>>7710262 >About to bang an underage girl >Someone shouts "you're under arrest" >Try to be a smartass. No, you shut the fuck up and look at the ground because all you have in mind right now is the two pent-up niggers you'll share a cell with.
>>7710432 AFAIK you can only use citizen's arrest on a person that is caught committing a crime red-handed (i.e. after the offence) or if the offence is imminent. Since the accused never got to (statutorily) rape anyone the first point doesn't hold, and because there is no potential victim present, the offence can not possibly be imminent. A citizen's arrest would be unlawful and the accused would have the legal right to defend themselves against any attempts to restrain them by civilians.
>>7712398 Anon completely right? I used to be a cop. Arrested a repeat offender chomo once. During booking, I went in back to let other inmates know. Guards made sure these inmates intermixed at one point. Poof! Problem solved.
>>7710045 I dont know about the Britbongs, but in the US, intent is illegal as well. Usually its harder to prove but in these cases I assume they have email logs of these men stating reeatedly their intent.
if this shit is legal, i'm never going back to the UK ever again. this has so many issues... i mean, as a lawfag from the continent, i knew common law had some fucked-up shit, but this really takes the cake.
age of consent of 16-18 is questionable to begin with people who presumably have little understanding of the actual law accusing people - recipe for disaster in general a bunch of wankers going around, pretending to be underaged girls, probably aggressively enticing meet-ups - entrapment, promoting and facilitating crimes, unfit and therefore not unlawful attempt because there never was any underage girl to begin with and therefore no way to have sex with her, etc. "arresting" people - not a public servant, pretending to have legitimacy to arrest people, potentially unlawfully restraining a free men deliberately making the "arrest" as unintelligible as possible and showing up with half a dozen guys - either they're afraid and spout bullshit to sound legitimate or they're just complete bullies filming people and publishing it together with their full name and wild allegations of criminal sexual behaviour - presumption of innocence, privacy concerns, serious defamation, media ethics
holy shit. i hope they stumble across a pedo lawyer and get the shit sued out of them. there is a reason why force has been monopolised by the state in the form of the police. there is a reason why we have due process and the presumption of innocence. there is a reason why it is highly problematic when someone first entices crimes, creates new otherwise unavailable opportunities and then punishes people for it. even if we conceed they have a good cause (of which i'm really not sure of desu) - their methods probably cause more damage to the rule of law than the occasional man who enjoys having sex with willing teenage girls.
fuck those guys. i'm triggered. this is taking the idiocy of UK "community support officers" and dialing it up to 11.
you are part of the problem. nobody in their right mind condones sexual abuse of children. but we're not talking about children. this pedo witch hunt has really gotten out of proportion, especially in the US. >jailing 8yo kids for murder, 14yo kids for drugs, etc and 16yo joining armed forces well, duh, they know what they're doing >protecting 17yo young adults from porn and sex well, duh, they don't know what they're doing
not that it's much better in Europe... >prosecuting 17yo for shooting nude selfies and distributing them at school well, duh, they're old enough to know what they did was wrong so we can punish them, but they're not old enough to make decision about their own body. >logic!
>>7714702 Nah dawg, it's a matter of principle. It's easy to show why: Just imagine a group of thugs walks up to you in the street, accuses you of being a pedo, detains you, films everything and posts it on the internet. Even if you're totally innocent - you've just been violated and completely ruined for the rest of your life. You have absolutely no guarantee that they'll only ever target "the right people".
This is not anything to be taken lightly. There are many well documented cases in the UK of anti child porn operations by the police targeting completely innocent people, ruining countless families and causing dozens of suicides (e.g. Operation Ore). Even if the accusation is bogus - standard proceedure is taking the accused into custody, raiding the house, urging their children to describe all kinds of sexual abuse and forbidding contact indefinitely. And really - if you're the non-accused partner - would you ever let your significant other come back to your home, bed and kids even if there is absolutely no substantial evidence? If the police already has such a bad track record we really don't need private citizens barging in on that market...
it could be a malicious stranger (4chan anyone?), but just think of your asshole friend (you know the one i'm talking about). he's chatting with an underage girl, gives your name, makes an appointment. then he calls you, tells you he wants to meet at a location. there you'll get swarmed by people with cameras. now you'll never find employment, housing and partners ever again.
sound like a good deal to you? lolol, it's just a prank, bro?
thank you very much, but i'd like to *know* i'm okay, not rely on the fact that i *might be* okay. it's always funny when it's not you. but what if it is one day?
Too many innocent male lives have been ruined because of this witch hunt.
Guy pisses on a tree? Pedo and homeless forever. Girl regrets it the day after? prison, then homeless forever Make a girl angry for any reason? Pedo and homeless forever. Pat a kid's head? raped to death in prison
I hope the men enabling this bullshit die horrible deaths. Pedophilia is indeed the new witch hunt.
I've known people who've been fucking beaten in there own home and lynched due to rumors. It was only after the guy lost his GF, Home and most of is friends it came out as a lie because the fucking bitch got a conscience in her late teens. You should only be labelled as a Pedophile when it's 100% proven, Not when some vigilante with a facebook account thinks he's got the right guy.
I get the guys is doing good things by catching the people he has but he's doing it in such a shit way that he could cause so much damage it's not warranted. People see these video's and instantly think the people there catching are Pedo's. There's no evidence backing it at all to to the public eye. You might as well go and point at someone in a busy shop and shout "Thief!!!"
>>7718764 None of it. UK law clearly prohibits preemptive citizens arrests, except where personal injury or damage to property is imminent. Now explain to me how this is not a "citizen's arrest" occurring before the commission of a crime, and thus clearly illegal.
>>7713646 Are you simple? This is just a few fucks pretending to arrest people. They aren't police community support officers. Do you think anything happened after the end of these videos?
They are at the very most making citizen arrests probably for some social media wank off with other simple minded retards. If the "suspected pedo" had balls he would probably have a suit for unlawful arrest or false imprisonment.
That's the fun thing about common law it has common sense built up over centuries.
Wait until you have graduated before passing judgements.
>>7721725 wait until you have basic skills in reading comprehension before passing judgements...
i've never claimed they were CSOs. just that it takes the idea of civilians playing pretend as tough cops one step further.
why would graduating change anything? nobody teaches common law around these parts. i'm not too familiar with the UK brand, but since graduation i've spent a lot of time getting into the US variant.
sure, there are some neat ideas, like being able to react relatively quickly to new developments, but i much prefer civil law, clear statutory laws made in a political process rather than expanding case-specific decisions made by a bunch of unaccountable geezers in robes into general rules. as a citizen i want to be able to look at one statute and know the law, rather than do extensive case law research 200 years back to answer simple questions. the thing with it being "built up over centuries" is exactly the problem. there is a tendency to rely too much on existing case law, even when the case at hand should really be distinguished. there's not much a carriage accident from 1652 has in common with a modern car accident. and all those centuries-old exceptions make modernisation very difficult. for example: the US prides itself on their very strong first amendment. but "obscenity" is still a huge deal. and there's no real justification for it other than: that's the way it's always been. historical exception. if you read some of the supreme court case law from WW2 or McCarthyism you could hurl. but since that shit has never been overturned, it still stands today. stare decisis.
there's no perfect legal system. but i feel common law is further away than civil law.
Only if you've caught the person red-handed. I would laugh my ass off if any of these fuckwits tried this on me. Wannabe police officers who failed to get into the force spouting the law to somebody like they have any power, it's hilarious.
This shit is rage inducing to be honest, they're not real police nor do they have any powers and I have no idea why everybody in these videos are admitting anything to strangers and going along with being handcuffed so easily.
If anybody tries this on you, just laugh and walk away. If they physically stop you then that is harassment and possibly assault. The police have already come out and said that they do not condone their actions.
I get what they're trying to do, but they're going about it in the completely wrong way. Don't pretend you're a police officer if you're not, don't spout laws if you're not in any power to enforce them.
What they should be doing is arranging everything they do with the police before hand and let the people who actually have the powers do the talking and arresting.
>>7723225 It's actually completely legal to use reasonable force to stop a suspect escaping before the police arrive. Also when doing a citizen's arrest, it's required to tell the person they're being arrested and for what reasons.
As for the police not condoning their actions, that's because these guys are showing them up! They've caught 30 nonces in just over a month, while the police drive around issuing tickets for minor road traffic offences.
It's legal to use reasonable force when somebody is caught red handed, anything else is just conjecture. Somebody standing around in a public place is no where near enough to warrant force, which is why I don't understand why they're giving these wannabe-officers the time of day by talking to them. If some pillock came up to you and demanded your name, would you give it to them? If they suspect you of something then they have to contact the police.
from the webms posted here it seems they pose a teenagers, not kids. so you mean men going for nubile teenage women who agreed to have sex? how about they catch some real criminals? actual pedos grooming prepubescent children or, here's a suggestion, how about the family members who are responsible for 90+% of abuse anyway?
them going after people who are neither actual pedos nor have unwilling victims seems like such a waste of effort.
damn dirty pedos, lusting after our 15yo toddlers! we better stop them, just think of the children!
what is their MO btw? how do they know their full names when they show up? did these men really volunteer their full legal names to strangers on a chat room? if so, this whole thing is laughably misguided and they're just catching the absolute moronic bottom of the barrel of sex offenders...
>>7723374 On a related note, the whole "stranger danger" thing is laughably misguided. People are always so concerned about those few cases where a stranger commits sexual abuse, which just draws attention away from the real problem of family and family friends committing abuse.
>>7723432 >According to UK law, a 14 year old is neither a woman, nor nubile, and cannot agree to sex with someone over the age of 16. yikes!
hmm, does anyone have any data (even anecdotal evidence) that these kinds of relationships are really damaging? just trying to make up my mind whether an adult having sex with a 14yo is immoral regardless of legality. it's certainly a slanted relationship and kinda iffy, but for abuse of preteens i know tons of cases and victim accounts how absolutely damaging this is. wondering if there is anything similar. like a 14yo teen agreeing to have sex with an adult stranger and being traumatised or something...
without giving it much thought, it seems other laws cover pretty much all the relevant bases - rape, battery, assault, abuse of authority - and those all apply regardless of age anyway.
>>7723481 The traditional argument is that a person under the age of consent cannot fully understand the consequences of sex and all that, or that they are unable to give consent because they are not fully rational creatures.
>>7723514 yeah, i get the formal argument, i'm more interested in empirical data. so what about sex does a 14yo not understand that all the16yos do? can you name something? isn't 14 typically the age at which teens start facing the criminal system if they do something wrong, like shop lifting? so they're supposed to understand all the laws, but can't yet decide about their own body? that's kinda strange...
>not fully rational creatures what a shock, even small humans are humans. who'da thunk? :-) especially when it comes to reproduction, i don't think there's even one fully rational creature on earth.
>>7709954 I getcha. I can't understand some of what he's saying. He mumbles when he's staying they charges, probably trying to confuse the targets. He's saying something like "for having sex with a 15 year old bladibladiblah."
>>7710432 A citizen's arrest is when a citizen calls an officer of the law to arrest someone. It's still done by an officer, because you're never allowed to detain someone without proper certification from the government. There are some instances where there won't be any charges, like if you're preventing a rape or murder, especially while waiting for police to show up.
http://findlaw.co.uk/law/government/civil_rights/500393.html >In England and Wales, the power to detain a person suspected of involvement in criminal activity is a statutory power laid down in section 24A of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1974.
>>7709896 >"You're still going to have sex with a fourteen year old right?' >keeps pressuring him that guy was released a month later when the lawyers filed for police harassment and guilt by duress. Don't fuck up like that again Mr Police, you let a kiddy toucher go.
>>7728001 not that person but even if he exaggerates on the side of things, the witch hunt is very real on the social side. Everyone immediatly becomes a SJW when pedo is involved. If you don't, you will be under suspicion, you will be stigmatised. People are crazy hysteric when it comes to pedo.
It is an medieval with hunt and it is exploited by both governments and individuals for smear campaign. Here in Germany we just had a politician destroyed by such accusations. Innocent or not, didn't matter, he was gone for good.
>>7723374 Or the people in power linked with Jimmy Saville who are not just raping children but murdering them.
Ever think that the whole pedo-panic witch-hunt on both sides of the pond is actually more about misdirection from this and perversion of normal, healthy sexual desire? The truly sick and dangerous people are in power, they write the laws and inform your consensus of them through the media. Thus they bend the laws to protect themselves while projecting their perversion onto those they place beneath them.
>>7731578 Based on false-logic dictating that no one below an arbitrary age has autonomy. Basically, when it benefits the state to dictate that they do not. It was very different in the past and civilizations never fell based on sexual norms allowing person who are currently defined as underage from engaging in sex with older persons.
>>7713815 The fact that you have any problems with a "pedo witch hunt" and you consider a 15 year old sexually mature means you're probably one of the sick fucks. Keep crying about it until someone knocks in your door, shitlord.
>>7710216 this one is kinda fucked, like come on the girl is seventeen, if a girl were trying to go meet a twenty-six year old she met online she obviously thinks she is mature enough to have sex i just don't understand the reasoning behind the imaginary lines society draws
These things have never made any sense to me. I mean okay fine if you want to argue the whole underage thing I can see where you're coming from. But these kinds of things go on for people who want to have sex with of age people. Like I know for a fact that police in my city pose as prostitutes online to catch anyone trying to pay for sex. Prostitution being illegal is mind-boggling. It's a goddamn victimless crime like drug use and the faster victimless crimes become legal, the sooner the world will be a better place.
Like what? We're going to have fucking Walmart cartels? "Hey bruh buy our drugs we're cheaper than than HEB" I mean brothels would create a shitton of jobs. Clerks, accountants, prostitutes, medical examiners for prostitutes + clients, etc
>>7709893 I might actually respect these guys if they'd go after the serious rapists--but if they tried that, they'd get shivved on the spot and the survivors crucified in the media and courts for anti-muslim behavior.
>>7713646 Bottom line is these men are pedo's. They are agreeing to meet underage girls which is grooming but are instead being met with arrests. (It's called a sting and after having one happen in a place that I work, they are legit).
All you are doing right now is defending a bunch of nonces by trying to blur common law and free mans law.
Isn't it a well known fact, that the police is only able to arrest you, if you've already done it? They cant catch poeple like this, because they didn't do anything yet. This poeple are probably doing it in their spare just for the cause, preventing things like this in an unusual but probably effective way.
>>7736717 So, they don't really care if the guys they trick into it even had any criminal records? They catch innocent people who may give in to, let's say, curiosity, assuming they will become future child predators?
>>7736766 No, that's entrapment in lots of places in the world including lots of states in the US and is illegal. It's why the 'to catch a predator' show eventually shut down. They got sued hard by someone who killed themself after they got caught on the show in a state where entrapment is illegal.
I also thought it feels abit like entrapment but when someone drink drives and gets pulled over they get charged- even if they haven't killed someone while drunk yet. If these guys have the mental issues that make a grown man want to fuck a child then imo better to weed them out and lock them away for the deficient human beings they are than wait for them to commit the crime. Some people dont deserve justice, some people are simply burdens on our society and we should practice some social Darwinism for the greater good.
>>7736760 >>No crime actually committed? Quick! Invent a new crime based on assumption that teenagers have no idea what they are doing and will be irrevocably harmed by sex!
You know, because that makes so much sense and it isn't used as a dog-and-pony-show/five-minute-hate while the demonstrable monsters run rampant: >>7731524
When do they get a sting-operation and when are you going to realize that there is a difference between what you have been conditioned to consider child abuse and molestation and a witch-hunt that has been engineered in recent times against a normal aspect of human sexual behavior?
As was pointed out here: >>7731655 There is no historical or sociological basis to support the conception that allowing persons currently defined as underage does actual harm to them or society as a whole. You can look at nations and states with lower ages of consent for further confirmation of this. The Pedo-panic Witch-hunt however does, as it is being used as a distraction from truly horrifying and systematic abuse and victimization of children. While promoting a paranoid, oppressive and abetting a police-state. You shouldn't let your emotions be manipulated into misdirection from actual harming of children and socially sanctioned hatred of others. Also note that It's not only men who engage in this behavior, you need only look up how many female teachers have been caught sleeping with teenage students to be aware of that.
Same thing all over the world, if you're a normal guy and fuck a 16 year old your going to get raped in jail daily, but if you are pot of the elite you can have 12 year old orgy parties with all of your hollywood buddies.
>>7736867 he's right though. you don't get arrested for "kleptomania". you get arrested for attempted burglary, which is a physical act, not a thought-crime. in a thread all about whether this is a witch hunt or not, that distinction matters. pedophilia as the mental state of being attracted to children isn't and shouldn't be a crime. you are also confused what constitutes an attempt. if you only plan a crime in your head, this is not illegal. it only turns into an attempt if you start preparations. most attempted crimes are where you've done everything to constitute the crime except you weren't successful (eg you held someone up at gunpoint and demanded money - they just didn't have any). if your concept of criminal attempts was true, everyone would be in jail for attempted murder, since everyone has thought to themselves "I'll fucking kill that guy" once in a while.
>>7737448 i don't. some do have the capacity, but generally no. but the same is true for an 18yo. and most pampered 25yos for that matter. yet the day miss airhead turns 18 she's fair game for fucking up her life with porn.
all i'm saying is, that 15yo are closer to 18yo than to 8yo when it comes to mental capacity. and curiously enough the law recognises that. 15yo teens can make more decisions without their guardian. they are criminally liable. if an 8yo steals shit, nothing will happen. if a 15yo steals shit, they'll go to juvenile court. so the law *does* think they are capabale of sound decisions, otherwise it would be the biggest injustice of all time to punish someone who can't make sound decisions for their unsound decisions.
the icing on the cake are the cases i cited: a 17yo makes explicit nude selfies and sends them to a couple of friends. she just manufactured and distributed child porn and will have to face the courts for that. so the law explicitly says: you are too young to make sound decisions about your body. but we can punish you for any unsound decisions you make. that ain't right! there should never be a responsibility without capability.
>>7736276 >implying you wouldn't have the call to prove he told you to go there >implying anyone would go to those lengths for a "prank" >Implying there would be more evidence against you than your friend >implying calling someone a mouthbreathing retard makes you sound older than 10 >implying anyone is offended by being insulted of the internet >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying
>>7738210 >implying you wouldn't have the call to prove he told you to go there >implying anyone would go to those lengths for a "prank" >Implying there would be more evidence against you than your friend
ah, but this is where you go wrong. if the police arrests you, you can say "but look at all the evidence i've got - i was set up!". and if it checks out, they'll apologize and let you go. an all the while they'll treat you right, because there is a proper redress against unlawful arrests.
with these vigilante retards though, you can say "but look at all the evidence i've got - i was set up!" all you want, but they'll just go "yeah right" and upload the video, ruining you forever. it's not a problem if officials crack down on criminals within the rule of law. the trouble starts with amateurs excercising horrific power with little care and consideration.
>>7709893 >guys are literally just standing in a public area >allegedly there to solicit sexual activity with a minor >allegedly >can't prove anything >literally cannot prove anything at all >cannot be charged >exercise in futility
>>7738548 No, YOUR'RE retarded.... That is a TERRIBLE metaphor. It would be more like if you thought about murdering someone so you set up a meeting with a contract killer and the cops met you instead of the hitman. You have already decided to go through with the crime, they are just preventing it from happening.
....and yes I know the guys in the clips aren't cops, just making an example.
>>7737479 >>Apparently not at all concerned with persons in positions of power sadistically abusing and murdering children. Then using their political connections to cover it up and get away with it on an organized basis. >>Calls others a pedo apologist.
How about you come up with a sound and logical argument to disprove the points being raised or you get out?
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5 If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.