So... Let me get this straight. You're saying that a messenger theme will make it easier for sexual predators to go after children? OK, I'm missing a connection here somewhere.

what's this - "your usual yellow press comments for videogames" or destructoid.com?

everyone who uses some instant messenger is pedophile and there's only kids playing a ds...?

I'm confused about how that show is legal. Doesn't that fall under the entrapment laws? For 1, the girl in question wasn't 13, but 18. So, on the chance that something did happen, it wouldn't have been illegal anyways.

Were you saving that headline and decided to waste it on a crappy instant-messenger theme story? Too bad.

That was awesome!! Post more pedo videos!! lol!

Holy shit, this is great news for me. I might have to check this out. If there are gonna be a bunch kids around to talk to. I can't wait!

And all this is related to the DS and yahooIM how?

My friend is obsessed with that show!

But wait, I don't see how this is 100% right/legal. Granted it is good to get the pedophiles behind bars where unseenly things will happen to them but...they didn't do anything wrong at that point and like DeusPayne says, she is 18.

I feel it is like saying you are going to illegally park in an IM and you are right next to a no park zone and cops bust you and arrest you. Granted it is an exaggeration but even giving a ticket. You can't give a ticket unless you actually do something wrong, not think about it. I mean who hasn't thought about doing something illegal?

But it is another story when on that show they have someone BRING something mention in the convo which kind of shows their intent, but without that I feel it could be missing something.

But back to the topic...who cares about a yahoo theme? That doesn't make it harder or easier for pedophiles to get kids, just gives them decoration.

From wikipedia: "Perverted Justice volunteers wait for the suspect to initiate contact" and "To date, however, the claim of entrapment has not been used successfully in a court of law to defend a To Catch a Predator suspect."

I really don't care if they are entrapping these guys. If they are showing up at a 13 year olds house even THINKING about MAYBE having MILD sexual contact with them they should rot in jail for life.

This is a good example of how Minority Report happens in real life. Is it enough to think about a crime? Or does the crime itself need to occur? In the case of pedos, I'd say the intent is usually good enough. However, when they're being roped in my police (or "narcs") that are of legal age, I don't see where the crime is being committed. I can say I'm 13 all I want, but that doesn't make my girlfriend a sex offender. The fact of the matter is that the target in question is not under age, regardless of what persona they used online.

And with such an absurd comment like that FrogMan (that someone even thinking about doing anything) maybe you should be the one rotting in prison.

I'd sooner want to see pedophiles walk free than have anyone put behind bars for not committing a crime.

If they haven't commited a crime they shouldn't be arrested. I truly believe that. The guy MIGHT have touched her and done something, but she is 18. Its technicalities and what not, the sad thing is that any possible sexual predator is gonna be found guilty due to the strong bias. I know i pretend to be a rapist, but i am not and it is a very serious subject. But if the guy didn't do anything then they shouldn't get in trouble for anything, probation at the most. just watch them so they don't do anything again. What they probably need is psychological help. A lot of times it really isn't their fault, to a certain extent. Their brains work differently and often times real sexual predators cannot stop themselves from doing those bad things that they do.

Yeah and some people are all talk...they say they will do this or that but it is more so for show and when it comes to crunch time they wimper and wuss out.

Destructoid gamers send angry hate letters to dateline! HAHAHAHA

Bah, when I read the headline I thought I'd be able to IM people through my DS. The fact that it's just a theme kinda ruins your joke, sorry.

If someone is trying to commit a crime they should still be busted. That's why people go to jail for things like attempted murder or attempted rape. I don't think anyone's literally suggesting someone be put away for thinking pedo thoughts, but these guys are coming to the house with the intent to have sexy time with underage girls. It doesn't matter if the person they were IMing with is a 50 year old guy, because that's not the person they're planning on messing around with. Just because they get cockblocked by Chris Hansen, doesn't mean they're not dangerous creeps who want to violate kids. There's plenty of criticism I could level at the show on how they go about things, but I'm much more comfortable with the idea that these men are put away BEFORE they hurt children rather than AFTER.

I was overexageratting slightly but my point is that pedophilia is a disgusting thing and I think that these people should be arrested based upon the conversations they are having with these supposed kids. Let alone actually showing up at their house.

Everyone who loves the internet for what it is: a bastion of free thought and freedom of expression should feel the same way. If something isn't done about online predators the government will find a way to step in and do it themselves. Don't underestimate the power of protective parents. And once the government gets their greasy hands on internet censorship it's over johnny.

EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME IS A PEDOPHILE!!! Yeah, I forgot this is a game blog. Sorry for being way off topic.

Just because I'm a stickler for language and words, sex with someone who is thirteen isn't pedophilia. Pedophilia would be sexual attraction to prepubescent or peripubescent children. Attraction to a postpubescent adolescent is ephebophilia. As far as nature is concerned, ephebophilia is probably entirely natural, because that's exactly what puberty is; the switching on of sexuality. However, nature isn't law, thus the age of consent was instituted to keep the balance of power in check. We believe anyone under the age of 16 or 18 (depending on the state) isn't well-informed enough to make a decision on whether or not to have sex, so it's illegal; sometimes just for people over a certain age (i.e. sex at 16 is fine as long as your partner is under 21). Similarly, we have sexual harassment laws, which although they usually apply between people over the age of consent, are still in place to keep a balance of power.

I agree with DeusPayne, this is the first step towards the "Minority Report". You don't know what anyone's intention is until they've actually gone and done it. Saying, 'well, you were _going_ to do it' doesn't seem very just in convicting someone of such a serious crime. Nothing is so bad you can arrest someone just for thinking it. Until the crime is at least _attempted_, then I see nothing illegal about this. The internet, and most of what goes on in and through it, is bullshit anyways.

@ Lord_Satorious:

If a guy is coming into a house thinking there's going to be a underage child he can get a freak on with, it's pretty clear what his intention is. If I went to a store wearing a ski mask and holding a gun and I happen to get dropped by a cop getting coffee, it's also pretty clear why I was there.

I'm not going to touch your semantics regarding age of consent. What those guys were planning to do to children (sexually mature or not, they're still children) is simply wrong. It's beyond wrong, it's evil.

The comparison to "Minority Report" drives me crazy. First of all, it's a mediocre sci-fi movie we're talking about that deals with psychics predicting the future. Let's not compare that to real life. Second, the system they had was actually working great until James Cromwell screwed things up.

Whoops, spoilerz!

Did I say James Cromwell? I meant Max Von Sydow.

Even so, intention is different from action. Intention to commit terrorism is building the bomb. The actual act will also inevitably cause destruction and murder. Should these men be stopped from what they may have intended to do and may or may not have carried out? Of course, but charging them with full out rape and label them a sex offender is going beyond the law. That's like charging someone with murder before they've actually killed anyone. Something like that would be conspiracy to commit murder, or something similar. It's a lesser crime in any case, and I think the arrest and charging of the offenders as in "To Catch a Predator" should reflect that gray area.

They're charged with a lesser offense, child solicitation (which is illegal in all 50 states, the cut-off age is usually 14). They're not actually charged with child molestation. They've gotten people on other charges too, such as having an unregistered firearm or drug possession depending on the situation. All the chat logs are saved, and a lot of the sickos had already sent stuff like child porn. These people have already broken the law by the time they show up to the sting.

They're charged with a lesser offense, child solicitation (which is illegal in all 50 states, the cut-off age is usually 14). They're not actually charged with child molestation. They've gotten people on other charges too, such as having an unregistered firearm or drug possession depending on the situation. All the chat logs are saved, and a lot of the sickos had already sent stuff like child porn. These people have already broken the law by the time they show up to the sting.