Chris Hanson on MSNBC's Catch a Predator comes clean tonight...

[Dawggie]

The "14" year old is really an 18 year old "model and dancer."

And okay, we should not question the motives of this programme.

Now. You like democrats and you are single and the man/woman of your dreams typed at you for several months,,,

You finally decide to show up at his/her house to tell him/her that there's no way...

Then you are busted.


But this is America and the truth will come out!







right?

[MalloyLiberal]

1. Well the guy who showed up butt naked was not trying to say no

[NNN0LHI]

56. He was just there to "mentor" a confused kid

:crazy:

Don

[meowomon]

2. Please!

How can anyone defend some of those vile men who want to rape a 14 year old? Yes, even with consent by the 14 year old, it is rape when anyone not in his/her teens wants to rape a 14 year old.

[Naturyl]

Good picture...

I noticed the resemblance to Bundy in that old Bush picture long ago, before anyone pointed it out. You can't miss it... <shudders>

[Dawggie]

8. Ummmmm.... That's Kafka.

Are you where you intended to be?

[Drunken Irishman]

11. He's talking about meowomon's sig with Bundy's picture next to Bush's.

[FunkyLeprechaun]

14. Sorry to hijack

But I absolutely love the button in your sig line... where can I get it?

I'm Irish as well and just heard that Barack Obama has a bit of Mick in him, whoo hoo!

[Drunken Irishman]

19. No prob, I stole it off a great website for people like us.

www.irishamericansforobama.com

[FunkyLeprechaun]

25. Can't seem to get on the website

I'll try again later but thank you for giving me the link!

[Dawggie]

20. Doh! For some reasom, my browser (firefox) doesn't pick up that pic. n/t

[MrSlayer]

3. Yes, let's defend perverts and pedophiles by all means.

Hanson should walk out with a shotgun when these fucks show up and smoke em.

[harmonicon]

5. absolutely - murder is totally cool!!

Your reasoning here is really something.

[varkam]

12. Ostensibly, murder is worse than attempted internet solicitation of a minor.

Though some here certainly disagree.

[harmonicon]

62. which is worse has nothing to do with it

It's not as if these guys are taped after having raped a child and are about to get away. One crime does not cancel out another.

[MrSlayer]

26. Yes, I realize this line of thinking is unpopular here.

But I really don't care. My beliefs are in line with the Democratic party on nearly everything.

[Bluebear]

38. No, they're not unpopular, they're psychopathic.

[High Plains]

66. I didn't know murderous vigilantism was part of the party platform.

[Forrest Greene]

69. Good Boy!

Sit!

[liberalnurse]

28. I would classify it as Protecting our Children....

Pedophiles are violent criminals, make no mistake here. Hanson catches them in their "stalking prey posture".

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11152602/page/2/



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12619066/

[NoBorders]

83. A small portion of them are violent

But about 95 percent of them are not violent predators. Most are not violent per se. I'm afraid I've been on the receiving end of one of them, and thus have had an interest in this subject.

You're just a victim of the media creating the impression that all pedophiles are sociopathic kidnapper/murderers. Unfortunately, this hids the most prevelant danger, which is that child sex abusers are nice people--adult authority figures--that the child knows. This is the true threat.

[varkam]

91. Exactly.

Seeing as how the vast majority of sexual abuse cases are perpetrated by either family members of the victim or by people known and trusted by the victim and their family, this focus on internet predators seems misguided. That is not to say that there is no such thing, or that resources should not be devoted to catching them, but only that the focus is woefully misplaced. Much more needs to be done in regards to education and, consequently, prevention of sexual abuse.

[NoBorders]

92. Thank You

I agree with everything you said, especially the prevention part.

[RFKJrNews]

49. Yikes

You don't by any chance, happen to work for Perverted Justice?

I'm all for pedophiles going to jail, but strongly feel that no activist organization or TV news producer has the right to tell law enforcement how to do their jobs.

Hanson & co. have been caught doing exactly this - anybody see the "Predator" outtakes from the Murphy, TX disaster? Who knew so called "news" programs could sink this low for ratings?

Speaking of what's best for children, I wonder how it affects kids in the "Predator" sting-house neighborhoods when they get to watch SWAT teams running around with guns drawn over and over all day long? That's got to be pretty traumatic for a 5 year old.

Apparently, the neighbors ain't too pleased when MSNBC come to town, bringing predators INTO the neighborhood where their children play.

[Marrah_G]

77. Yes we should never capture criminal because it could capturing them could traumatize a child.....

:eyes:

[Naturyl]

4. The show is stupid and self-righteous.

I support lawbreakers being caught, but to make a low-brow "gotcha" show out of it for the public's self-righteous amusement is not the sort of thing I'm into. Some of the guys they bust are major creeps, but that doesn't necessarily make the show's methods or motivations right.

In my view, its a simple-minded show for simple-minded people.

[Hannah Bell]

21. It's....

the five-minute hate in the flesh.

half the programming on tv these days is the presentation of scapegoat figures to mock or hate: a little shot of superiority & solidarity for lives that otherwise might lack same.

[Naturyl]

40. I agree, that's pretty much it

And I'm not "defending" these guys that get busted (don't you hate having to always make that disclaimer), but the fact remains that evolution doesn't see things the way civilized people do. From the evolutionary perspective, young females are fully developed in reproductive terms. Of course, that's no excuse whatsoever. Our society sets reasonable standards and these guys are idiots (and potentially criminals) for letting their drives overrule their better judgment. They do deserve to be busted. But making a dramatic show of it just feeds into the sort of mentality that loves to gloat over the failings of others in order to feel vastly superior.

[DrDan]

31. well . . then change channels and go back to your American Idol

[Naturyl]

32. You talking to me?

For your sake I hope not, because that's about as far from the mark as you could be.

American Idol? LOL.

[DrDan]

34. I certainly was . . .

Why do feel you can sit in judgement of other's choice of shows (and do not assume you can judge my choice from my statements).

If someone wants to watch it . . . then there is a market for it. If it also gets some pedophiles off the street . . . then it has been successful.

What give you the right to call any viewers of this show "simple" or of a "simple mind".

That is sooooooo republican.

[Naturyl]

37. Okay, fair enough

I should have stopped at calling the show itself simple-minded. I have no way of knowing the motivations of all viewers (although one can certainly reasonably extrapolate the motives of some). But I did overstep, and for that I apologize.

[DrDan]

60. well thank you! That is so refreshing.

[annabanana]

53. (voyeur TV.. a peep show for the masses). . . . . .n/t

[Drunken Irishman]

6. So you're saying it's ok for a 35 year old to have a 14 year old girl be the woman of his dreams?

Whether the actor is 14 or not, isn't the issue here. The men talking to this girl are under the impression that she is in fact 14.

I'm in my early 20s and I can't even THINK about dating anyone that's younger than 18, let alone 14.

Gross.

[Dawggie]

7. What I'm saying is that possibly no 14 year old would have tempted the

sicko and he would have matured and married the girl of his dreams and found no need o his earlier fantasies.

These guys are all sick fucks but they never consummated the act.

Personally, I think entrapment.


It's as if you liked marijuana and someone here kept offering to sell you some and you finally decided to buy a 1/4 oz.

[Drunken Irishman]

10. But you don't know if they would have or not.

The fact that they had a change of heart doesn't mean shit when they're caught. It's typical guilty remorse. Oh well I'm busted, I'm going to lie and tell them I didn't REALLY plan on doing anything, even though I brought a condom, a porno and some lube. We all do it, we get busted and make an excuse to try and save our ass.

I'm not condoning the show, because I think it has some faults, but these people obviously are tempted enough to meet a 14 year old, even if it's an 18 year old actress. That's pretty scary, knowing they very well could try this again and actually FIND a 14 year old. And if these men are willing to have sex with a 14 year old, what else are they willing to do?

If anything, the show at least puts some doubt into people's minds when they're trolling the internet. At least I hope it does, because frankly, these people scare the shit out of me.

[Dawggie]

15. "They would have or not" is a thought crime.

For instance: You are 14 I'm 50

You invite me over for sex.

I come over.

I yell through the door about how stupid you are for asking me over.

I'm confronted by Chris Hanson

I'm arrested for the cameras.


I go to court.

Facts:

You are really 18
I didn't have sex with you
You approached me... I wasn't "looking for it."
You misrepresented yourself
You cannot prove the earlier conversations actually came from the alleged "perp."



Sorry, thought crimes are not punishable by law as much as the Republicans would like them to be.

[eShirl]

16. there's your mistake right there

"For instance: You are 14 I'm 50

You invite me over for sex.

I come over."

duh

[Dawggie]

22. "I come over." How can you truly know the intent? n/t

[Dorian Gray]

46. Exactly...

why in the hell would you show up if you didn't intend to have sex?

STUPIDITY?

[Drunken Irishman]

17. But there is intent.

The fact you showed up is intent enough to be charged for the crime. That is the law.

There was no act, but the intent was clear, especially if you show up. I have no problem with that type of law, because if you're taking the time to actually talk about a sexual encounter with a 14 year old and you're 50, there are some problems -- ESPECIALLY if you show up. It doesn't matter if you use an excuse, saying you didn't REALLY want to have sex, you still took the time to show up after a meeting was planned.

NOW I do not believe we should just throw them in prison, or put them back on the streets. We need to get these people some serious mental help, because it is not normal to think that way. They are sick and should be treated for it. That doesn't, however, excuse their behavior.

[Dawggie]

23. How in the hell can you know the intent?

The intent may have been to tell the 14 year old to change her behaviour.

There is no fucking way that one can know the intent by a knock on the door.

[Drunken Irishman]

24. Of course you can.

If you watch, they're asked to always bring something the kid wants. Whether it's a condom, soda or beer. It shows that there is an intent there to do what they talked about.

The problem with what you're saying is that no one would ever be guilty then, unless they were caught in the act. Which kinda defeats the purpose, since, you know, it already HAPPENED! So if you're a person that preys on young children, you can now always just use the excuse that you just wanted to tell her that you weren't interested. Or that you didn't want to have sex. It doesn't matter, I guess, that you brought a condom with you...

What idiot drives to a 14 year old's house, after discussing having illegal sex, just to tell them they didn't want to do it anymore? I call bullshit. If that's their excuse, fine, but they should be sent to court. If the judge buys it and lets them free, so be it, I guess, but I'm not in favor of cops just releasing some creepy fuck that set up a meet with a young girl and only weasled out of it after getting caught by saying he didn't really plan on doing anything.

[riverdeep]

35. I'm thinking you've never watched this show.

During the internet conversations the 'girl', or 'boy' as the case may be, tells the perp to bring something specific. Often condoms and liquor. Someone that is bringing condoms and liquor to someone they think is a 14 year old isn't doing it for show and tell.

[Dorian Gray]

47. You can tell the intent

by the catalogued internet conversation you had with the girl. Which they have records of and read aloud to the perpetrators:

You like Blow Jobs?

Kewl!

LOL!

I'll give you a blow-J!

Awesome!

CU Tonite.

Buy buy!

[Marrah_G]

79. Oh bullshit.... if any of them were concerned for the child they would be talking to her parents

NOT going to meet her alone.

[RFKJrNews]

51. Defining the new normal

Maybe I'm just too normal for primetime, because the notion of getting it on with a teenager just doesn't appeal to me. But...

...is it any wonder that so many grownups have these thoughts/urges when everything in our culture is geared to sexualize youth?

When you're constantly bombarded with images of 14 year-old rock stars dancing around in their underwear, wouldn't you begin to think this is the new normal?

Ever check out the female teen apparel section of your local department store? Even the children's section? Skimpy halter tops and miniskirts being marketed to 6 year olds? What other motivation could there possibly be for encouraging kids to dress this way?

[DrDan]

29. these go beyond "thought" crimes

Most admit on the show that they did have the earlier conversations. And they did go to the effort of showing up to consummate their intentions.

And they were looking for it. Exactly why do you think they were online involved with these conversations.

And that is enough to have committed a crime, a felony, in the states where these are filmed.

I have yet to see any "get off" - even when they went to court. They are all convicted. Many of the sentences are much less than if actual contact had been made - for example 6 to 18 months in jail, but they were convicted.


imo - your "don't blame me" reasoning is a shining example of the felonious republican's misdeeds of the past few years - Larry Craig's toe-tapping, for example.

[miles 2 go]

50. that's probably why only about half of them are prosecuted

it's the ones who admit to it. The ones who fight it probably get off. I think the girl may legally have to be 18 to do the show. I don't think they would be allowed to get a real 14yr old involved in that stuff.

[demgurl]

74. Actually, before you ever left your house you committed a crime.

Coming over to say you have changed your mind does nothing to negate the fact that the 'girl' made sure you knew she was 13 or 14 and you sent her a picture of your penis.

The crimes these perps commit have nothing to do with coming over to the person's house. The crime is ALWAYS committed by coming on to an under age person in a chatroom.

The 'child' never comes onto the adult and always makes sure to disclose their age.

Under the law these folks committed the crime while at their computer.

I believe the problem you have with TCP is different than the problem you have with the laws in this country.

Does TCP sensationalize the subject? Perhaps and I can understand you being upset if you feel that way.

When it comes to entrapment I have heard a lot of people echo sentiment about thought crimes. You need to address if it is a thought crime. In our country we try to coddle minors since they are the most innocent and defenseless of us all. The laws on the books state that if you talk sexually, to a minor, over the phone, mail or internet that you are corrupting that minor and you are breaking a law. This is the law. If you believe that when a grown man is told that, in no uncertain terms, that the child is under the age of consent and he still graphically talks about the size of his penis and what he wants to do to that child is entrapment then you need to lobby to have the laws changed. (the above example I have seen on TV, by the way. These perps do describe themselves and what they want to do)

You may not agree with the age of consent but a line, to protect children, must be drawn somewhere so that the law is clear. Where we draw that line is often hard to tell and so the law steps in. The line has to drawn somewhere but we are all welcome to talk to our reps and have them repeal the law.

In any case, the whole entrapment thing does not fall under Dateline and what they do. It is what the law states is illegal. They have arrested several people who did not show at the house because that is what the law says.

[DrDan]

27. well . . . it is only entrapment of the person was otherwise unwilling

and imo none of these are otherwise unwilling. They are on the internet with one goal in mind - find a young girl, or boy, willing to become their prey.

As is happening, they should be thrown in jail, and their identity publicized to help prevent a reoccurrence.

[Marrah_G]

78. They didn't consumate it because THIS time it was a sting

What if it wasn't. What if it was a real 14 year old. He would have gotten away with it and gone on to hurt more girls.

[varkam]

9. I don't understand what the decoy has to do with anything...

other than the fact that she will (reportedly) call hesitant targets and beg them to come over, the decoy seems irrelevant to me. There are problems to be had with the show, but the fact that the "14 year-old" is really 18 is not one of those problems (in fact, it would be a much better problem if the decoy was actually 14).

[Naturyl]

13. I always figured the decoy was an adult anyway

No way NBC would risk lawsuits and bad PR by actually endangering a child, even for great ratings from the "smoke em with a shotgun" crowd. Of course its an adult actress.

[book_worm]

57. they have always showed the decoys and the people corresponding

as over 18 that is no revelation.

[Dawggie]

18. Thinking within the realms of Juris Prudence...

the fact that one person trolling for another that is consummated only by a supposed intention...

[H2O Man]

33. Nonsense

[Ravy]

81. If you buy a bag of sugar from a cop who tells you it is cocaine, was a crime committed?

Not defending the predator's actions, but just looking at the issue in terms of entrapment.

What would REALLY be interesting if some guy posing as a 21 year old talks to an 18 yr old undercover who encourages him and he shows up to the house and *he* is really 16. Do they take Chris Hansen to jail then?

[Wizard777]

87. Yes, the cop has conspired to sell or sold a look a like substance and should be arrested. lol

That may have already happened with a minor soliciting them. I've heard that there are child pornography charges against some of the members. Some of the pervs will send nude photos. If one of the pervs sending nude photo's to them turn out to be a minor. They have received, stored, and are in possession of child pornography and are subject to arrest.

[varkam]

89. Sure: attempted purchase of a controlled substance.

As far as I am aware, the substance of the crime in these internet solicitation cases rests with the mens rea. Whether or not there is an actual minor victim appears to be irrelevant, though many jurisdictions inaccurately (IMO) charge and indict these individuals with internet solicitation of a minor though no minor was involved. IOW, the correct charge should be attempted internet solicitation.

Courts have routinely upheld these solicitation convicts on the basis that if an individual drives to a house on the promise of sex with a minor, then that is sufficient to demonstrate a criminal intent on the part of the defendant (at least, as far as I understand it). My guess would be that it would be similiar if someone attempted to purchase what they thought was cocaine from an undercover officer.

[DrDan]

30. uh . . . they have stated the age of the young child on each show

this is not news

[myrna minx]

36. I've only watched the show a couple of times, and I knew the decoys were at least 18.

I don't know why the OP finds this to be an explosive revelation.

[riverdeep]

39. This show serves a purpose.

It's fairly exploitive, but that's just Network TV these days. It does actually catch some freaks, it does make life a little harder out there for peds on the internet, and it does bring some more awareness to clueless parents.

One of the deleterious effects might be that people start to believe the internet is the main source of pedophilia. They should actually be looking much closer to home.

[Naturyl]

41. I agree the show does have some use as a deterrent

I'm not a big fan (for reasons I outlined above), but one good thing that may come out of it is that some guys will be scared to try anything.

It didn't stop the idiot who they busted in the same city twice, though... lol.

[KharmaTrain]

42. Rule One In Online Meetings: In A Public Place

I've known too many adults who play online...looking for love or lust or whatever it is they're typing away for. In a couple cases, I've had some friends meet their current partners this way, but most of it is almost school yard crushes and games. Anyone can be anyone they want to be behind a keyboard and a guy or gal with a good line of bullshit can "do well" in this new meat market.

One thing that's almost a golden rule among people I chat with who meet others is that they NEVER meet for the first time at an residence but in a public place...a restaurant...just in case "Mr. Wonderful" turns out to be Freddy Krueger. Inviting a stranger over...especially a horny one...is all but asking for trouble.

I have problems with the Nansen program as it exploits these crimes for ratings, but I don't condemn the concept of setting up stings and trying to catch online perps. Most know that cybering with an underage child is illegal and from what I've read about Perverted Justice, they do set up these stings in chat rooms that are set aside for teens. Sadly, it doesn't take much as I am sure there a lot that's going on. When my daughter was younger, she constantly got hit on by older men and I doubt that Yahoo and AOL have really done much to stop this from going on.

I could see this as an occasional program...done on a quarterly basis as it does remind people...especially parents...of the sleeze that can be tapping to your children at the other end of the puter and to alert them that this is still a problem. However, I don't see making Hansen a star or glorifying a TV show.

[spanone]

43. i hate this fucking show.....

[Little Star]

44. This is really weak.

They have to have a decoy at the house that is eighteen or over.

Who in their right mind is going to have a real fourteen y.o. put in that position. It is dangerous and it would be really stupid to use a real 14 year old.

You're argument fails on so many levels, that I don't know if I could list them all.

Those sickos that show up at the house think they are meeting an tween 12-15 yo. for sex. That's the real point.

[Dorian Gray]

45. How many of those men

show up at the house to tell them that there is

"No Way?"


I don't like the show because it makes me really sad. But, I don't think that we should feel that those arranging meet ups with someone who they believe to be 14 are the wronged parties.

[JerseygirlCT]

48. I can't watch that show. Leaves me feeling ill. nt

[seabeyond]

52. i hate this show. something to be looked at, 18 yr old posed as 14

tempting the men. this is retarded in odd psychological ways and shouldn't be denied. it is easy to say, well she says she is 14 so that should be enough for the men. but the woman is 18, physically, mentally, and emotionally. that is a reality. as she "poses" as 14. so the feel being projected to the men even in a pose is 18 and it is to draw men. the men are drawn. even though verbally they are getting the number 14, she is not, that is the reality.

i dont like this show. i dont like it as entertainment. i feel the energy of the show and using as entertainment is damaging to our society.... i will never stand up for these men because the reality is the "girl" said 14 and the men have the responsibility, but.... i am clever enough to see the manipulation of these men in so many ways.

i think it is wrong all over the place.

one of the things bothering me was having a 14 yr old girl playing at this game for peoples weekly entertainment. i could not see how they could get away with using a 14 yr old. that is answered, they cannot

so we are going after these men for going after children when in reality it is an adult.

[bettyellen]

54. guys seek out kids on the net in kids only rooms- yet you think they know she's an adult?

seriously? it's the gals fault for entrapping them?

[seabeyond]

58. you skipped over so much of what i say to tell me this is what i say

no.... i did not say what you posted. not even. not kinda. not a little. not sorta

[bettyellen]

82. "tempting the men" was the clearest part, so u think it's a fluke they go to kid's chat room

they didn;t go there to ehem.. be with kids... just bad luck a "temptress" lured them, huh? that's what it sounds like you are saying. but if i am wrong. please. do. clarify.
what is this about the 18 yr old spirit coming through. it's facinating, bizarre theory... they subconciously know she's an adilt because she's so sexy? so they are subconciously doing something totally legal, DESPITE their concious attempts at befriending minors?
Pls do, go on.

[book_worm]

55. I'm surprised there are some on DU who support these perverts

who think they are corresponding with 13 and 14 year olds and send suggestive photos of themselves, then come to their homes when their parents are supposed to be gone carrying alcohol and condoms. What do you think they want? yeah, just talk. It makes me wonder why some of the people who seem to support those guys do so.

[seabeyond]

59. i think there is a difference from support, and seeing that possibly there

might be a little more to this to discuss. but bottom lining it to all that look into this is "supporting" makes it so much easier to dismiss any of it. IF you are suggesting my post is in support of these men, which i specifically and clearly say, fuck them for making the choice they did.

[ecstatic]

61. Her true age doesn't matter; What matters is the age he thought she was nt

[WinkyDink]

63. Minors are not used by authorities to catch criminals. It's SOP.

[Wizard777]

71. Actually they are. They are used in Cigarette and alcohol stings.

They will also use them as drug informants and some of those minor informants have been killed.

[Beelzebud]

64. There is a reason the police don't instigate these type of stings.

If the police were to use the tactics that To Catch a Predator uses, they'd lose in court because of entrapment.

Thats why you see no law enforcement in the house, talking on the computer, etc.

[JBoy]

65. Are you sure about that?

I think the police would do it (more) if they had sufficient resources.

[Beelzebud]

67. Positive. If police set them up they're clear-cut entrapment cases.

You'll NEVER see a law enforcement agency conduct a sting like these are done.

[JBoy]

70. I don't see what's different about this type of operation

from other stings that police run - posing as drug sellers or prostitutes.

[Beelzebud]

73. Because those don't take a couple of weeks to set up.

You stop your car at a street corner to buy crack, or a hooker, and it's an instant thing. You asked for something, and they nail you for it.

Perverted Justice goes in to chat rooms and talks to people for sometimes weeks before they get them to agree to hook up.

It's not a fact they hide either. On the show I've seen many references to conversations that take place weeks before the sting operation. They entice fools into doing something stupid, even if it takes weeks to get the job done.

There is a huge difference.

Now, are all of these guys just innocent entrapped victims? hell no. However I have watched the show a couple of times where I got an uneasy feeling that they manipulated someone into doing something they wouldn't have done unless propositioned.

[Wizard777]

86. I'm not even sure Entrapment still exists. It used to be that if a cop tried to sell someone drugs.

It was entrapment if the cop initiated the sale. Now they call that a reverse sting.

[Marrah_G]

80. It isn't entrapment.

[varkam]

90. Police *do* engage in these types of operations indepdendent of the media.

Provided that certain guidelines are followed, it is not entrapment. For instance, if it is the police officer that first makes a sexual advance then that would be considered entrapment by most courts.

[Forrest Greene]

68. I Question The Motives Of This Program n/t

[Forrest Greene]

72. It's Too Bad The Entrappers

...who run this totally slimeball program don't have the guts or the integrity to run their contemptible little stings on crooked politicians, dirty cops, embezzling CEOs, hate-filled, drug-addicted preachers, & the like.

[Heidi]

75. The producers of this show don't give a shit about kids or pedophiles, by the way.

If they did, they'd tell you the likely punishment upon conviction, the treatment measures mandated (or only available) to those convicted, they'd be absolutely transparent about the conviction rate of their program, and they'd make sure to be very, very upfront and transparent about their processes, including the money they pay each "project" to Perverted Justice.

This is about ratings, folks. Nothing more.

[Marrah_G]

76. If you are an adult going to a teenagers house to meet them alone...

...to "save" them.... you are a liar or a total moron.

These guys show up with alcohol, drugs, condoms and more.

I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

[demgurl]

84. I feel the same about this as I do about the possibility of cheating

on my husband.

As a responsible adult I do not put myself in such situations. I actually do go to a child oriented web site (the type of web site these perps have to go into in order to find these underage kids) My kids like the games and they get points for them. I happen to be better than them so they ask me, almost everyday, to play for them. One minor contacted me, said I was hot and asked if I would be his girlfriend. Besides the fact that I am married, I know underage kids are illegal and I have no interest. Wanting to be their friend is only asking for trouble and so I immediately put an end to his private messages.

I feel the same way about marriage. My husband does not mind if I have male friends but I tell him I choose not to since a relationship of that kind COULD lead to something inappropriate. He insists it is fine and I tell him that if you never put yourself in such a situation then nothing can happen.

Even if we are talking outside of the PJ realm and there is some child wandering into an adult site, soon as that adult finds out that that minor is underage, they should go ahead and cut off all communication immediately. There is no reason for a 50 year old man to keep talking to a minor and sending her pictures, etc.....

The bottom line is do not do something that is against the law and you should be prettty safe from arrest. The best way to stay away from that stuff is not to be anywhere near it if you can help it.

[Dave From Canada]

85. I've watched that several times, and the decoy the use is always at least 18. They have to be by

law. It's no excuse for someone sending naked pictures of themselves, or going over to the house of somone who they believe is under-age.

[nick303]

88. A+ for your performance on this entire thread.

Great to see people with a sick but subtle sense of humor. Would read again.