To Catch A Predator Is Wrong

[shinbits]

The guys Dateline catches as a result of this show are criminals, who need should be punished as criminals. Thanks to them, many potential child molesters are off the streets.

But have you seen what they do just before sending them off to jail?

I Just saw one episode, where a man about 31 years old with glasses stripped naked, while hearing a voice of someone he believed to be a 14 year old girl in another room. When he's totally naked, Chris Hansen comes out, and proceeds to strip every last shred of dignity this man has, by asking consending questions with no purpose other than to further humiliate him:

Hansen: "Were you planning to have sex with a 14 year old?"
Man: "Uh, no I wasn't really gonna go all the way."
Hansen: "Oh come on! You're naked!"

Well Chris, if it's soooo obvious what he's doing, why put him through all this? Why all the snarky coments?

After what seems to be about ten minutes of useless obvious questions, he lets him know he's on national T.V., and a camera crew comes out. Now he's naked (just a towel) in a room full of people. Chris Hansen further destroys all shred of his self-respect by asking him if he has "anything to say" to millions of people who will now know what he's doing. This serves no purpose other than a sadistic enjoyment of watching him squirm. Put on the spot, he of course apologizes.

And to top it all off, Chris Hansen tells the guy he's free to go, and "keep the towel" just to stomp on his humanity one last time. What the guy doesn't know, is that he's not actually "free to go", there are cops outside in camoflage ready to put him to the ground, cuff him, and take him to jail. They don't show it, but I just know Chris Hansen is laughing his head off like "We said he was "free", let's see the look on his face when he realizes we just said that to screw with him".

Aren't there laws against "cruel and unusual punishment" for a reason? Aren't these laws in place because we recognize that criminals are still human beings? (Yes; Chris Hansen isn't offically a law enforcement official, so I guess it's okay, huh?)

Do you think this is right to do? I for one don't. Yes, what these men do is illegal, and immoral; but that's only depending on which country you live in, or in the U.S., what state you live in.

It's wrong to treat men who think they're going to have consentual sex with a teenager, who depending on the country (or state) would be legal to have sex with.

 

[A Is A]

To Catch a Predator went off the air years ago.

 

[shinbits]

I JUST saw an episode, no more than an hour ago. Even if it's no longer making new episodes, the reruns still come on, so it doesn't matter. The criminals caught get to relive their humiliation each time it comes on. What they did was still wrong.

 

[A Is A]

So? Anyone stupid enough to go try to bang a thirteen year old girl he met online deserves to get humiliated.

 

[flicka]

We have developed a strange idea about "entertainment", that's for sure. Probably why I rarely watch television anymore.

 

[Macx]

Aren't there laws against "cruel and unusual punishment" for a reason? Aren't these laws in place because we recognize that criminals are still human beings? (Yes; Chris Hansen isn't offically a law enforcement official, so I guess it's okay, huh?)

There are laws against cruel and unusual punishment (actually just one really relevant law in the 8th amendment) and it is true that the State is prohibited from enacting cruel and unusual punishments. The difference is, "TCAP" is acting before conviction (it isn't punishment because you are innocent until proven guilty) and not as an agent of the State (not bound under the 8th amendment).

To frame it a different way, if a crime victim whacks their attacker with her cane as the police are taking the criminal away, the police have not violated the 8th amendment, but the victim must be charged appropriately with some sort of assault or battery. Getting whacked by a cane wasn't part of a prescribed punishment. There is no law against setting up or conscenting to have set up surveilance devices in one's home. The actions by Dateline, though cruel (and appropriate) are all within the realm of lawful conduct by private citizens on private property with the consent of the property owner. There is no violation of the law, as the criminal is being aprehended & Dateline probably has a handful of well paid lawyers to make sure that line isn't crossed.

 

[shinbits]

The actions by Dateline, though cruel (and appropriate)

appropriate why?

 

[Hakan101]

So? Anyone stupid enough to go try to bang a thirteen year old girl he met online deserves to get humiliated.

I could use that same logic to say anyone who commits any sort of crime or wrongdoing, regardless of severity, deserves to be humiliated. That is cruel and cold-hearted, and the same is with this show. It is not about justice, but is meant to cause suffering for other people's entertainment. And that is wrong.

 

[Macx]

Outside of what is provided by law, there is a need (within society) for justice.

This topic being close to home for me, I'll use a personal example. HIPPA laws were violated and the fact that I was the victim of a pedophile is a matter of open court record now. Anybody with the time and inclination can find the records. I, as a victim am exposed to any curious eyes & they can read whatever sick details suit them including that I lost my virginity when I was less that 3. It is out there, makes no difference if I say it here, it happened, it is public info, I can't get it back, I can't get privacy, I can't get those records sealed. That never goes away. Why shouldn't the caught pedophile get a taste of what they give? Why shouldn't they experience the degradation they so freely give? I say it is entirely appropriate. It is kinder and gentler than I'd be. . . but then, I'd tend to violate laws if I caught a predator. A little degradation within the law? VERY appropriate & gentler than these guys deserve.

 

[MacNeil, D.]

...
It's wrong to treat men who think they're going to have consentual sex with a teenager, who depending on the country (or state) would be legal to have sex with.

You can't humiliate pedophiles enough. And there are defamation laws so that if one of these things thinks he was defamed before he was tried and convicted, he can sue the TV production companies that did this to him. Truth is always a defense.

 

[jayem]

Humiliating and discomfiting people for entertainment is the basis for a lot of reality TV. Remember the old Candid Camera show? That was gentler, but still, they basically set people up. Wasn't there a show testing people's fear? Contestants had to do things like sit in a chair covered with rats, and eat stuff like sheep eyeballs and horse rectum. (Though these folks knew what they were getting into.) Yeah, it's sleazy, but I guess it gets ratings.

 

[MacNeil, D.]

...Yeah, it's sleazy, but I guess it gets ratings.

You say "sleazy" as if humiliating pedophiles were a bad thing.

 

[Hakan101]

You say "sleazy" as if humiliating pedophiles were a bad thing.

It is a bad thing, humiliating anyone like that is a bad thing. Arrest the man and bring him to justice, that's a good thing. Rubbing salt in the wound is not.

 

[MacNeil, D.]

It is a bad thing, humiliating anyone like that is a bad thing. Arrest the man and bring him to justice, that's a good thing. Rubbing salt in the wound is not.

Looks like being a pedophile has all kinds of risks.

You probably know that pedos are really hated in prison populations, and he'll have to deal with a lot more than salt being rubbed into his wounds.

 

[Macx]

It is a bad thing, humiliating anyone like that is a bad thing. Arrest the man and bring him to justice, that's a good thing. Rubbing salt in the wound is not.

The criminal justice system does not offer appropriate justice. Merely locking them up & putting them in protective seg is not enough. Their faces need to be out there. Why shouldn't they be humiliated? It is only a small portion of what they do to their victims.

Then too, there is the deterent effect. You think pedophiles don't see the show and think "maybe I shouldn't use the internet to lure victims".

 

[jayem]

You say "sleazy" as if humiliating pedophiles were a bad thing.

But is it necessary?

Example: there's a reality cop show, The First 48, that follows homicide detectives in different cities as they investigate murders. A good show, and really absorbing. It would be very interesting to film a sexual crimes unit setting up a sting to nab a pedophile. And then showing a suspect being interviewed in the appropriate setting, with proper legal safeguards being observed. It's great to get a predator off the street, but I'd rather see it done with the focus on professionalism. The focus in the TCAP series seems more to be on a certain voyeuristic titillation, mixed with self-righteous indignation.

But it's really a subjective thing. To me, The First 48 is entertaining and in good taste. TCAP is not.

 

[Hakan101]

Looks like being a pedophile has all kinds of risks.

You probably know that pedos are really hated in prison populations, and he'll have to deal with a lot more than salt being rubbed into his wounds.

Exactly, that's part of why this show is unnecessary. And to entertain people, of all purposes...

 

[MacNeil, D.]

Exactly, that's part of why this show is unnecessary. And to entertain people, of all purposes...

I have no sympathy for pedophiles. I want them to be publically humiliated, then tried, convicted, and sent to prison where they'll be worked over by convicts outraged by the intrusion of such filth.

 

[Hakan101]

I have no sympathy for pedophiles. I want them to be publically humiliated, then tried, convicted, and sent to prison where they'll be worked over by convicts outraged by the intrusion of such filth.

What a nice guy

 

[MacNeil, D.]

What a nice guy

Some people are merciful to pedos. I'm not one of them.