Ok. Let assume Stintsons motives are sound. He wants to catch paedophiles. That is in itself a good aim.
I still question the use of facebook and the motivation of the tv producers.
I can fully relate to the horror and fury people feel, I think born partly out if how helpless you feel when the scale of the problem is exposed. I worked on a place where there were lots of children. A colleague who shared the same building but did not work directly with children, whom I also knew socially, turned out to be an extremely serious and predatory paedophile. He was caught by a police sting (they do happen) and got a lengthy sentence.
I was furious. Absolutely seething with anger and hatred for what he had done to an extent that surprised me.
But that still does not mean I agree with the kind of treatment indi in particular has been getting on this thread.
It is possible to abhor the crime, the criminal and to still not agree with sensationalist tv.
having had training in CP one of the things that was emphasised strongly was convictions are hard to obtain so nothing must be done that can jeopardise a conviction.
So to turn it around, how could this be approached better? Appealing less to an emotional reaction and more to a practical solution that reduces potential harm to children?
The anger we feel does us no good unless we have somewhere to channel it and I don't think vigilantes (or accusing people on a thread who don't agree with you of collusion) are the way to go.