to think the people 'trapping' the paedophiles aren't doing anything wrong

[LaurieFairyCake]

I realise the police are taking a dim view of this but honestly they admit they don't have enough resources to catch many of them.

'Vigilantes' are talking to them online, arranging to meet - and then calling the police when they turn up (and presenting them with the evidence)

Oh, all vigilantes are scumbags. This lot are creaming their pants at the idea of being superheroes, possibly getting in the way of actual successful prosecutions and may well be endangering innocent people. TBH, to dedicate yourself to 'entrapping' nonces on line, you usually have to be quite a nonce yourself. THe more self-righteous noise men make about hating rapists/child abusers, the more likely they are to be abusing members of their own families (which is, of course, different, because these men are special...)
What would be interesting is to find out how many times the silly bastards have 'entrapped' each other...

SoildGoldBrass How you suggest that the problem is tacked?

tackled

For what it's worth the bloke in my area who does it is such a prolific DA offender he is not allowed near children unsupervised and has been reported on in the national news

What about the ones that post the details of their 'stings' online?

since there is no proof re nutjobs this is a red herring to distract from the op.s pov re getting childfuckers off the street. Why wd anyone object to that?

I will no doubt get flamed for this, but honestly, if I was "Head of the World", I would give all these buggers a lethal injection and be done with it.

At any cost amarmai?

No.

Vigilante set-ups like this attract criminals who want to see themselves as above da peedos (for example rapists who only attack adult women) and adult survivors of abuse trying to make a difference. We've discussed the first type on this thread already, but what about the second type?

They are then exposing themselves to truly triggering stuff with no training, no professional support or supervision. It isn't good for them (understatement) and it doesn't lead to reliable evidence-gathering.

Arent there laws against Entrapment though?

I thought police had to be very careful- cant go up to a prostitute and ask them for sex, for example, they have to wait for them to offer, or they can jeopardise the arrest.

there is nothing wrong with it and if people were beating them up also wouldnt be anything wrong as long as they have the correct person

Yeah, as long as! Key words there.

So here's a scenario for you...

Some is 'caught' by one of these groups (whether they're truly guilty or whether the 'evidence' is beside the point). The details are posted online. Someone recognises him and posts his address. There are kids in that house.

I'll leave you to fill in any details.

*whether the 'evidence' is edited

I think it's highly questionable that anyone would seek out and encourage potential paedophiles into conversations and meetings. How much is creating a problem? And why not other crimes? Odd past time.

The police already do exactly this themselves.

Trouble is, you always get The Stupid.

Like those who think that a paediatrician is the same thing as a paedophile.

So now, whenever there's a programme on the tv that features paediatricians, the voiceover always has to say 'a children's doctor' because The Stupid don't know the difference.

It's a terrible, terrible idea.

Hippy, I imagine that's following a recruitment and vetting process and with on going supervision and support? Not just fishing around on the internet for some perve to talk dirty to and pretend it's for the greater good?

I once read an account by an American member of an organised US equivalent. She ended up on the internet at all hours of the day and night, because every moment she wasn't online (even though she had a young family), she felt guilty that she was letting someone groom a real 15 year old. Her "support" consisted of talking to other members on the group's private forum.

I don't know the ins and outs of it Noeuf but I would very much assume so. Sadly my experience was on the other end of it (not me, obviously!).

I wasn't saying the public should be doing it because the police are - quite the opposite. The police should be doing it (properly) and they are. It isn't something would be vigilantes should be interfering with.

In with you OP - by using grown men or women to lure paedophiles it means a child has probably been saved. For the right causes I see nothing wrong with a bit of vigilantism

Like those who think that a paediatrician is the same thing as a Paedophile

The media thingy this is based on didn't even happen

THe more self-righteous noise men make about hating rapists/child abusers, the more likely they are to be abusing members of their own families (which is, of course, different, because these men are special...

Don't understand this logic at all

NeedsASockAmnesty What do you mean it didn't happen?

We have vigilantes where I live. They are all, without fail, utter scumbags who use their vigilanteism to legitimise the fact that they are violent criminals. They pretend they are saving the areas that they terrorise.

YAB massively U OP.