Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Jun 2012
- Posts
- 5,951
Why can't the Police just adopt the same tactics so it's all above board, is it a manpower issue or is the method not sound?
Paedophile hunters
- Thread starter Felon
- Start date
No one claims there isn't, but how many inconcent people get harassed, have their lives and careers turned upside down, or was murdered, because of some vigilante moron.
True, i was thinking about that after I posted. How many actual Pedophiles walk scot free because the evidence collected by Vigilantes cannot be used in a case of law.
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 157
But they are not flirting with a 15 year old are they...
The 15 year olds in question are not real, they are creations made up in the minds of knuckle draggers who's only real intention is to set up a you tube channel, monetize it and make money from ''outing'' these guys.
As others have said on here the police themselves should be doing this.
If the ''Hunters'' had any real good intentions they would never post a video until after a conviction is secured, but they dont they post it up get the views and likes then move onto the next one.
You watch any of the same type of video the same theme runs through most of them.. guy gets chatting to a girl he thinks is 19.. why does he think she is 19 ? hmm maybe because she is in an adult chat room... it seems it is only later after the guy is well hooked does a 'oh im only 15'' casual comment is made. By then the meeting is already set up an ''barrys nonce bashers'' are all tooled up ready for the outing.
In my opinion these ''hunters'' dont stop the real pedo's one little bit, because they dont target the real ones. they target the half wits in internet chat rooms that think at age 44 you can still get it on with a 19 year old.
I have read it.
You have refused to answer any question. You have provided no evidence of anything other than a media report that, if true, might or might not be of any relevance. You're claiming that is "a right spanking" and more important than the murder victims you completely ignore.
I'm not embarrassed. You should be ashamed, but you won't be.
This, in spades. Most self-declared paedophile hunters don't really care about paedophiles or children. They don't even know what a paedophile is. Some of them have even managed to be so ignorant that they have attacked paediatricians. Their motive is either attention, money or their own bloodlust. They are no different to the self-declared witch-hunters of the past except for the fact that they haven't yet managed to obtain enough power to kill with impunity.
Find paedophiles is difficult. Finding men who can be fooled into thinking that a young woman is interested in sex with them is far easier and manipulating some of them into accepting that an adult pretending to be a couple of months below the legal age of consent is mature enough (which they are, since they're well over the age of consent) is relatively easy.
Meanwhile, paedophiles are at no risk from these people. A few ephebophiles, maybe, possibly. But probably not.
But hey, it gives some people a chance to do great harm and feel righteous about it and some other people to be entertained by that. Some of their victims might even be guilty of something! That's worth the abusers going free, the innocent people's lives being ruined and the innocent people being tortured to death, right?
So you read the 2 news paper reports posted confirming that Paedophile hunters put two guys away. But you don't believe them! Says it all really.
URGH,
He's not saying that though is he...
He's saying that when you allow vigilanteism, you end up with a far higher degree of mistakes being made, which means that more innocent people get harmed, for example;
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...thought-he-was-a-paedophile-who-a6981756.html
Things like that totally undo any possible good that could come from using vigilanteism as a solution to a problem such as this,
The police do do this internally. Just like they infiltrate all sorts (dark web, drugs, gangs etc etc). I wouldn’t be surprised if these “hunters” get in the polices way. Just because the police don’t share it all over Facebook and your great auntie isn’t sharing it doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.
You obviously haven't read those reports, since that's not what they said.
You also haven't answered the most important question. I'll repeat it for you:
How many innocent people would you accept being tortured to death for that one conviction? And yes, I am expecting an answer to that question because you know that people being tortured to death is the inevitable (and desired) result of vigilantism and that their guilt is presumed.
There's also a followup question, which I'll also repeat for you:
You ignore innocent people being tortured to death, cite one report of one case in which the evidence might have been of some relevance and you regard that as "a right spanking". Do you really want to portray yourself as being that sociopathic?
All police have to do is make it clear that vigilante groups aren't above the law, if they can legally obtain evidence of 'intent' like these online hunters do then fair enough but handing over incriminating evidence to police for the legal system to do its work is quite a bit different to taking the law into their own hands and organising lynch mobs to commit murder based on hearsay and rumours.
Which is what inevitably happens with vigilantes, especially when there's presumption of guilt of something which spurs fear and fury.
The comparison with the witch-hunting hysteria of the past is a very close one. Presumption of guilt, fear and fury, almost total lack of understanding of what's actually happening (attraction to legal adults pretending to be legal adults and then pretending to be biological adults who aren't quite legal adults but who actually are as mature as a legal adult because in reality they are a legal adult is not even close to being paeophilia), hysteria, massive pressure to be publically in favour of torturing people to death on presumption of guilt, etc. Also closely comparable is the legal system trying to stem the tide - in England, almost all people accused of witchcraft were acquitted if they made it to trial without being lynched. There are differences (e.g. an unknown proportion of the accused actually are guilty this time), but there are more similarities than differences and the social issue is worse this time because accusations can be spread far wider far faster.
Anyone who accepts vigilantism is accepting torture and murder of innocent people and the ruination of the lives of other innocent people. The two are inextricably linked. It's a causal relationship. The question isn't whether or not it happens. The question is whether or not it's worth it.
It's funny how some people seem to hate Paedophile hunters more than they do Men trying to sleep with 11 year olds, nothing to do with the fact that a large number of the Paedophile hunters are groups of white working class men, a group hated by liberals and the middle class.
I think you'd be unpleasantly surprised, not only by how little they do - but how far behind they are when it comes to detection and monitoring of online threats against children.
When it comes to policing anything online (with the exception of saying some naughty things on facebook) the police are literally so far behind it's hard to believe, it's incredible.
I work in tech, and I've attended a few seminars where representatives from the police (cyber crimes units, etc) have given presentations and provided facts and figures, on how many incidents they effectively solve and they're so far off the mark with online stuff, and they admit it.
Probably not, no. It's probably more to do with the "hunters" pretending to be righteous, the torture, the murder, the danger to society in general and the fact that their targets are so very rarely "men trying to sleep with 11 year olds".
Yeah we should ban everything because of a few extreme examples. No more football because some people fight at games, no boxing because a few people have died. How about you consider the fact that actually, they'll maybe stop some very young girls and even boys being raped?
How many innocent people being tortured to death do you think that unquantified possibility is worth? Bear in mind that that's not even what they're trying to do because that would be too difficult, so if it did happen it would be a complete coincidence.
It's a serious question and I would like an answer. You know it has happened and continues to happen. It's an inevitable causal relationship. What's your cutoff point? 1 innocent person tortured to death for 1 actual paedophile being convicted? 1 innocent person being tortured to death for 10 actual paedophiles being convicted? 10 innocent people tortured to death for 1 actual paedophile being convicted? I'd like some idea of where you stand. A precise figure isn't needed, just a ballpark figure for what you consider to be the right price to pay.
The question of how much damage to society is the right price to pay is a much harder one to answer since it's much harder to quantify. The family of the accused is likely to become additional victims, for example, and there's thw question of the erosion of the idea of innocent unless proven guilty. How can you quantify the harm done to society by that?
It's not a few extreme examples. It's inherent in vigilantism, especially when applied to whatever group is the witches of any particular time and place (still witches in some parts of the world).
"The video of Emery has since been handed to police. Emery has been convicted of attempting to meet a girl under the age of 16 following a trial at Southwark Crown Court. He is set to be sentenced on November 3. "
So you never read that.
"A man who was snared by self-styled paedophile hunters has been convicted of child sex offences."
You missed that one to....oh dear...denial is a strange beast.
I know of one person that was killed but wasn't tortured to death.
"How many innocent people" one doesn't know if they are innocent till the facts are known.
As I've said there are more but I can't be bothered to find them.
R4 had a bit on this the other day. One of the experts on their said that, while the work was worthwhile, only the successes are publicised. Messing up an innocent persons life, interfering with an ongoing investigation, none of those are publicised. So whilst they can do good, I am not as keen on the publicity angle and think they should hand over evidence to the police rather than post videos on YouTube.