

Soliciting a minor is a crime, sorry to burst your bubble. still not the shows fault, he killed himself, the show had nothing to do with it.

Not bursting a bubble, I have no bubble, I just enjoy arguing.

I'm just saying it feels wrong that they televised a guy as a pedophile for something he didn't do.

Then I read a post about him sending images of himself to the child, so no sympathy for him.

 

[Starke]

for the year, why not, if they build up enough they can wiat, some shows wait as long or longer before airing.

As for the other quesiton, I dont know.

It's hard for a company to sit on footage in the can for a year. They spend the money today, but won't see a return on investment until next year? That's a hard sell in media.

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that all of the guys from the show walked off scott-free once a lot of the details on how the investigation was conducted came out and I think almost all of them got out on the simple grounds of entrapment.

If that's true, I'd be very interested to see the article.

 

[Prince Regent]

Well it's certainly less stupid then american police women going undercover as prostitutes. You would think that the police actually has something usefull to do.

 

[Necromancer1991]

Now cops use this method all the time, they have female officers dress like hookers and trick otherwise normal guys into hiring them, wherein upon reaching her hotel of choice you are arrested, now stuff like that is more a sucker-punch way to go about catching criminals, but this does not apply to the internet IMO, most info you find is probably altered to some degree and anything you hear should be taken in with a bit of healthy skepticism, after all...

Spoiler

 

[Jabberwock xeno]

In'st it illegal?

Like, invasion of privacy to air the stuff without the predators consent?

 

[The Axon Hillock]

I'm going to have to go with... Fuck 'em. If you are on an internet chat room and you don't immediately log off when a 12-year-old says they want to bang your brains out, you are creepy. If you get in a car with an intention of visiting said 12-year-old, you are a criminal. Busting people in their own homes, televising it, etc. is a bit iffy, but I think it has the potential to do more harm than good.

 

[Kagim]

It doesn't matter if someone was enticed or not.

They can't arrest you for merely talking to the child. Since that's not a crime. The person in question has to arrange a meeting with full understanding of sexual intent at the minimum.

However most people on that show have already sealed there grave. They have had conversations of a sexual nature to a person they believed to be a child as well as sent lewd photos to a person they believed to be a child.

They are already screwed by there actions before they even set up the meeting. The meeting is simply just an easy way to bring the perp to them.

Now, as for enticing regular guys who wouldn't normally do anything bad? No. If a ten year old girl approached you when you were alone and offered to give you a blowjob and promised not to tell anyone would you take it? I would hope not. The fact that these people openly engaged in sexual relationships with people they believe to be children sets them aside from "normal people". These people need help. Some more then others.

 

[Agayek]

Just think where you were at at 13 years old. Assuming you are a boy, you were looking around at girls seriously for the first time, you are not too sure how to act on your emotions. Your views at relationships is juvenile at best, and you hadn't had the time to develop those feelings.

The guys who are preying on young boys and girls are only looking for sex, they will fuck these kids and leave them confused and broken. Those kids they essentially rape will be even more confused, they will feel like outcasts in their social groups because everyone else who is developing naturally (i.e. avoiding sex with adults) won't understand the problems that the kid is going through, and their views on relationships in the future would be totally fucked out. They could very easily develop abandonment issues, take up drugs, become sexually promiscuous without any emotion behind any of their trysts ever. It will break them down to the core and leave a wound that would never heal. You are not consenting to sex at 13 years of age, no matter what you think.

I fail to see how a single willing sexual encounter will completely destroy someone's entire being. When I was a kid, I couldn't imagine a relationship lasting longer than a few weeks at most. Also, feeling like an outcast is pretty much par for the course. It doesn't do any real damage.

That said, I'm far from a psychologist, so I'm not going to really argue about it.

PS - All that stuff you listed as the "This will happen" scenario really aren't that bad. Abandonment issues are easily the worst on the list, and they're really not that hard to deal with.

 

[TheLaofKazi]

The police enticing people to try and commit a crime and then arresting them for it and airing it for everybody to see, and having a major broadcast network profit from it? That doesn't sound very moral to me.

The problem here is we don't know whether or not the pedophile would have actually committed the crime if they weren't enticed into doing it. There a many moral, social and legal barriers keeping a pedophile from going out and having sex with underage teens and children. The problem is, the way this show tries to get them to do it remove several of those barriers, namely the one that involves having sex with an underage person against their will. The guy is convinced that this is a consensual thing. Otherwise, I really doubt a lot of these people would have done it.

Just because they are pedophiles doesn't mean they don't have empathy and morality, it's a sexual preference. Sure, it's harmful if acted out, but kept in the imagination and to fiction, it's harmless. That's the same for many fetishes out there. Violent sexual fetishes such as choking, gagging and rape are prevalent on the internet, but that doesn't mean people that are into that are going to go out and do those things the first chance they think no one will find out. It's that they don't want to hurt other people, especially against their will. This can be expanded into other interests as well. We all love violence. But we explore it in video games, books, films and music, because acting it out would involving hurting another person, and we don't want to do that.