Posted on 10/18/2017 10:29:43 PM PDT by sparklite2
Execute the dealers, street level to kingpin and the problem will diminish exponentially. Same with traffickers.
Government bodies like good salacious stories like this to remind people of the hard work they’re doing (TO GET MORE FUNDING!!!!!!!).
So far not one good suggestion on how to catch these guys AFTER they have destroyed some sex slave’s life even further.
Just continued defense of the men who are willing to sexually exploit women and children.
The men are responsible for their own decision and life choices.
If they weren’t willing to engage in this sort of behavior, they wouldn’t have gotten caught.
Sucks to be them but they made their choices and need to be responsible and accountable for it.
If they don’t want to be arrested and have their poor widdle lives ruined, don’t do the crime.
You catch these guys with testimony and evidence after they commit a crime. And create a deterrent by sentencing harshly. Just like any other crime.
There is no perfect solution that will eliminate all crimes in advance. Most crimes are actually never solved. That is the price of living a non-fascist society. Some bad people will take advantage of our rights but that doesn’t mean we should all lose them to be constantly watched and tested by Big Brother.
Creating professional pornographic advertisements and professionally talking people into breaking the law is 100% entrapment.
Arresting people based on their responses to police psycholigical manipulation is the beginning of “precrime”. A very, very slippery slope...
Please reread my post.
Apologies, I just saw you were replying to the same post I was replying to.
Nobody forced any of those men to either reply to or even search for those advertisements. That they were prevented from answering real "ads" or other come ons and making it profitable for pimps to enslave women and children for that purpose, is fine with me.
“That they were prevented from answering real “ads” or other come ons and making it profitable for pimps to enslave women and children for that purpose, is fine with me.”
That’s prediction or “precrime” Giving someone a test to try and predict what would have happened. Maybe some are monsters. Maybe some would have walked away or not had talked to anyone at all had the police ad with that particular picture not existed.
That is legally and morally dubious in a free society. And only will get worse with technology...
What if police start scanning peoples minds, entrap them while they dream and determine they are prone to be criminals? Based on some fantasy they create to test people.
Some of these fake profiles were posted om dating sites. Sometimes they take snippets and post as banners on various other sites. Especially of attractive women. I’ve seen dating profiles on bloody air conditioning sites!
No problem.
Happens to me too.
Wrong! Many of them solicited sex from minors. The fact that they missed and got a police officer instead of an actual minor is beside the point.
If the police ad did not exist, some of them might not be soliciting anyone. You don’t know what would have happened.
This is essentially creating a psychological test to try and predict what someone would have done. Then dragnetting everyone that failed their test in an imaginary situation.
Bad legal precedent and similar to how the FBI creates terrorists by planting agents to convince idiots online to carry out imaginary attacks. Many of them would not have done anything without talking to that particular FBI agent.
With technology, you’ll start seeing this concept deployed more often and the possibilities for diminished freedom are terrifying
Absolute nonsense! The existence of the police or their ad is not the reason they went searching for young hookers. How about this? If they never went searching for underage hookers, nothing would have happened to them regardless of what the police did.
You don’t know what would have happened.
No, but we know what did happen. OK, innocent until found guilty, but if they are guilty, it's because of their own actions, not because of anything the police did.
There is no such website as “young hookers R us”.
These were ads placed in classifieds and dating sites where someone looking for other things can also see them.
Just like using a police woman as bait in the street to convince men to pay her. If she did not exist, nobody would be talking to her. They are making a prediction by creating a fantasy situation they assume proves what someone would have done later.
This is all very psuedo-scientific and legally dubious
What does that prove?
These were ads placed in classifieds and dating sites where someone looking for other things can also see them.
People looking for "something else" aren't going to answer ads from underage hookers.
Just like using a police woman as bait in the street to convince men to pay her. If she did not exist, nobody would be talking to her.
No, they would be going after someone else. And if they turned out to be sickos who intended to do harm, then that someone else would be saved by the vice squad.
That is not assuming they would commit a violent crime. They're being busted for what they did, solicitation, not for what they might have done.
I know, for what they allegedly did. Innocent until proven guilty. And if you want to make the case that the cops aren't always telling the truth (see Baltimore), you'll get no argument from me. That's why we have trial dates, and they'll get theirs.
They are making a prediction by creating a fantasy situation they assume proves what someone would have done later.
If a guy solicits an under cover cop, no assumptions are necessary. We know what he would have done, because he did.
This is all very psuedo-scientific and legally dubious
That the culprit solicited sex from what he though was a minor but turned out to be a cop is very scientific and legal.
And why are you defending someone who may have made the choice to make human trafficking profitable? That's what you're doing whether you see it that way or not.
“What does that prove?”
It proves they may not have been looking specifically for that until police entered their timeline. They may have been looking for a real date and ended up seeing a police ad. Or it may have been linked to a banner on a completely random website. The marketers keep track if someone searches for online dates and put that on banners.
“That the culprit solicited sex from what he though was a minor but turned out to be a cop is very scientific and legal”
A police officer posing as a minor and/or prostitute would not appear nor act nearly the same. If a suspect saw an actual one they may have walked away.
I personally know of several people who went to look for that, saw the prostitutes face, couldn’t do it and never did it again. Instead here you would have a healthy confident cop. 100% confident she would not get killed or arrested that night. Goading you on to buy it. Completely different scenario
“And why are you defending someone who may have made the choice to make human trafficking profitable? That’s what you’re doing whether you see it that way or not.”
Not all people who look into the gutter will go into it. It is unscientific, immoral and not Christian to assume what someone would have done based on a flawed test.
Our court system will defend some terrible people and they will go free. Not because the law loves the bad people. But due to the chance that someone innocent may be punished if we assume what happened. Now when we begin to assume what WILL happen, that is a terrifying slope!
. We have a moral duty to not harm innocents like the criminals do. Even if it means some criminals will go free.
Three times you said what MAY have happened. That doesn't prove anything.
A police officer posing as a minor and/or prostitute would not appear nor act nearly the same. If a suspect saw an actual one they may have walked away.
Again, what MAY have happened. They were not busted for what MAY have happened, but for what they (allegedly) did.
I personally know of several people who went to look for that, saw the prostitutes face, couldn’t do it and never did it again.
Do you think they would have told you about it if they did?
Not all people who look into the gutter will go into it. It is unscientific, immoral and not Christian to assume what someone would have done based on a flawed test.
They were not busted for what they would have done or might have done or may have done. They were busted for what they (allegedly) did, solicitation. That they were wrong about who they solicited is irrelevant.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.