Thread: Dateline: To Catch A Predator

Has anybody seen this NBC show I know it popular in america. If you haven't you can watch it on youtube. Well is it fair to show the people faces. Just think about it their pedophiles so they do deserve some punishment, but being shamed and made fun off on tv. Is it going to far as when the show airs they would have aload off problems to deal with as the public would know who they are and they going to court. Also the show seems like a bad joke as the presenters reads out the manuscipt of the person and you can't help, but laugh and this is the problem the show tries to be funny as in the time where they made that guy strip naked and they even read out his fantasy about a girl doing a sex act on a cat. Is it right to shame them like this and make fun off them for ratings.

I've watched the show a couple of times, but missed the particular one you're talking about. In general, the only thing I really have against shows like that is that they practically tell criminals how to commit crimes and then how to hide the evidence afterwards. Shows like this are the reason for the increase of crime, not video games. All you have to do is watch the show, and you could be an expert thief/murderer/whatever.

As for them ridiculing criminals for ratings, in some cases they probably deserve it. For instance, if you have a guy who has been on a raping spree for however much time, he definitely deserves whatever he gets. I feel no pity for people like that, in fact I think they should create harsher punishments for them.

You know how many times that I have watched those shows and thought to myself exactly how I could get away with it? I would never do it, it's just the thought process in my head lol. I agree. The problems with shows like that, is that they do show you exactly how to get away with crimes at least for a little while.

But I have to admit, I love me some CSI lol.

I think that show scares the Hell out of pedophiles and makes them less likely to troll the internet for kids. The people they show are usually after kids who are 12 and 13, and that is not as evil as going after 7 year olds and stuff, but they still have no business doing it and need major deterrance. National humiliation looks pretty powerful. Imagine having a 13 year old sister and some 56 year old going to your parents' house to have at it with her. It can't happen. They need to do the right thing and go after college girls.

My question is, can they do that without the pedophiles' permission? I have no problem with the criminals voluntarily humiliating themselves.

Originally Posted by Brilliand

My question is, can they do that without the pedophiles' permission? I have no problem with the criminals voluntarily humiliating themselves.[/b]

yeah, its freedom of the press. it happens to celebrities all the time. they dont give permission for some photos but they still end up on TV.

Originally Posted by xcrissxcrossx

yeah, its freedom of the press. it happens to celebrities all the time. they dont give permission for some photos but they still end up on TV.[/b]

But what the pedophiles have to do for the show? "as in the time where they made that guy strip naked and they even read out his fantasy about a girl doing a sex act on a cat." That sounds like the guy gave permission.

Identifying the person to the public is OK, to my mind. I agree with freedom of the press - if it's true, and they didn't make the person do it, it's OK to tell it.

Originally Posted by Brilliand

But what the pedophiles have to do for the show? "as in the time where they made that guy strip naked and they even read out his fantasy about a girl doing a sex act on a cat." That sounds like the guy gave permission.[/b]

I saw that one that one. No, I'm pretty sure he didn't give permission.

They ought to expand that so pedophiles can never be sure who they are talking to. Hire a bunch of people to bait them. People could even volunteer to do it for free. It would cut down on it a lot I think.

Like that movie by arnold swartzenegger. Anyhow. It is all about the ratings. Ethics? What are those? Does it sell?

Originally Posted by Neruo

Like that movie by arnold swartzenegger. Anyhow. It is all about the ratings. Ethics? What are those? Does it sell?[/b]

Do you think it's unethical? No they haven't had a trial, but they all think tbey are coming to the house to have sex with a child. Have you seen it?

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

Do you think it's unethical? No they haven't had a trial, but they all think tbey are coming to the house to have sex with a child. Have you seen it?[/b]

Yeah. Basically, what they do is make fun of the mentally challenged, the mentally sick. Some of the pedophiles are just a bit weak in the head, and should be taken care of, therapy or something -locked up if that is better for them and the rest of the world-, not ridiculed on national TV. That they 'Catch' the pedophiles is great, but I really find it sick to show it on tv. It isn't so different from showing people getting the death sentence on tv. They shouldn't air that either, despite whether the people on the chair earned it or not.

-

If you want to 'make them pay' by showing them on TV, or something like that, that is just sadistic. Law and it's punishments should work on bettering society, not on revenge and retaliation. If you shoot the man that shot your child, you aren't helping anyone.

Originally Posted by Neruo

If you shoot the man that shot your child, you aren't helping anyone.[/b]

But what if he lives to shoot more children? He might escape from prison and go on a killing spree. Isn't the killer just a waste of space anyway? Useless to society? He isn't ever going to help anyone and they need the space in prisons. If you kill the killer you make him taste his own crimes. I think the death penalty should be legalized everywhere.

As for the pedophiles, they aren't making fun of them as much as you think they are. Something tells me you don't have a good understanding of American humor. They are exposing these criminals as wrongdoers and hopefully scaring them into never doing it again.

Originally Posted by CymekSniper

But what if he lives to shoot more children? He might escape from prison and go on a killing spree. Isn't the killer just a waste of space anyway? Useless to society? He isn't ever going to help anyone and they need the space in prisons. If you kill the killer you make him taste his own crimes. I think the death penalty should be legalized everywhere.[/b]

Yes I get what you are saying. However, if YOU shot a man because he shot your children, you are doing it not for the best of society, you are probably doing it out of vengeance. You shouldn't be allowed to take right into your own hands. Law should do that.

Example: If someone gets the death penalty, would the relatives of the people he raped like to see him get eaten alive by wild dogs? Probably. However that serves no purpose but vengeance, retaliation. If you are taking the person out of society because that it better for it (he is sure to rape again), then do it in a humane, painless way.

With pedophiles: Who benefits from seeing the pedophiles on TV? How does the goal of the law benefit? If they just get caught and send to jail / therapy, that is the best you can do. They aren't going to behave better after they got ridiculed on TV. So the only goal it serves is vengeance on the 'bad' people (and money for the company that airs the show ) That is my point.

As for the pedophiles, they aren't making fun of them as much as you think they are. Something tells me you don't have a good understanding of American humor. They are exposing these criminals as wrongdoers and hopefully scaring them into never doing it again.[/b]

Like how introduction death penalties never change crime numbers? Really, making those people afraid doesn't work. Also, you aren't going to tell me they air the show, not because people like to see people they get getting owned, but that they watch it 'to make sure pedophiles are scared into doing it'. It is about entertainment, about the money.

Originally Posted by Neruo

Yeah. Basically, what they do is make fun of the mentally challenged, the mentally sick. Some of the pedophiles are just a bit weak in the head, and should be taken care of, therapy or something -locked up if that is better for them and the rest of the world-, not ridiculed on national TV. That they 'Catch' the pedophiles is great, but I really find it sick to show it on tv. It isn't so different from showing people getting the death sentence on tv. They shouldn't air that either, despite whether the people on the chair earned it or not.

-

If you want to 'make them pay' by showing them on TV, or something like that, that is just sadistic. Law and it's punishments should work on bettering society, not on revenge and retaliation. If you shoot the man that shot your child, you aren't helping anyone.[/b]

I wondered what you would say. I see what you mean, except for I don't think they're just a bit weak in the head, I think they're a lot worse than that. Actually I don't think people should be trapped into any other crime, and then have it shown as entertainment, so maybe I should think about why I think this is OK. I guess it is just the nature of that crime and the sliminess of the perpetrators. The only benefit it would have would be as a deterrent, but I'm sure it's not widespread enough really to actually scare very many. They could probably do the same thing without showing it as entertainment tho. You're probably right, we should be above watching that, altho if I realize it's on I go watch it. I don't think they just need a little counseling tho, they need locking up forever.

I agree with you about taking the revenge element out; prevention of further harm should be the main goal. If society has extra money, I guess rehabilitation for some (lesser) crimes is worth a shot. I think there should be a lot fewer laws tho, so there would be a lot less need for prisons and rehabilitation.

you know I really dont understand why there are shows like this to begin with. Its like the news and what gets on the news. is anything that gets on the news really news? is any of it necessary? is it anyones business if so and so died in an accident other than the loved ones, is it anyones business that such and such family broke out in a bbq fight. . . ?

Drugs have to be legal. Alcohol is one of the most dangerous drugs there is, and the banning of it got so out of hand that the prohibition amendment had to be repealed. I don't see what is different about the other drugs. Drug prohibition is a disastrous nightmare, and it goes against individual liberty. Nobody goes out killing so they can steal the money to buy a 12 pack of beer or a pack or even a carton of cigarettes. That is because alcohol and tobacco are so inexpensive when legal that nobody has to do outrageous things to get a hold of them. Tobacco kills 1/3 of its users, but it too gets some very strange exemption. Alcohol and tobacco have immensely powerful lobbies, and that is why. Imagine what would happen if tobacco were banned. Can you imagine what people having nicotine fits would be willing to do to get their hands on tobacco? One cigarette pack worth of tobacco would cost like $50, and one crime after another would get committed so addicts could have their tobacco. A three pack a day smoker would have to come up with $150 a day to support the habit. The world of prostitution would suddenly have a lot of new members. The same is true of all of the drugs. That has a lot to do with the crime problem we now have.

We have two choices.

1. Drugs are illegal and we have the gangster problem and robbery/murder problem we now have and the drugs themselves are less pure and therefore more dangerous. Drug addicts destroy themselves any way and destroy the people around them. The government keeps spending approximately $700 per second on the war on drugs.

2. Drugs are legal and the gangs lose power (and so would the pop culture of gangster bullshit that is so huge in the U.S. today) and stop killing each other and addicts mind their own business and destroy themselves without destroying the people around them and the people they go out to mug and burglarize. The government spends nothing on the war on drugs because there isn't one.

Very importantly, if I want to sit in my living room and get high, that is my decision, not anybody else's. Nobody has any business telling me I may not do it. Freedom is a virtue.

I actually dont like drugs of any kind - I dont drink. But I agree, I mean alcohol is as bad as it gets and yet its very legal.

The way I look at it is, if the person is willing to go and commit those kinds of acts, they deserve to be shamed in front of everyone. Everyone needs to know what kind of sickos exist and who they are. They're actually going easy on these kinds of people compared to what SHOULD be done to them.

As Neruo said... I don't think it's really "helping."

Please correct me wrong here, as I am not TOO familiar with the show and I might have the wrong interpretation here... buttt...

For one, they couldn't throw one of those people in jail. They haven't actually DONE anything yet. They can't be convincted of anything, because they didn't actually do anything. Even if they were convicted for "intent" to do something (which I don't think would happen), it would obviously not be for very long. I think that national humiliation would just make them much, much more agressive/sociopathic because of how mad they are at the world. They probably wouldn't care too much about "subtletly."

saying they should be shamed in front of everyone is like saying we should have public executions

Most of these people have an "it cant happen to me" attitude.

Originally Posted by Neruo

When you previously replied to this part of what I said you sounded a bit more freaked out : )

Anyhow: Do you know how many people do Marijuana in the U.S.? A great deal. How many deaths does Marijuana cause, and how much does obesity cause? No-one has died directly from marijuana (THC) over dosage. Also, you don't think people are addicted to food? Then please, tell me: Why do SO many people fail at going on a diet? Why do so many people in America and more and more in Europe say: "I am to fat, I am going to lose weight." but fail at it? Really, food can be quite addictive.[/b]

Food can be addictive, as can anything, but if the health standards were improved we would avoid most the health risks . Unfortunately, when people get older it becomes harder to lose weight. People may be failing at losing weight because they are not including exercise or they are starving themselves and want food even more. They may be losing faith in themselves because it is hard to exercise if they already have a lot of extra pounds on them.

Originally Posted by Neruo

Also, you just assume more THC means more addiction. I doubt that's the case. THC isn't even physically addictive. Besides, if people have weaker marijuana they just smoke more. In America, most weed is smoked pure (so I have heard), In the Netherlands, where there is far more THC in the marijuana, people smoke it with tobacco. You get get just as high with low-thc weed as with high-thc weed, it just takes other dosage. It is like with alcohol, addicted to wine or addicted to whiskey, does that really matter? I doubt it.[/b]

So what you are telling me is that somebody who drinks one beer is going to be just as intoxicated as someone who drinks ten? Interesting.

Originally Posted by Neruo

Are we going to ban email too? It is worse for your mind then marijuana
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04...l_destroys_iq/[/b]

I have nothing to say to that except I believe this proves that we do not need another poison killing our minds whether it be marijuana or email, people shouldn't use either. I only use email for account registration on websites. People need to realize technology can be abused just like anything else.

Originally Posted by Neruo

what a bunch of nonsense. I know of a whole bunch of students that like to smoke marijuana in the weekends, but preform fine. HOW is it killing your mind? You are just talking American-government-scare-infomercial nonsense. Marijuana does nothing with your mind on long term, expect for an unproven small percentage of people that probably would find an other addiction.[/b]

You already answered your HOW is it killing your mind question in that link you provided me. Please tell me why the American government would lie to us about using marijuana?

Originally Posted by Neruo

Like sitting behind your TV, eating McDonalds 3 times a day, and base-jumping?[/b]

Absolutely not! Riding your bike, climbing a tree, going out with girls, enjoying your friends (actual friends, not the people you get high with who would abandon you in a heart beat), playing a video game that makes your heart beat faster and faster with adrenaline, and ofcourse, preparing yourself for dreaming.

I feel as if you think smoking marijuana is one funnest and best things you can do in your spare time. Though, I am probably wrong on this...

Originally Posted by Neruo

Do you also consider someone drinking 10 red bulls, or 25 cups of coffee and dieing in a car accident to be drug overdose?[/b]

Yes, actually I would but that rarely (if ever) happens

Originally Posted by Neruo

How different is people getting addicted to sky-diving from people getting addicted to marijuana? Both rarely happen. If anything, all you named is an argument FOR drug legalization, so you don't give the group that is most likely to get addicted access anymore: Children. Name a reason why not to legalize LSD, a very safe, studies show, harmless, un-addictive drug. Drugs should be regulated, not forbidden, like sky-diving, car-racing and base-jumping is.

There still isn't a reason not to legalize marijuana, -and now I have learned, LSD, XTC and some other drugs found to be safer then tobacco-, since people are going to use it anyway.[/b]

Actually, I did make an argument FOR legalizing marijuana if you will read my previous posts again. In fact, it is quite similar to the one you are making now This argument is not about other drugs so I really don't care what is said about them. The reason I brought marijuana up is because if they legalize marijuana, it could solve certain problems this country has with drugs. I chose marijuana because it is one of the less harmful drugs.

Edit: Pew, looooooong post. Please just read it, and like I say later on: You don't really have to respond to everything, that would take ages.

Originally Posted by CymekSniper

Food can be addictive, as can anything, but if the health standards were improved we would avoid most the health risks . Unfortunately, when people get older it becomes harder to lose weight. People may be failing at losing weight because they are not including exercise or they are starving themselves and want food even more. They may be losing faith in themselves because it is hard to exercise if they already have a lot of extra pounds on them.[/b]

What are you saying here? 'If health standards were improved'? Are you saying that America doesn't have proper heath standards? It is personal choice: If you can choose between an apple and some spinach or a fatty hamburger, people choose the hamburger.

Besides, everyone that is overweight can stop eating unhealthy, and start living healthy. By far most that want to stop being unhealthy, just can't break the habit of being unhealthy. Honestly, don't you think more people can not stop eating unhealthy, even if they are overweight and know it, then people that realize they smoke to much marijuana can stop doing it?

Point being: Why be against legalization of Marijuana, and not against addictive food? In all aspects, a ban on fatty, sugary foods would be better for humanity: Less people would die, economy would be better (way less medical bills for society), fat people often aren't as happy as healthy people.


Cardiovascular is the number one cause of death in western countries.

Ban McDonalds? I rather see people be properly educated, and been given the freedom to make their own choice. Same with drugs.

So what you are telling me is that somebody who drinks one beer is going to be just as intoxicated as someone who drinks ten? Interesting.[/b]

Didn't you read what I said correctly? I said that if you take 5 beers, you are getting just as drunk as with 1 glass of whiskey. Also, if I drink beer, I drink a whole lot more then I drink whiskey. Also, I can get as shit-faced with both beverages (because I stop liking whiskey and such after a few glasses, really makes me puke).

Get the simile? If I wanted to get stoned, I could either smoke some good weed, with like 15% THC, or bake a cake with a whole lot of crappy 5% THC weed in it, or smoke some more of the weaker-weed. Fact remains that THC (active substance in marijuana) isn't physically addictive. Also, if people want to get stoned, they will take as much as they want. 'Weak' marijuana isn't going to stop them.

I have nothing to say to that except I believe this proves that we do not need another poison killing our minds whether it be marijuana or email, people shouldn't use either. I only use email for account registration on websites. People need to realize technology can be abused just like anything else.[/b]

I have nothing to say to that except I believe this proves that everything we do can be another poison killing our minds whether it be unhealthy food, tv, dangerous sports or email, people should use everything with moderation. People need to realize technology can be enjoyed and abused just like anything else.

Ha.

Also, are you seriously saying we should make email as illegal as marijuana? And TV? Did you know that watching tv makes your brain as in-active as quite a few drugs do? Ban that too?

You already answered your HOW is it killing your mind question in that link you provided me. Please tell me why the American government would lie to us about using marijuana?[/b]

It started with Hemp, a plant great for ropes, clothes, paper and many many many other things besides getting high, being to competitive to paper-manufacturers. Banning it had some sort of economical advantage.

Also, Reagan if I recall correctly needed something to divert attention from all the shit that was going wrong. Declaring 'drugs as the US' number 1 enemy' or something.

And, are you saying that it doesn't score? My conservative grandparents would certainly vote for someone that sais"We ban all drugs.". They would Never vote on someone that says: "we should give people the choice to use drugs, and get drugs out of criminality." They are deaf to the last part. In their minds, drugs are all bad. With fear drugs have been made 'taboo' or something to Hate in the minds of all people.

I get really annoyed if people say "drugs this, drugs that' without realizing that alcohol is a drug in every way. An anti-drug person drinking alcohol is pure hypocrisy.

I saw a really interesting documentary about hemp. About the actual plant, not about the stoner-shit. Quite interesting. I couldn't find it.

Absolutely not! Riding your bike, climbing a tree, going out with girls, enjoying your friends (actual friends, not the people you get high with who would abandon you in a heart beat), playing a video game that makes your heart beat faster and faster with adrenaline, and ofcourse, preparing yourself for dreaming.[/b]

lol. I wasn't taking about 'going out with girls' at all, how the hell did you drag that in here? I was talking about dangarous, fun things. What is the REAL difference between riding a motorcycle and smoking some marijuana? Seriously?! Both are dangarous, a lot of people get hooked a bit on both. Both are a bit dangerous, and a bunch of fun.

Also, you are extremely misguided. Seriously, the biggest bullshit you said till now is to think that 'stoner friends' are all a bunch of cruel assholes. How the FUCK do you get such a retarded idea? You are saying that without any reason at all. Maybe heroin or cocaine addicts would be such assholes. Besides that, I like to do drugs like alcohol or marijuana WITH my friend, they aren't my friends BECAUSE we do that. Where do you get the idea.

I feel as if you think smoking marijuana is one funnest and best things you can do in your spare time. Though, I am probably wrong on this...[/b]

Yes, quite. I don't even like it that much. However I hate people being hypocritical wanting to ban it, while it is less dangerous then many, many legal things. It is a fact that there are many things that are more addictive and dangerous then marijuana, like alcohol, tobacco and other things. You never hear anyone wanting to ban those. Pure hypocrite's.

Do you want to know how YOU sound? You sound like you have this very warped idea inside your head that everyone that likes to smoke marijuana once a month or few weeks -like most people do-, is a lazy, stupid, unmotivated, friendless, addicted junkie. I don't know where you get that idea. Fuck, even my mother knows better.

Yes, actually I would but that rarely (if ever) happens[/b]

Research shows that caffeine makes you a crappy driver. Ban caffeine? Research also shows that aggressive music makes you a crappy driver. Ban aggressive music in cars?

Be consistent. Why only be against marijuana, not against other dangerous, mentally 'addictive' things?

Actually, I did make an argument FOR legalizing marijuana if you will read my previous posts again. In fact, it is quite similar to the one you are making now This argument is not about other drugs so I really don't care what is said about them. The reason I brought marijuana up is because if they legalize marijuana, it could solve certain problems this country has with drugs. I chose marijuana because it is one of the less harmful drugs.[/b]

I am sorry, I forgot you were for marijuana. I guess everyone, even critics, can see that getting it out of the criminal circuit would only have positive sides.

However, you still have some weird 'grudge' against marijuana...


Okay, this post is getting to long, you don't have to reply to every single part, just read it. I do have some questions I would like you to answer me:


-Shouldn't people have the choice to choose what they want to do with their own bodies? I am talking about doing something that does not put anyone in danger. I am not just talking about drugs, but everyone that can hurt only that person. Like sky-diving or something like that.

-What is wrong with LSD and XTC? Studies prove it aren't dangerous drugs at all comparing to alcohol can tobacco. Especially LSD for instance. LSD seriously isn't addictive. From what I heard, most people say "that was great and wonderful, but I am not going to do that for at least a year". Are you also for legalizing LSD?

-Where did you get the idea marijuana is super-bad? Some people some a little to much, but what about all the people that occasionally smoke it. Do you know how much people in college smoke marijuana? Don't think there aren't tens of thousands of doctors, lawyers, managers that never smoked some marijuana in college or university.

-Have you ever tries it yourself ? I garuantee you that you will not get addicted, or that your IQ will drop, or that you will become schizophrenic. However, I am sure that you probably will remain this way, (thus never try it) unless if right now you are below 18 or something. Drugs really have a bad name in the media and such, while if used responsibly it can bring joy.

ha, I just remember my biology teacher saying that ("if used responsibly it can also be fun.". Back then I was like: "Omg?! He is promoting drugz!1 Drugs R bad!!1". While actually he was just stating a fact.