Three Disney employees arrested in chatroom sex sting

http://www.tgdaily.com/index.php?o [...] w&id=31441

Isn't this entrapment? Isn't entrapment illegal? Isn't this also completely irrelevant to protecting children? Do they really think they can catch all the "bad guys" in the entire world by running a once/week entrapment racket, I mean "sting operation"? And who do they hire to pose as desperately horny underage children in chatrooms? What are their qualifications? This whole operation stinks. If you want to protect children you need to make sure that they, and their parents, and their community have the tools and the will to protect them. If an actual child is so foolish and desperate for attention so as to invite strangers to their house, while their negligent parents are away, to have sex with them the root of the problem has very little to do with how many people out there would take advantage of the situation. The fact of the matter is that most children who are taken advantage of and physically or sexually abused need to be protected from people within their own family, not some mysterious semi-anonymous boogieman on the internet. This entire concept is a red-herring, a distraction from the real and present dangers that face children.

Why don't they advertise parties with free drugs and hookers and arrest everyone that shows up? Because it's immoral and illegal for law-enforcement to go out of their way to convince someone to do something illegal and then arrest them for it.

There are a number of things that could be done to protect children. This is not one of them. The child they are protecting never existed. It was some fat, balding, BCG-wearing super-pervert getting payed to pretend to be a horny 13yo girl (if you've seen the Dateline NBC special you know the guy I'm talking about xD). Kinda hard to claim moral superiority when the basis of your operation is an old guy with working knowledge of how to present himself as a sexually desirable underage kid to other old men... that's sick.

Want a better idea? Run the same operation in reverse. Find the children who agree to let a stranger come over to their house and alert their parents. THAT could save lives. That could identify neglected children and remove them from unsafe households. The fact that they can run this entrapment racket on a weekly basis proves how pointless it is. A waste of time and money.


Moral of the story: When meeting people you have met on the internet ALWAYS have your first meeting in a safe, neutral, public place.

Like Disneyland

They aren't doing anything about it. That's my point. The sting operations they run on drug traffickers are so obviously NOT effective I don't know why you brought it up. And entrapment operations, where they coerce people into committing illegal acts, are not allowed. An under-cover law enforcement agent or informant can pose as a drug dealer or a drug buyer and attempt to catch someone who engages in that business. They cannot attempt to coerce otherwise law abiding citizens into it. Do you see the huge moral difference between the two?

I agree. We should arm children and their parents with the tools necessary to protect themselves. Quite frankly though I don't know of any 13-14yo children who actively solicit sexual visits from strangers on the internet. Such a child is probably in very poor mental/emotional condition and in need of serious protection/intervention. This program does nothing to address the needs of such children.

No they aren't. They were never near them in the first place. They had to be pro-actively contacted on the internet and INVITED over. That's entrapment and it's not protecting anyone.

No, I'm not. Thank you for asking though. But you do bring up a good point: the buzz-world pedophilia. It's probably the reason they pick 13-14 and not 10-17. 13-14 they can get away with calling the people they entrap "pedophiles" and get people to hate them. Most 13-14yos aren't actually pre-pubescent though (as you acknowledged as identifying them as "hormone filled blobs of skin" ) but some are and it's widely considered to be "too young" anyway by our society which, incidentally, also doesn't know how to use a dictionary, so calling them pedophiles will generally fly. From a legal standpoint they could just as easily pose as 17yo "children" in most of the world but they wouldn't get the fervent "moral" support, would they? And if they posed as 10-12 year olds they probably wouldn't get any responses as the people they are entrapping probably aren't actually pedophiles (a little sick, desperate, or stupid? Sure, but people really need to learn to use a dictionary) As you see, it's not about protecting children, it's about prosecuting "bad guys" and drug traffic is the perfect example of how ineffective that is.

I have never been solicited for sex on the internet by a minor (nor visa versa, but thank you for the ad hominen counter-argument dumbass)... obviously I haven't been targeted. My concern is with protecting children AND civil rights. This program accomplishes neither of those things. If it actually did have some value for protecting children I might be willing to deal with the fact that law enforcement agents might be actively trying to trick people into committing an illegal act that they wouldn't have committed if merely left to their own devices, but it doesn't.

If you would like to respond to any of the arguments I have put forth feel free to do so but attacking me personally is low and merely demonstrates your complete lack of understanding or compassion for children at risk.

These people are going into rooms HUNTING children down for sexually explicit acts.

How are you possibly against finding these fuckers?

This is not entrapment. Regardless of if it's a fucking kid, or a fucking police officer pretending to be one, they are still going there to HAVE SEX WITH CHILDREN.

It's wrong! Just WRONG!

Oh god it's just too perfect. I can hear "his" throbbing erection already.

"He" ...*approaches*...

i and my fellow enlightened thinkers do not like being demonised. it is wrong.

who is to say only finding those in school uniforms attractive is wrong. i think it is a disgrace that my freedoms as an adult are being breeched like this. those police officers were wrong to get in the way of two consenting people doing what they like in private.

i do not ask what you others get up to so why should my private life be public knowledge. this is clearly a sarcastic post so please do not get your feathers all ruffled.(no pun intended riser )

In respect; I'd love to see every 'truely' sick pedo, sex offender and "incurable" offender executed; you dont get much more scum than said folkes.... and I consider some of the things these people do to be get as effective as murder (i.e. life-long trauma)

On the flip side: I can to an EXTENT agree with the pro civil liberites being argued heard. Sadly its all in the name of protection and security which makes this line a little blurred.

kinda what you do on the forumz....

You should just grab your ankles right now, and get it over with.

I could tell you a few stories about some of the clinical (and occassionally forensic) cases I have to deal with. You learn a lot about this class of behaviours.

However:

...*enters, massive stiffy throbbing mercilessly*...

...*infringes quite a few of noob's civil liberties*....

Haven't you watched Nightline or whatever it is?

Those peados show up and have no excuses.. Why are 40 year old men showing up to a 12 year old's house?

Fcuk em. They should do this more often and just advertise they're 14/f/Alabama and see who bites.

Being you're a ccok sucking idiot, you go about judging what they're doing without knowing in full detail how they're going about it.

Ever watch the stings on Cops? They have someone stand on the corner like a prostitute and people offer money for sex. Hell yeah, bust them.

I can't convey how much of a fcuking twit you are.

As far as Jessica's act: Its sad you had to even research to know what it is. Don't even try to lecture me on it when you have to go out and google it just to know something about it.

You really sound disappointed that they're targeting peados. Do you have something you want to confess?

Or are you going to go out and shoot 10 Amish girls in the head because you're a child molesting stupid fcuk?

*edit for typo

Careful Mugz, you don't want a relapse before the next meeting...

Of course I am. I always am... [/Young Frankenstein]

you do raise a good point about what constitutes paedophilia.

in the u.k here, the age of consent is 16.

i think that for the celts who occupied europe long ago it was 14.

technically i don't think you can put a blanket law in these things as some people may be ready for marriage and the like while others may not or at least at 16 anyway.

still, it was your views on the legitimacy of the police operations that got you in fire and IMO you are wrong there.

you're right, but I don't think it was a 16 or younger girl/boy to a 30-50 y/o man (aside from cultural differences where I know this happens) it doesn't happen here and shouldn't!

"They posed as 13-14 y/o girls"

meaning, they made everyone in that chat fully aware of their "age"

looks have absolutely nothing to do with this.

Any adult that does that kinda stuff is the lowest you can get. And if caught, will get there just reward. Everyone in prison has family

I'm sure there is someone like you, just waiting for someone like them.

fresh meat and all

um... THG posted it, I'm just commenting on it. I suppose it may have been foolish of me to expect people to take it seriously since I didn't say "ZOMG PAEDOPHILES! KILL THEM ALL!" and actually tried to criticize the way they handled the situation like a rational human being but I was completely serious when I expressed that I was appalled at the notion that this is supposed to be a way to "protect children".

I do have a bit of a post count, I'm no stranger. And where, pray tell, should I take it? To the CPU section? Seriously. No, wait, don't. Tell me to read the stickies again, ramble on nonsense about llama suits, and call me names. But aren't you worried that such schoolyard antics might attract the kind of attention that you seem so hell-bent against? This isn't some retarded post about AMD > Intel or what-not, this is serious, and most of the responses are complete rubbish. No wonder the best response anyone can seem to muster to child exploitation on the internet is "How to Catch a Predator".

I've had this handle since I was like 13. It's really rather innocent in origin. Thanks for asking. And I really can't help but mention some of the avatars people have chosen but still expect to be taken seriously in this thread, so spare grieving me over my screen name

And no one has even commented on my idea of running the operation in reverse. If anything THAT was supposed to be the flame bait. Certainly a lot more absurd then suggesting that soliciting old men on the internet for sex with minors is morally questionable.

if i give him some shit here, can he keep it here?
i know i have some shit just laying around doing nothing... eh?

if you're talking about my tits, I'm over your age limit, you don't have to look

Amen, although you have to realize you cannot protect them forever. First of all their parents, but also you as their oldest sister must help them to guard themselves against this kind of abuse.

At a local school here, they have a project where children go on MSN at school (we're talking 10-12 years old here approximately I think), and they let them talk to each other on MSN with other children. Teachers also participate. And then they play a game where the children have to find out who of the people they are chatting with are actually teachers posing as children, or really children. It is a great way of teaching children of the dangers of MSN and how you can guard yourself against abuse. You can tell and explain children a hundred times, or more, but doing these kinds of exercizes are much more instructive, for all.

This is a Hardware forum to start with....

I'm sure that there are other forums on the net that would appreciate a thread like yours...... It doesn't seem to get much traction here though..... [shrug]

Fricking retard, figure out the laws.

There is a floating window for adults and "under age" people. I think its a 3 year window. If you're 18, you can date a 15 year old and get away with anything that happens as long as the parents are ok with it.

But if you're 30 going for a 15 year old, you have issues.

Kids are 17 and under. Age of consent in most places is that of 16.

Get over it. Its the law, its simple, its clear.

You are a twit. I have no complaints against entrapment when it deals with this kind of issue. I'm all for entrapment on people who use drugs, molest kids, do anything disgusting or outside of the norms of society (Except Winding, no one wants to deal with him).

Damn.. check out those eye brows.