I agree. The pervs need to be in jail and stay there until they die there. But i have serious mixed emotions with the methodology. They do not talk to minors online ,do not meet with minors. They may be talking to a 50 year old man when they think they are talking to a minor girl. Therefore, their crime is a thought crime only. Very Orwellian.
And I see it as doing something about a serious, growing problem. If the guy wasn't caught in the sting, he could very well pick up a real live 12 or 13 year old and do who knows what to him/her. I wish there was a better way, but it seems we either haven't found it, or it's out there, but people are unwilling or unable to implement it. Far too many parents are indifferent to the problem. And judges...well....don't get me started on some of them.
It IS a thought crime ----UNTIL they show up on what they think is a youngster's doorstep carrying paraphernalia to engage in sex.
Under the law, carrying sex paraphernalia shows "intent" to commit acts against youngsters.
Hanson always reads from printouts messages the pervs sent wherein they acknowledge they KNOW the victim is underage. Some of the pervs also wire porn pics of themselves and their sexual organs, which is illegal.
Moreover, I believe the states used in the Dateline reports are chosen b/c they have specific laws that cover these areas.
That's been one of my concerns, in reality they weren't talking to a 14 year old girl, they were talking to a balding 50 year old guy. But as far as I know you can be prosecuted for buying a ziplock baggie of oregano if you "thought" it was mary jane. Something about one of the elements of a crime being a conscious act in furtherance of the criminal act. I think I read an example onece about a guy who read about bomb making, that in and of itself was not a crime, but when he started to purchase all of the components to build a bomb that was a "step" that was enough to arrest the guy. So these guys you see not only chatted away online, they also got into their cars and drove somewhere to further the criminal act. Maybe someone here with a better grasp of lawyer-speak could put it more eloquently.