Gardai cricitise paedophile hunters

timthumbni

Discodog wrote: »

Because that's what mobs do. They make huge & often wrong assumptions & then break the law under the pretense of doing good.

I don't see things through the perspective of anyone. I see a Police force asking people to stop as it may hinder catching real offenders. Then I see a group who want to defy this because they think they are above the law.

I could suggest that I would ensure that my child doesn't have unsupervised access to these "types".

Of the so called hunts that I watched there were no wrong assumptions let me tell you. The ones caught were planning on defiling a child.

You can dress it up every which way you want. You can scream entrapment, threatening etc etc. In the end I applaud anyone who expose these scumbags.
And I won’t be spouting about their social class either.

timthumbni

Auguste Comte wrote: »

There is only the word of self intrested face book heros to say that anyone was trying to arrange anything. If these publicity seekers have gathered any hard evidence of criminal behaviour then they should present to the Gardaí or PSNI to follow up on and do it in a way that doesn't facilitate the destruction of evidence by those that might be guilty.

I suppose you were a big fan of the RA handing out hidings to the local "hoods" who might have had the neck to look at someone the wrong way.

Lol. If you read my other posts you would never accuse me of being a big fan of the “ra”.... the ra supporters on here could testify to that...

Gimme A Pound

Auguste Comte wrote: »

I suppose you were a big fan of the RA handing out hidings to the local "hoods" who might have had the neck to look at someone the wrong way.

That's resorting to the "you're defending paedos" kinda approach though.

And definitely don't think so considering Tim is a member of the unionist community!

Discodog

timthumbni wrote: »

Of the so called hunts that I watched there were no wrong assumptions let me tell you. The ones caught were planning on defiling a child.

You can dress it up every which way you want. You can scream entrapment, threatening etc etc. In the end I applaud anyone who expose these scumbags.
And I won’t be spouting about their social class either.

Watched where ? I never scream.

Discodog

Egypt Scarce Cross wrote: »

That's resorting to the "you're defending paedos" kinda approach though.

And definitely don't think so considering Tim is a member of the unionist community!

Not really. It's about a group of people thinking they are above the law & unionist terrorists were just as bad.

Garibaldi?

These oul wans need to beat home lookig after their own sprogs

Auguste Comte

Discodog wrote: »

Egypt Scarce Cross wrote: »

That's resorting to the "you're defending paedos" kinda approach though.

And definitely don't think so considering Tim is a member of the unionist community!

Not really. It's about a group of people thinking they are above the law & unionist terrorists were just as bad.

That was more or less the point. In other circumstances these are the same people who would be handing out punishment beatings because it fills some need in them to feel power over other people, nothing to do with the hunt for justice..

That and face book likes.

timthumbni

timthumbni wrote: »

Of the so called hunts that I watched there were no wrong assumptions let me tell you. The ones caught were planning on defiling a child.

You can dress it up every which way you want. You can scream entrapment, threatening etc etc. In the end I applaud anyone who expose these scumbags.
And I won’t be spouting about their social class either.

Around twelve years ago, my friends thought it would be hilarious to chat to people on Omegle and send my pic as their identity. Innocent fun and all that.

The police could arrive at my house with evidence and verify what was going on. A mob won't do that. It's a statistical inevitably that they will get it wrong at least once.

timthumbni

Deleted User wrote: »

Around twelve years ago, my friends thought it would be hilarious to chat to people on Omegle and send my pic as their identity. Innocent fun and all that.

The police could arrive at my house with evidence and verify what was going on. A mob won't do that. It's a statistical inevitably that they will get it wrong at least once.

I have never heard of Omegle tbh. Anyways the ones I watched the people were messaging as they met in a certain area. Even if someone had stolen your ldentity you would hardly end up at the meet point/ trap unless you were a nonce. Let’s be serious here.

Gimme A Pound

Discodog wrote: »

Not really. It's about a group of people thinking they are above the law & unionist terrorists were just as bad.

Saying "I suppose you were" xyz is doing the assumption thing.

I was only referring to the community Tim is from to demonstrate how he has definitely never been a fan of the ra. Yeah loyalist paramilitaries were as bad - never said they weren't. Maybe Tim is a fan of vigilantism by them.

Potential-Monke

Look, Tim, nobody is defending paedos. Nobody. Like you, I think they're the lowest of the low and the males should be hung with their own banjo string, the women with their own fallopian tubes. There's no one going to defend a caught paedo.

The point we're trying to get across is that what these people are doing is circumventing law to catch a predator. And they may be getting it right, even if I disagree with their methods. But what about that 1 time they get it wrong. Is that persons ruined life worth it? Are you stating that potentially stopping a paedo trumps someone else's right to privacy, security and a safe life, which will be gone as soon as they're 'outed', even if untrue.

So, to clarify, do you agree with the following statement:

One person being wrongly accused and having their whole life ruined is ok as long as other potential paedos are stopped.

timthumbni

Egypt Scarce Cross wrote: »

Saying "I suppose you were" xyz is doing the assumption thing.

I was only referring to the community Tim is from to demonstrate how he has definitely never been a fan of the ra. Yeah loyalist paramilitaries were as bad - never said they weren't. Maybe Tim is a fan of vigilantism by them.

Loyalist paramilitary terrorists are just as big scumbags as ira terrorist scumbags so don’t even head that direction with me thanks.

Discodog

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Look, Tim, nobody is defending paedos. Nobody. Like you, I think they're the lowest of the low and the males should be hung with their own banjo string, the women with their own fallopian tubes. There's no one going to defend a caught paedo.

The point we're trying to get across is that what these people are doing is circumventing law to catch a predator. And they may be getting it right, even if I disagree with their methods. But what about that 1 time they get it wrong. Is that persons ruined life worth it? Are you stating that potentially stopping a paedo trumps someone else's right to privacy, security and a safe life, which will be gone as soon as they're 'outed', even if untrue.

So, to clarify, do you agree with the following statement:

One person being wrongly accused and having their whole life ruined is ok as long as other potential paedos are stopped.

The problem is that one in a million are caught & they have to be pretty dumb. If the same "research" was applied to preventing kids for being online unsupervised then a lot more would be prevented from putting themselves at risk.

Gimme A Pound

timthumbni wrote: »

Loyalist paramilitary terrorists are just as big scumbags as ira terrorist scumbags so don’t even head that direction with me thanks.

I just mean if there was vigilantism by them in this regard. Not support of them in other ways. I'm not saying you do support such vigilantism by them - just speculating you might. But of course I don't know.

timthumbni

timthumbni wrote: »

I have never heard of Omegle tbh. Anyways the ones I watched the people were messaging as they met in a certain area. Even if someone had stolen your ldentity you would hardly end up at the meet point/ trap unless you were a nonce. Let’s be serious here.

It used to be an anonymous chat site where you got randomly put in a private chat as soon as the previous one ended.

This sounds like that show "To Catch a Predator". Even it had its flaws so I'm guessing a more amateur approach would have more. You can say "The ones I watched were definitely predators." but you're trusting that the people making it are actually thorough and are not misrepresenting anything.


Like others here, I don't see why they couldn't bring it to the police. Perhaps post the video publicly with faces blurred so the police are pressured to investigate what they bring them.

Galwayguy35

Any of the FB videos I saw the fella was there to meet someone that he thought was a kid and they had evidence of him sending pics and depraved messages.

This was then given to the cops when they arrived.

Personally I think they should be hung from the nearest tree but every one they expose is one that the cops wouldn't have known about.

AllForIt

May I remind certain posters that this thread is about vigilantism. If it's okay for paedo hunting then it's okay for every crime hunting.

If I say it's wrong for all crime hunting that does not imply I am defending all or any crimes. And I really think it's quite disgusting that some are suggesting that posters are defending pedophiles when they are merely against vigilantism and ever worse suggesting that that perhaps some posters are in fact nonces themselves to be against it. If I were a mod I'd have yellow carded that post at least.

Do we really want to live in a country were ppl are lynced in public like they are in 2nd world countries like India? That would be the result of endorsing vigilantism.

The issue of the social demographic the paedo hunters are from is pertinent. I.e. the ppl who are most uneducated and perhaps of the lowest IQ. This isn't a snobby assessment. I'm from a working class background myself. I don't think it's much an assumption to make that paedo hunters are a bit dim to say the least and therefore their motives should rightly be called into question.

And the fact that you can send a text message from anyone's phone number, or email, very easily. I've done both as a teenager. A quick google gives this site though I can't be bothered checking if it works. Stuff like this definitely used to work ages ago.

https://www.spoofmytextmessage.com/

It's just so easy to ruin someone with apparent evidence that the police could verify by going to the phone networks etc. It's frankly kind of sad that this is being advocated on here after all those WhatsApp killings in India last year.

I could within the space of a day learn how to spoof this stuff, send the messages or emails with explicit pics as if they're from someone, arrive at their door, take a video with "proof", and post it to Facebook. If something is that easy to fake, it's hardly a good basis for public lynchings.

timthumbni

Deleted User wrote: »

And the fact that you can send a text message from anyone's phone number, or email, very easily. I've done both as a teenager. A quick google gives this site though I can't be bothered checking if it works. Stuff like this definitely used to work ages ago.

https://www.spoofmytextmessage.com/


It's just so easy to ruin someone with apparent evidence that the police could verify by going to the phone networks etc. It's frankly kind of sad that this is being advocated on here after all those WhatsApp killings in India last year.

I get that you can send txts from someone’s phone number. However how do they get these people to then meet up at a specific place?

The ones I saw were not innocent. They were meeting up for sex with a minor. Simple as that.

timthumbni

timthumbni wrote: »

I get that you can send txts from someone’s phone number. However how do they get these people to then meet up at a specific place?

The ones I saw were not innocent. They were meeting up for sex with a minor. Simple as that.

If I want my revenge on someone, I can get them to a certain place with any story under the sun.

The point is you can set people up very easily, IF it's a Facebook mob. Not with the police.


Would you allow yourself to be a guinea pig for this? I'd guess not. (I'm not suggesting it, just asking. And I edited my post above with more.)

timthumbni

I’m not sure if the ones you guys are referring to are similar to the catchers in NI.

The ones I watched were set for the person to meet at a certain location. The messages sent and received were then given over to the psni that were called as they met.

Absolutely no one appeared to be set up from someone else hijacking their phone and in fact nearly everyone admitted what they were doing. Im not sure how anyone would arrange a meeting with you in person by hijacking your phone.

timthumbni

timthumbni wrote: »

I’m not sure if the ones you guys are referring to are similar to the catchers in NI.

The ones I watched were set for the person to meet at a certain location. The messages sent and received were then given over to the psni that were called as they met.

Absolutely no one appeared to be set up from someone else hijacking their phone and in fact nearly everyone admitted what they were doing. Im not sure how anyone would arrange a meeting with you in person by hijacking your phone.

I think you're missing many of our points here. If something is easy to fake, then the entire thing is inherently flawed.

Sure, you watched yours and thought they did a good job. What about the next guy who doesn't contact the police after and just posts the video to ruin someone?

The fact is if you gave me your name and address, I'd be able to have a professional video on Facebook within a few months making you look like a child rapist. The person who wants revenge will already have a headstart and have your phone number and email most likely. I'd have to go through your rubbish.


So you really not see the flaw in supporting something so abusable? Read up on WhatsApp India, seriously. You're advocating vigilantism based on one producer of these videos.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

weldoninhio wrote: »

They aren’t a private security firm. They are normal people who volunteer their time. They don’t imprison anyone, falsely or otherwise. And as for harassment, that’s laughable.

I wonder if the people defending the nonces are doing so due to a sense of worry. Maybe they think they’ll be next on FB live??

There's also the GDPR law. Which, I know, is a pain in the ass - but do you really want to see someone show up with the intent of abusing a child and then have them get away soct-free on the technicality that they were filimed without consent?

freshpopcorn

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Any of the FB videos I saw the fella was there to meet someone that he thought was a kid and they had evidence of him sending pics and depraved messages.

This was then given to the cops when they arrived.

Personally I think they should be hung from the nearest tree but every one they expose is one that the cops wouldn't have known about.

What would you do if somebody joined a dating site/app. Uploaded your pictures and chatted to a teenage girl. They then gave out your address and Louise and her team turned up to your house on Facebook Live saying I've screen shots?

Jmsg

In any scenario where fully grown men were targeting underage girls for sex and being caught in the process in said manner, I and any given person would straightforwardly consider this not vigilantism but rather citizen's arrest. That's clearly not what's happening in this instance though. The story here is desperate men on dating sites who have likely have received zero iotas of female attention in their lives suddenly start getting very rare replies (because it's a male/neutral decoy) who upon learning of their young age reluctantly accede with the situation. All the videos demonstrate this is self-evidently the case. These aren't pedophiles.

The next matter is the ones carrying out this. Attributing them a double digit IQ would be a compliment as would allotting them a double digit conviction rate as the reality would probably be well in the triples for everything but the thing they're so obsessed with pinning on these sad men. This project is clearly a makeshift way for them to find a false sense of redemption via moral superiority in the later phases of their vile, criminal lives of pure, unadulterated scumbaggery.

Garibaldi?

freshpopcorn wrote: »

What would you do if somebody joined a dating site/app. Uploaded your pictures and chatted to a teenage girl. They then gave out your address and Louise and her team turned up to your house on Facebook Live saying I've screen shots?

This is the kernel of the matter! No proper investigation. No due process.No legal remit. Hysteria. Potential disaster!

Garibaldi?

Garibaldi? wrote: »

This is the kernel of the matter! No proper investigation. No due process.No legal remit. Hysteria. Potential disaster!

And should the unjustly accused, in understandable fear and panic react robustly and physically against one of these vigilantes, what might be the outcome then?They might confront someone not a sexual deviant but with other documented mental health issues.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Garibaldi? wrote: »

And should the unjustly accused, in understandable fear and panic react robustly and physically against one of these vigilantes, what might be the outcome then?They might confront someone not a sexual deviant but with other documented mental health issues.

Somehow, I don't think we going to get an answer to that one. Unless someone accuses someone else of defending child abuse.

Garibaldi?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Somehow, I don't think we going to get an answer to that one. Unless someone accuses someone else of defending child abuse.

A case of account hacking/mistaken identity/one of the many phenomea occurring on social media. Baying mob arriving at home door. Emotionally unstable person terrified and reacting impulsively! Vigilante seriously injured! What then?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Garibaldi? wrote: »

A case of account hacking/mistaken identity/one of the many phenomea occurring on social media. Baying mob arriving at home door. Emotionally unstable person terrified and reacting impulsively! Vigilante seriously injured! What then?

Batman.