Perverted Justice
March 18, 2004 10:38 PM   Subscribe

Vigilantes troll for pedophiles in chat rooms, set up meetings and videotape them. Then they out them at Perverted-Justice.com. The ensnared men sometimes exercise their "right of reply" to explain their actions. Huh.
posted by Slagman (26 comments total)
 
Also, maybe it's just my browser, or the crappy design, but you have to scroll down to see the stuff on the actual site.
posted by Slagman at 10:40 PM on March 18, 2004


Whoops. So now I find it (8/2003). Nothing new under the sun. Feel free to delete the thread, Matt.
posted by Slagman at 10:46 PM on March 18, 2004


Local. People. Right. Next. To. Me. Oh boy... Should I tell my group of friends?
posted by Keyser Soze at 11:29 PM on March 18, 2004


An interesting point in their FAQ:

Girls ages 12 and younger are married to older men in other countries, so what gives you the right to say its wrong just because America says it is?

A. We're not here to debate what ages should marry others. We don't really care what Zimbabwe does, nor do we care what Serbia does. This site is based in North America and in Western Culture. If a country chooses to be backwater and behind the times on modern psychology, that is their problem. We are not going to lobby for changes in laws in third and second world nations. We don't care. I don't know how much I can state that without it ringing through. If you think it's okay to have sex with a twelve year old because a backwards third world nation does it, that's your psychological dysfunction.

Nope, you are dead wrong. Not "North America". Just America. Don't go dragging my country into your holy war, losers. [For the non judicially inclined, the minimum consent age in Canada is 12, with reservations]

And yeah, fuck you for calling us third world, also, dickwads (especially when we score way better on all "best place to live" indicators). We aren't psychologically dysfunctional either, just pissed off at you for telling us what to do. Assholes.
posted by shepd at 12:01 AM on March 19, 2004 [1 favorite]


Are you actually mad shepd or is that just sarcasm? Because if not you might need to take some deep breaths.
posted by BackwardsHatClub at 12:05 AM on March 19, 2004


The local NBC station in Milwaukee did some thing like this, though I don't know if it was in cooperation with this group. (With a blurred mosaic on the person's face)



Battaglia said vigilantes like the Perverted Justice volunteers run the risk of being sued for defamation or invasion of privacy. "If they're insinuating that someone is committing a criminal offense and putting their photograph and personal information online, they could be held liable in a civil suit," he said.

I suppose, though I doubt any of these guys draw the attention of law enforcement on themselves.


fuck you for calling us third world

Maybe he was calling you a second world nation?
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 12:17 AM on March 19, 2004


Canada RULES
posted by shoos at 12:39 AM on March 19, 2004


(sorry if this shows twice)

BackwardsHatClub, when someone includes people outside their society in their hate club without doing the least amount of fact checking as to whether they belong or not (or even if they'd like to), then proceeds to insult them over and over (mistakenly, due to hatred, but it's still not right), damn right I'm mad.

It's not like there's so many countries in North America that they didn't have time to research them all; and we're a little big to miss by accident. It's just another abuse of the word "North America" that makes another website look a lot less credible to North Americans.

Worse than that, before insulting us, they throw us in the hate club where you're supposed to be supporting things like this crap. When it comes to sex laws, if there's anywhere I don't want to be lumped in with, it's the US.

At the same time, I certainly feel no pity for a pedophile. But a pedophile isn't a guy longing for the fresh from high-school girl who wants to "get it on". It's clearly (from their own archives) the man looking for the Elementary School kid who they can make their slave that we need to be worried about.

To put it bluntly, please don't associate our morals towards sexuality with the US'.

Is 12 too young for an adult? I'd probably say yes, but there's always a "grey" area. Canada deals with that intelligently by setting a graduated schedule for consent.

12 - 14: People of similar age only
14 - 18: Anyone who is not an authority
18+: Anyone at all

It appears that using such a graduated method is against the agendas of those running that site. Why, well, that beats the hell out of me, except perhaps that they didn't check the FIRST LINK from google. :fume:
posted by shepd at 12:42 AM on March 19, 2004


Well, since this thread is still up, I will go ahead and make my scientific observation that a surprisingly large number of these perpetrators are overweight men with goatees. It's not really an attractive look. In addition, many of those who exercise their right of reply insist it was not only a onetime mistake to troll for underage chicks online, but they are now interested in helping the group to achieve its vigilante goals. "Where do I sign up?" Which makes me wonder if there is not a little thrill that some experience posing as underage girls, or reading about people who do.
posted by Slagman at 5:17 AM on March 19, 2004


I dont see them trying to bust 14 year old guys getting down with 12 year old girls. Cmon, if your 29 and trying to have sex with a 12 year old there are psychological issues pertaining.
posted by Keyser Soze at 5:38 AM on March 19, 2004


You may be on to something Slagman.

I am reminded of Jimmy Swaggart railing against adulterers and prostitutes and there was Bill Bennett railing against immoral and unholy gamblers and sexual creatures. J. Edgar Hoover persecuted those darn homo cross dressers and Tammy Faye cried for all those poor sinners going to hell without a smidgen of makeup.

Yup, you may be on to something there. I know parents often detest seeing their own worst faults reflected in their kids behavior. This is a real pyschological trait that people often obsess over a flaw in both extremes. "It takes one to know one?"
posted by nofundy at 6:07 AM on March 19, 2004


nofundy

I'm shaving my goatee off right now!
posted by Slagman at 6:24 AM on March 19, 2004


Is it just me or is their website name [most likely] unintentionally counterproductive? When I read it, I get the impression that their idea of justice is perverted, not that they are seeking justice against those who are perverted.
Maybe it's just me.
posted by zorrine at 6:50 AM on March 19, 2004


I think there's definately something twisted about posing as a little kid on the internet, but I'd rather have bored, thrill-seeking citizens doing it than the police.

Everytime I hear about a story where the police have a squad of people posing online as underage children, only to have it end with some misdemeanor conviction, I get pissed. It can't be the best use of their manhours, or taxpayer money.

I like the idea of meeting the guys with video cameras at the door. If you've taken it to that level (driving to a place thinking the parents are away...) you deserve some serious fear infusion.

Still, I can't imagine that continually posing as little kids online is good for one's psyche, no matter how beneficial its motive.

Whatever happened to just playing video games for hours and hours?
posted by Busithoth at 6:52 AM on March 19, 2004


Whatever happened to just playing video games for hours and hours?

Alive and well at my house !!
posted by a3matrix at 7:35 AM on March 19, 2004


I used to think these sites were just vigilante "justice," probably doing more harm than good, but now reading the reply letters I'm not so sure. if they are sincere, then maybe this sort of thing is worth. but then again, the letters could be bullshit. "you're right, I am messed up! sorry dudes. so uh could you remove the info now?"
posted by mcsweetie at 7:41 AM on March 19, 2004


Yeah, I've seen this site posted a bunch. And while I don't have much in the way of sympathy for most of the people this site targets, it does weird me out. The amount of glee that the site ops take in this is a bit bizzare, and also, they seem to get way, way, way into posing as young girls online. That's kind of creepy. In fact reading the transcripts makes me feel like both sides need a little counseling.

And yeah, pereverted justice has a bunch of other implications that I don't think they thought through. I mean, perveting justice is generally thought to be a bad thing.
posted by lumpenprole at 7:46 AM on March 19, 2004


For a bunch of fanatics devoted to the belief that every one of these people are a potential psychopath out to molest/hurt a child, it's amazing they haven't had to deal with anyone reacting to a camera shoved in their face by getting beaten to death. (The fact that they make their own videotape of men showing up with weapons to physically and verbally assault and intimidate someone sort of helps one's potential homicide defense, doesn't it?)

It's a tricky argument, because no one can argue against stopping pedophiles. But that's basically their sole defense for what they do, and the very first time their vigliantism goes wrong, leading to a lawsuit or as I mentioned above something worse, it's going to damage legitimate means of preventing sexual crimes.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 8:34 AM on March 19, 2004


Sometimes I wonder, if there weren't any people like this and no cops doing the same thing, would there actually be 13 year old girls looking for sex with old men on line? I mean, aren't the "girls" who post this stuff a) cops b) freaks or c) vigilantes and-or freaks? It just doesn't strike me as something a lot of 13 year old girls are interested in doing. Of course, it might explain my lousy luck when I was a 13 year old boy. They were all hooking up with old guys. Except we didn't have the Internet then. And we liked it! Or we didn't know what we were missing. Though now that I think about it, there were some guys like this hanging around the school:

Wooderson: That's what I like about these high school girls, I keep getting older, they stay the same age.

posted by Slagman at 9:01 AM on March 19, 2004


Vigilantes troll for pedophiles

shepd, are you trolling to catch vigilantes?
posted by Shane at 10:00 AM on March 19, 2004


While I applaud their intentions, it would seem that this is a system that's open to some pretty terrible abuse. How hard is it to level accusations against someone?

And yeah, the people posing as children get off on it. Its role playing, its justice (though perverted justice is a confusing idea, maybe they should change their name to Pervert Justice?).

The guys saying it was a one time mistake are deluding and fooling no one. Anybody that's trolling online has almost certainly trolled off line before.
posted by fenriq at 10:23 AM on March 19, 2004


Steve_at_Linnwood: Maybe he was calling you a second world nation?

Still ignorant, our economy is not planned. Boy is it ever not planned.

What I find hilarious is the following term of use:
4. I am not a law enforcement officer, nor a postal inspector, nor operating under an assumed name or in cooperation with any criminal investigation; nor am I seeking out evidence which may serve as the basis for any charge of violating federal, state, provincial, or local obscenity laws. I am not accessing this material to use against TRIO, the website operators, their affiliates or any other person or entity in any conceivable manner.

In other words we want to hold others responsible for their actions but don't want to face the concequences of ours.
posted by Mitheral at 10:33 AM on March 19, 2004


While attempts at prevention are generally commendable (I certainly don't want pervs hitting on my young femmes) I'm more inclined to address proper punishment for these goateed asses.

Would it be fair and just punishment to excise their sexual organs entirely?

I'm not talking about young boys and young girls having consensual sex but these older men stalking vulnerable little girls (or older women stalking vulnerable little boys too.) Something like above 21 and below 15 maybe where it is dramatically clear as exploitation?
posted by nofundy at 10:38 AM on March 19, 2004


Would it be fair and just punishment to excise their sexual organs entirely?

Maybe, but it would certainly be both cruel and unusual. Let's not go there.
posted by jpoulos at 12:52 PM on March 19, 2004


Competition for the perverted vigilantes -- from robots. (Props to Monkeyfilter)
posted by Slagman at 5:13 PM on March 19, 2004


shepd, are you trolling to catch vigilantes?

I suppose. I really dislike the idea of vigilantism, it solves nothing and shows one has little to no argument worth listening to (if you did have a strong position, you'd not have to resort to such tactics).

Honestly, hate has no positive results. Pity can, but I can't pity people like these pedophiles. The correct action is obviously to get them mental help. Putting up hate sites, wether the hate is towards a common cause or a distasteful one just isn't good and there's no way I want to be included as a part of it (Perhaps I shouldn't have emailed the authors at the website to fix their broken definition? It's probably better to be reviled by haters than to join them.).

Oh, and Keyser Soze, you might want to look at my comment above yours where I discussed about the age that's "wrong" and how there's a grey area; but 12 years old is too young for an adult.

Does that mean someone should want to take away my college hotties sites because the girls look like they might be a bit under 18? NO WAY! :-)
posted by shepd at 4:46 AM on March 20, 2004


« Older Shockwave.com & Awe   |   Air from water? Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments