To catch a predator

[Adrian Wong]

Originally Posted by PsYkHoTiK

Thats the kinda crap I'm talking about.

Predators. It is beyond the simple concept of attraction. Its on who puts on sheeps clothing for a sole purpose.

Hmm.. That is too much. The guy should be hunted down, although I'm glad she was not harmed. That is a big relief. No matter whether she was raped or had sex with the man, it is far more important (to me at least) that she is ALIVE!

But IMHO, this case is proof that educating the kids is key to "prevention". No one can protect the kids by monitoring everything they do. They will always find a way around your monitoring.

It's best to teach them to think for themselves. That way, they can protect themselves whenever we are not around. Even the strictest parent cannot always be there for the child.

[PsYkHoTiK]

Like I said, what people do is their business (who they are attracted to).

My focal point is these people who commit these heinous crimes. People who actually prey on others. No amount of education can prevent that.

Sheep dogs protect the sheep (and educate them in this case). But the wolves always manage to pick one out once in a while.

I don't care about what people feel about ooh that teenage actor or this or that. Those are harmless and besides the point (for we are mere humans).

These predators on the other hand, are the lowest of life forms. What human with half a mind could possibly do that to a young one?

Like I said, its one thing to find a younger person attractive. Its a totally different thing to actively prey on them. Very strong distinction between the too. Absolutely nothing wrong with the former. As for the latter, they should be shot.

As for marrying why is it a problem? Minors cannot engage in a legally binding contract (which what marriage is - Prenuptual agreement).

Relating back to the show, they catch these types of criminals. People who are trying to prey on little kids. Not peeping toms or people who glance, but predators (hence the title of the show).

[Chai]

What Adrian is trying to about about minors marrying is that, they should have the rights to agree instead of their parents signing the contract for them completely. If the minors say no, the parents should at least oblige.

[Adrian Wong]

Originally Posted by PsYkHoTiK

Like I said, what people do is their business (who they are attracted to).

My focal point is these people who commit these heinous crimes. People who actually prey on others. No amount of education can prevent that.

Sheep dogs protect the sheep (and educate them in this case). But the wolves always manage to pick one out once in a while.

I don't care about what people feel about ooh that teenage actor or this or that. Those are harmless and besides the point (for we are mere humans).

These predators on the other hand, are the lowest of life forms. What human with half a mind could possibly do that to a young one?

Like I said, its one thing to find a younger person attractive. Its a totally different thing to actively prey on them. Very strong distinction between the too. Absolutely nothing wrong with the former. As for the latter, they should be shot.

As for marrying why is it a problem? Minors cannot engage in a legally binding contract (which what marriage is - Prenuptual agreement).

Relating back to the show, they catch these types of criminals. People who are trying to prey on little kids. Not peeping toms or people who glance, but predators (hence the title of the show).

Eh PsY, the prenup is different. That's a pre-marital agreement between two parties in the event they divorce later.

Yeah, if that's what they really do, then yeah, it could possibly help the police nab these guys before they do any harm to another kid. But I can't help wondering how the bait was set.

IMHO it would be okay if they set up the sting in an Internet medium that the "predator" frequents, like an IRC channel, or a forum. But it would not be quite ethical if they directly e-mail him to entice him.

BTW, do they target women? Or just men?

[Adrian Wong]

Originally Posted by Chai

What Adrian is trying to about about minors marrying is that, they should have the rights to agree instead of their parents signing the contract for them completely. If the minors say no, the parents should at least oblige.

Yup, that's what I meant. Some girls are married out to total strangers, sometimes over 50 years old. I don't think the girls would agree to such a marriage, but they don't have the right to refuse the marriage.

IMHO, children should be empowered to make informed decisions. That includes deciding on the person they want to marry and live with. It would be a double-standard if we were to strictly regulate sexual relations, while allowing the practice of forcibly marrying off underage girls to continue.

Again, my opinion is always of informed consent. No matter what your sexual preference is, it's your business as long as everyone involved consents. IMHO, sex should be fun and free (as in unencumbered by restrictions!!)!

[Adrian Wong]

BTW, is there a grade for sexual offenders??? Maybe something like this?

Grade 0a - Curious about young boys / girls of 16-18 years.
Grade 0b - Curious about young boys / girls younger than 16 years.

Grade 1a - Fantasizes about young boys / girls of 16-18 years.
Grade 1b - Fantasizes about young boys / girls younger than 16 years.
...
...
...

Grade 9 - Violent. Tortures children.

Grade 10 - Violent. Kills children.

Etc...??

IMHO, a grading system will help law enforcement officers focus on the more severe cases like the recent Nurin case. It will also help the public distinguish between really sick homocidal killers, "plain jane" sexual predators and the just curious.