dateline-to catch a predator

[biteme]

Where are all of these chatrooms for underage girls anyway?

I've never been into a chatroom. Someone post a link so I can see what all the fuss is about.

I think it would be very easy to sniff out a "decoy" or whatever. Most 14 year old girls on a chat log type of thing, are going to seem more grown up online especially these days and no always play so stupid about blowjobs and all of that crap and who is dumb enough to beleive that some girl who has never been fucked in her life is just going to go online and find some fat middle aged mexican to do it with. Just not beleivable at all and why would these perverts be sending pictures of their litrtle peckers anyway? again, dumb.

Wanna have a chat? You are at least 14 right? And more importantly, do you live in Canada or the US?

 

[Sexy-boy]

"LOL, yeah, I'm 14, you oughta stop by the house some time, I love to bake little cookies and we can hang out, do you have some marijuana and condoms. LOL. I've never been with a guy before but it sounds like fun. hehehe"

 

[EnderJE]

If I felt I had to act upon a deviate urge towards a child, I'd just off myself first.

just sayin

Thank you Denis Miller. I loved his quote about it.

"Sometimes, there are times when you know that you have to lean into the strike zone and take one for the team."

 

[heatherrae]

I think most women over 30 would like to raise the legal age to 20 since they are obviously jealous of younger women... They can't hide it.. They are used to being left for much younger women, the way men are used to being taken for their money.

spoken like a true idiot.

 

[Razorguns]

i was watching how they bust these people. its often funny but at the same time it brings up a question. many people have strange fetishes, most of the time embarassing ones that most would not expose to the public aside from their wives or girlfriends. i am not an advocate of these predators. i think taking the innocence of a child is wrong. but is it at the same time right to expose these people and make them look bad for something biological that they probably wish they could control but cant? i feel that child rapists and molesters that do things to children against the will of the child is something that should be punished severly. At the same time, a 13 year old girl consenting to sex with a man who has some sort of fetish seems wrong but at the same time is it truly the man's fault? and should he be humiliated on national tv? these men will never change. to me it almost brings the same issue up as homosexuality...something biological that those people cannot help, no matter how shunned from society they are and how much many wish they could change. what are your opinions on this?

i'm all for catching sickos before they actually commit a crime. it's called PROACTIVE not REACTIVE. Not entrapment.

Cops always come in AFTER a crime is already done. Big help then. Like I care once i'm murdered.

Some of these creeps even admit they've done this before.

This is no different than sting operations to catch drug dealers and hookers.

r

 

[heatherrae]

Old enough to bleed, old enough to breath. Haven't you ever heard the sayin'?

You dork. The phrase is "old enough to bleed, old enough to breed." The way you say it makes no sense for what you are trying to say.

 

[Razorguns]

If my daughter's 15 year old gf's came onto me real strong, (some of them look like women) I wouldnt fuck them (although I know they've probably been fucking for some time), but if some man does, I don't think it should be illegal at that age... It depends on the circumstances.... In Canada, they think 14 should be the age of consent, Spain 12 , here it's between 16 and 18.... I would go with the old sayin' "old enough to bleed, old enough to breathe" (j/k). I think 14 is about right, but then again it depends on the circumstances.... I wouldn't do a girl that young (If I were single), but that is just me.

when u legalize it at 14

you'll also have 14 y/o prostitutes tomorrow working in massage parlors and brothels.

r

 

[Cal_21]

"LOL, yeah, I'm 14, you oughta stop by the house some time, I love to bake little cookies and we can hang out, do you have some marijuana and condoms. LOL. I've never been with a guy before but it sounds like fun. hehehe"

lolololololololol what the fuck?!

 

[heatherrae]

Lots of them make the argument of entrapment. However, in order to have entrapment you have to prove (1) government inducement of the crime, and (2) the defendant's lack of predisposition to engage in the criminal conduct.

Here, the government isn't acting. However, if I were hired to defend the men, I would try to say that the government is working so closely with these groups, that they are essentially the actors inducing the crime.

The problem here is predisposition to commit the crime. Even if inducement has been shown, a finding of predisposition is fatal to the defense of entrapment. The predisposition inquiry focuses upon whether the defendant "was an unwary innocent or, instead, an unwary criminal who readily availed himself of the opportunity to perpetrate the crime." Thus, predisposition should not be confused with intent to commit the crime. The guy can have the intent to commit the crime, yet be entrapped. Also, predisposition may exist even in the absence of prior criminal involvement. A seminal case on the issue states that "the ready commission of the criminal act," such as where a defendant promptly accepts an undercover agent's offer of an opportunity to buy or sell drugs, may in and of itself establish the predisposition of the defendant.

So, what I'm saying is that I would try to make that argument if I were the defense attorney, but it is about 95% likely to fail unless the judge was buying that the government was really just acting by and through third parties and the transcripts of the conversation really showed the guy saying that he didn't want to do it and basically taking no part of it. If you had a guy like that, he probably wouldn't show up at the house with rubbers and beer in the first place...lol.

It isn't entrapment folks.

 

[MichaelScott]

You dork. The phrase is "old enough to bleed, old enough to breed." The way you say it makes no sense for what you are trying to say.

i thought it was old enough to bleed old enough for me?