I am in favor of making people who break the laws be held acountable for what they do. However, I think this "To Catch a Predator Show" goes to far.
Reasons listed below
1. This is an issue of entrapment; The guys never talk to children they talk with decoys above 18. Although the intent is their, the ACTUAL CRIME IS NOT THERE. (( A smart lawyer can tear this to shreads))
2. The show always mention the charges that are filed, but there is no mention of the verdicts that stick.
3. This show makes entertainment out of a SERIOUS issue and it disquises itself as promoting awareness. (Is it necessary to have back to back serious of 4 hours of this kind of awareness?) lol
4. It is really ineffective in stopping the REAL problem. It is like saying we are going to use a tea cup to scoop the water out of the Great Lakes. ((The intervention is TO SMALL to make a dent in the problem))
WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS??? (I am not trying to take up for pedophiles, Im just providing my opinions! Diana, you are foolish! I believe in catching criminals, but I believe in DOING IT LEGALLY!!! I don't believe two wrongs make a right! The crime they are charged with is soliciting of a minor online. When they are chatting,they are under the impression they are talking to a minor and are therefore committing a crime. They even send filthy pictures to these decoys who they think are children. There is no entrapment because the decoys do not make the first contact,the initial contact has to come from the adult. I have seen many instances of the verdicts that were given. One just the other night was given 1 year in jail with 5 years probation. Alot of the cases haven't been tried before the show airs. In my opinion,if the show has brought awareness to the problem and has saved just one child,it is worth it. I have no problem with the show. They may only be talking to decoys but the guys don't know that. They think they really talking to underage girls and they are getting turned on by it. How many of the guys have you seen actually bring condoms with them to the house? These guys are not just looking for someone to talk to and listen to their problems. They ARE looking for sex with minors. You bring up a lot of valid points, but it does raise awareness. I have only watched the show one time, but I did not think about the verdict issue.
The crime kind of is actually there I think. It's like when a cop poses as a prostitute - the cop isn't REALLY a prostitute, but it is still illegal for someone to try to pay her for sex. you sound like a predator. i hope they catch you soon!!!!! I always appreciate questions like this because I think it's important to be thoughtful about issues instead of just blindly arguing for whatever sounds good (if you know what I mean.) My thoughts, since you asked: :-)
1. This is an issue of entrapment; The guys never talk to children they talk with decoys above 18. Although the intent is their, the ACTUAL CRIME IS NOT THERE. (( A smart lawyer can tear this to shreads))
************ A smart lawyer would understand the definition of entrapment. You are not applying it correctly. If I understand the show correctly, what these guys are being charged with has happened online. In any event please don't assume you're familiar with all of the laws implimented in these cases. You are not, unless you've done some legal research... and even then...
2. The show always mention the charges that are filed, but there is no mention of the verdicts that stick.
****************** My guess is that the reason for this varies case by case, from acquittals, to pending cases, to a whole host of other reasons. I will say though that sometimes verdicts (and sentences ) ARE mentioned. In any event, I don't understand how this is an argument that the show "goes to far." You're suggesting that they go to far by not providing enough information?!
3. This show makes entertainment out of a SERIOUS issue and it disquises itself as promoting awareness. (Is it necessary to have back to back serious of 4 hours of this kind of awareness?) lol
***************** "Necessary" is an interesting choice of words here. People watch it... so does it HAVE to be necessary in order to be aired? In my opinion, entertainment and serious issues do not have to be mutually exclusive. The general public enjoys watching child predators held accountable...I'm not sure there's anything wrong with that.
4. It is really ineffective in stopping the REAL problem. It is like saying we are going to use a tea cup to scoop the water out of the Great Lakes. ((The intervention is TO SMALL to make a dent in the problem))
********** I doubt that the real victims of these guys agree with you. I don't understand how this is an argument that the show goes "too far." If anything this argument tends to imply that the show doesn't go far enough. That said, this is a really defeatest attitude. Neither you nor I have a solution that makes a bigger dent, so the alternative would be to ignore the problem. No one wants that. By the way, haven't you ever read the Starfish story??????????! Here it is:
Once a man was walking along a beach. The sun was shining and it was a beautiful day. Off in the distance he could see a person going back and forth between the surf's edge and and the beach. Back and forth this person went. As the man approached he could see that there were hundreds of starfish stranded on the sand as the result of the natural action of the tide.
The man was stuck by the the apparent futility of the task. There were far too many starfish. Many of them were sure to perish. As he approached the person continued the task of picking up starfish one by one and throwing them into the surf.
As he came up to the person he said, "You must be crazy. There are thousands of miles of beach covered with starfish. You can't possibly make a difference." The person looked at the man. He then stooped down and pick up one more starfish and threw it back into the ocean. He turned back to the man and said, "It sure made a difference to that one!"
Overall, I don't take issue with the show, and I am confident that they have done their research and are doing something productive (and legal.) I say, "Good for them!"
PS Determining that it is about mens rea is an uneducated thing to do. To even start to think about discussing whether state of mind factors in you must know the charges and the elements of the crime charged. We do not; they vary from case to case and no example has been given as a basis of discussion. So it is in fact impossible to determine that "it is about mens rea." YIKES> If people are upset by this show, then can turn the channel or not be on that channel in the first place.
I am not saying I like that show, on the contrary I do not but then again that is just one of the prime examples of why I choose not to have a television in my home: most of what is on there is negative.
I think you are missing the point of the detectives/officers posing as the potential 'victim' - do you know about mens rea? (See weblink below for definition/explanation.)
If you have a problem with what the LEOs (law enforcement officers) are doing when posing as decoys, then keep that same train of thought...and you should also be against speed traps. See what I mean? It's just an example but I think you understand what I am getting at. (Also bear in mind the people who buy child porn and have it sent thru the mail or via FedEx/UPS, etc...how about when LEOs run a sting and try to get someone to buy that stuff?
Bottom line, I think it's all about mens rea. |
