This is quite interesting, can you point me to a society that doesn't have 'power dynamics'? If not, the case for this being a naturally occurring event seems to hold more credence.
Letzgo hunting paedos
- Thread starter butchersapron
- Start date
This is quite interesting, can you point me to a society that doesn't have 'power dynamics'? If not, the case for this being a naturally occurring event seems to hold more credence.
8ball
Decolonise colons!
Whether it is entrapment is not predicated on the age of the 'victim'.
How did he entrap the guys to come to his house? They all though they were coming to bone underage kids. Tough shit.
No they did not. Did you actually watch the show?
Can you explain what their age has to do with the issue of entrapment?
Thought not. You seem confuzzled.
yes, I did. And yes they did.
"I want to come and fuck you so bad" is what one of the guys texted to a supposed 11 year old girl before making an appointment to visit, do you think he wanted to help her clean the house if she had of been there?
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Online or IRL?
There should be a distinction made between "internet groomers" and those who commit physical sexual offences against children, not least because as best we know (the whole "internet grooming" category being less than a decade old, we don't as yet have much longitudinal data) the majority of them don't appear to go on to offend physically (the majority also don't have records for crimes against children, either).
Athos
Well-Known Member
As you say, the data is patchy. So is the line between internet groomers and those who commit physical acts e.g. sending indecent pictures etc. Plus there's the issue that grooming is an offence in itself, regardless of whether physical sexual contact is made.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
TBF there's been debate in criminology over the last few years with regard to whether the majority of internet grooming is predatory behaviour preparatory to sexual assault, or is inadequates acting out their sexual fantasies online and from a distance. That means we need to ask ourselves whether the internet has created more of an opportunity for said inadequates to cop a wank-aid (harmful though being caught up in such a fantasy can and may be to the person "on the other end") than it has for aggressive paedophiles to score victims.
So phil isn't right to say Hunter "creates" victims - he doesn't - what Hunter does is facilitate the committing of a particular crime ("internet grooming") in the belief that he's potentially preventing a more severe crime (child sexual assault). While the tabloids agree with Hunter, current HO stats don't.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Absolutely. My real bugbear with the offence of internet grooming is that the criminal justice system has put quite a bit of funding into seeking out and prosecuting the offence, when the offence shows a minor rate of physical sexual assault resulting from it, quite possibly (based on prosecution rates) because the offence is an "easy nick" for the OB. Meanwhile, shit like Rotherham happens (not that I'm blaming Rotherham on police targeting internet grooming, but resource allocation is a tricky thing, and the key to increasing your slice of the pie is to get more boxes ticked on your annual "solved crimes" figures).
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Andy, you're full of shit.
What are you talking about? "Attempting to build"? He's already built it!
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
I don't think he's positing a moral equivalence, I think he's saying that there's a continuity of "acting out" behaviour with regard to queer-bashing and nonce-bashing, and that people who did the former 40-odd years ago are much the same as those who do the latter now in terms of motivation.
I agree with the former, but not the latter.
Athos
Well-Known Member
OB should concentrate on the really serious stuff, and let Stinson mop up the groomers.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
It is considered "a mental illness of sorts", insofar as successful psychotherapeutic and psychological interventions have been shown to work in some cases.
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
Though what he said was a slight variation on the above:
He's suggesting that people who hate nonces are the same as/equivalent to those who physically attacked gay people. Underneath the trolling, there's an interesting discussion to be had about our attitude to nonces and whether in our perhaps appropriate detestation we are also feeding something unsavoury in ourselves. However Phil's intervention above is more a provacation than a way of having that discussion.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
deliberately phrased so, yes- but see for example the jailhouse kudos some psycho can get for doing a prison napalm attack on baby p's killer, or any nonce. Hierarchy of contempt stuff, also legitimate targeting stuff. I'm not about to open a pub called 'free the paedos' or anything but the socially acceptable target thing is a point. Phils dressed it in the language of who-is-the-real-nazi but kernel.
8ball
Decolonise colons!
It does seem to have provoked the discussion.
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
Yeah, absolutely and that plays out at a societal level. Everyone from Stimson through to the daily mail draws on the 'most detested' model, while the police and social services leave poor and vulnerable kids open to industrial scale grooming.
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
So, in my feeble attacks, I only make him stronger.
if you strike him down he will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
Nazis, nonces and Starwars - the thread with everything. Hang on, what abou the Illuminati?
andysays
Love and solidarity
I find it hard to see what crime is being committed by these honey traps. If you believe you're grooming a fourteen year old, but the person is actually twenty, what is the crime?
If you're in a nightclub and pull a girl who says she's fifteen and have sex with her, can you be convicted of having sex with a minor even if it turned out she was eighteen? The crime lies in the belief?
If you're in a nightclub and pull a girl who says she's fifteen and have sex with her, can you be convicted of having sex with a minor even if it turned out she was eighteen? The crime lies in the belief?
8ball
Decolonise colons!
I *think* that's exactly how the law on 'grooming' works (though it doesn't translate to lots of other situations).
no-no
Small robot you know
These guys are blatantly seeking out underage girls for sex though.
If and when your nightclub situation arises and if if it came before the courts then yes I guess logic would dictate that you would still be guilty.....of grooming I suppose but not of actually having sex with a minor as that hasn't happened. These blokes are charged with grooming not of actual underage sex. I don't think your example is a good comparison.
If and when your nightclub situation arises and if if it came before the courts then yes I guess logic would dictate that you would still be guilty.....of grooming I suppose but not of actually having sex with a minor as that hasn't happened. These blokes are charged with grooming not of actual underage sex. I don't think your example is a good comparison.
A thought crime. Orwell was off by 30 years.
Or what if you're with someone who you know to be of consenting age, and suddenly in the middle of sexing they start pretending that they're fifteen. Do you have to stop?
8ball
Decolonise colons!
It depends whether you believe them.
Similar threads
