Officers troll Internet to reel in sex predators

Keep up the good police work. It's great knowing the police are trying to keep our kids safe.

Thank you!!!

I have mixed feelings about this. This is similar to what I've seen on a Dateline-type program where the detectives posed as children to lure the perps into an actual meeting.

While I certainly don't condone child molestation, it does not appear that "molestation" is what is being prevented here. The detectives are simply providing an opportunity for a "crime of opportunity". The fact stated that many of those apprehended are first time offenders would seem to support this.

I assume that "Jamie" would have to appear (at least) willing, if not outright enticing. That contradicts the term "predator" that is used so often in this article.

Once again, I don't condone sexual relationships with minors, consensual or not. But the fact remains that there are likely many people who would never consider "molesting" a child, that are lured into a situation they feel is consensual. The detectives are adding fuel to a spark that may not have fueled into a fire otherwise. It smells like entrapment to me.

I don't deny that there are true predators online. Too bad there isn't a better way to catch them. Parental monitoring of the child's activities online would go a long way towards prevention.

Humbert Humbert wrote:

I have mixed feelings about this. This is similar to what I've seen on a Dateline-type program where the detectives posed as children to lure the perps into an actual meeting.
While I certainly don't condone child molestation, it does not appear that "molestation" is what is being prevented here. The detectives are simply providing an opportunity for a "crime of opportunity". The fact stated that many of those apprehended are first time offenders would seem to support this.
I assume that "Jamie" would have to appear (at least) willing, if not outright enticing. That contradicts the term "predator" that is used so often in this article.
Once again, I don't condone sexual relationships with minors, consensual or not. But the fact remains that there are likely many people who would never consider "molesting" a child, that are lured into a situation they feel is consensual. The detectives are adding fuel to a spark that may not have fueled into a fire otherwise. It smells like entrapment to me.
I don't deny that there are true predators online. Too bad there isn't a better way to catch them. Parental monitoring of the child's activities online would go a long way towards prevention.

I understand what your saying. I won't let my ten year old grandson have his own email address, because I am afraid. I have my computer in the living room and he isn't allowed on it, without me or granpa in the room monitoring things. Theres so much going on the world and its not all that good. There definetly should be should be more parents or grandparents monitoring what kids are doing. We need the police to do what their doing to protect the kids, because I really don't think alot of parents care or the parents are off working and they trust the kids to know better.

Sandy Roos wrote:

Keep up the good police work. It's great knowing the police are trying to keep our kids safe.
Thank you!!!

A subjective comparison of Germany and the United States

Germany has extremely strict privacy laws: the supreme court has acknowledged a right to "informational self-determination" and everyone storing personal data about others has to obtain consent from these persons, has to allow them access to their records, and can use the data only for the purpose they were originally collected for. The federal government and all states have privacy ombudsmen who take citizen's complaints and make sure that the privacy laws are enforced and extended where appropriate. Germans value their privacy highly and essentially everybody agrees with these laws.
So do I, and it is absolutely frightening to me how privacy rights are constantly violated in the US. Credit card companies keep databases about your purchases and sell the information; supermarkets issue frequent-buyer cards in order to track your preferences; if you buy a TV set in an electronics store, they ask for your name and address; the post office sells information about who moved where; the Internet set-top box WebTV dials up Microsoft every night to upload information about your web surfing habits; automatic face recognition cameras are used in sports arenas and casinos; surveillance cameras are common in public city areas etc. etc.

The US has very strong access-to-information laws. If the government collected it, and it does not affect vital national interests, then you can file a request to see it. Emails of the president, phone bills of the governor, lists of all issued driver's licenses: everything is fair game. These laws enjoy wide public support.

Interestingly, neither is privacy a big issue in the US nor is access to information a topic in Germany. Clearly, the two issues are opposite ends of a spectrum - you can't have both at the same time. Maybe this difference between the countries is a symptom of the fact that Germans tend to distrust big business, while Americans tend to distrust big government. Quite predictably, the consequence is that corporations are more powerful and government is less powerful in the US than in Germany. When Americans need a quick example of government gone bad, German history serves well; when Germans need a quick example of corporate excesses, American businesses are often used.

In one area, the US approach is far superior to the German (or European) one. All information and data collected or produced by government research facilities is released into the public domain, without any copyright. Be it images from the Hubble space telescope, sequence from the human genome, satellite images of environmental degradation, or cancer statistics: in America they are all completely free to the public for any purpose whatsoever. European governments are much more protective and usually give out data like these only for non-profit research purposes under specific licenses, while retaining full copyright.

The term "freedom" is ubiquitous in the political and public debate of the US; it is indeed a very important, if ill-defined, concept for ordinary Americans. The quotation "Whoever is willing to give up essential freedoms in order to gain some temporary security deserves neither" is repeated over and over again; I'm sure that there is at least one usenet article circulating at any given time which contains this sentence.
By contrast, Germans like their security quite a bit and are uncomfortable with the dichotomy Freedom vs. Security. They want both. In fact, when told that in the US one can be fired when getting severely ill (or for no reason at all -- so-called "at will" employees), at which point the health insurance coverage is also lost, Germans ask puzzledly "But how can people live like that?" It is even more astounding to Germans, including me, that given this dire situation, US citizens are notorious for not saving any money, even living on credit instead.(Almost all Americans carry several credit cards; I never understood why anyone would bother to carry more than one until a fellow graduate student told me that she treats credit cards as a kind of unemployment insurance). Even in the presence of the huge German welfare system which tries to make everyone feel as secure as possible, people routinely save money, just to be on the safe side. Personally, I found it very strange to learn that many Americans, even those with a good income, live on a "month-to-month" basis, always waiting for the next paycheck to arrive in order to be able to pay the bills. If they do save, then they usually use the money to speculate (they call it "invest") in the stock market, which is again much too insecure for the average German. On a similar note, Germans don't understand why people keep living in areas which regularly see earthquakes or hurricanes; natural disasters which kill people don't exist in Germany. Many of this may be explained by a generally much higher level of optimism and risk tolerance in America.
The following interchange took place on usenet between a Dutch and an American; it beautifully sums up the differing approaches towards the concept of freedom:
- "

Several large US cities have enacted curfew rules, which prohibit teenagers from being on the streets at night if not accompanied by an adult. This is another example of an infringement on freedoms which I think would not be tolerated in Germany. In general, teenagers seem to live much freer lives in Germany than in the US. For example, it is common for 15 or 16 year old Germans to take vacations in foreign countries with a couple of friends; in the US, it is rare to see anybody traveling under the age of 18 -- even though 16 year olds are already allowed to drive there, while in Germany the driving age is 18. It is much easier for German teenagers to drink and smoke, but other drugs are more readily available in the states. Many US high schools subject students who participate in extracurricular activities to random drug test, which also involve tests for alcohol and tobacco. Their freedom of expression is also limited: often they cannot criticize school officials or wear offensive or suggestive clothing. Some high schools forbid their students to hug or even touch other students. More than twenty states still allow the striking of students in schools if the parents don't object. Young German teenagers often spend their weekend nights dancing in discos, while virtually all comparable clubs in the states are off limits most of the time to people under the age of 21, because they serve alcohol. German adolescents over the age of 14 in Hamburg and Berlin may freely choose where to live (even on the streets if they want); in the US you are subject to your parents' will up to age 18.

Mike wrote:

<quoted text>A subjective comparison of Germany and the United States

What are you comparing, how the police are trying to catch the sexual prediators? Do you think Germany could do a better police work?

If the sexual prediators can reel in kids on the internet, then the police should be able to reel in the sexual prediators on the internet.. At least the police are wanting to protect the kids, not hurt them.

Your arguement has no validity to it. You have no information on weather these predators have offended prior and none of them would tell it if they had. You question this and state that perhaps it is a crime of opportunity and doubt they would try to moleste a child, Infact it is EXACTLY what they are attemting had they not been stopped. Most of these guys are out there actively seeking children to have sex with. It would be a different story for you if it was a relative of your. FACT THESE PREDATORS DESERIVE TO BE RIGHT WHERE THEY ARE... IN JAIL GOOD JOB INTERNET COPS

Det Grizzard does a great job on these. My only question is how much time is he using on these cases? With all the other things going on in the city of Massillon such as bridges being burnt down, illegal dumping, businesses and residents allegedly purchasing and reselling stolen goods, murder, beatings, drug dealing, just to name a few. Is to much time being used on these internet influenced crimes that residents should be avoiding?(Parents watching what there kids are doing on the internet.)