3 ms·

The difference is that the "bait" used in this case is a 24-year-old woman with a wrinkled forehead: https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/08/30/magazine/30mag-

The difference is that the "bait" used in this case is a 24-year-old woman with a wrinkled forehead: https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/08/30/magazine/30mag-NetNanny-image-03/30mag-NetNanny-image-03-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/08/30/magazine/30mag-Ne... Hambrick was imprisoned for meeting the 24-year-old woman (who he had identified as an adult), not a 13-year-old girl. There were no children involved in any part of his case. Theft from a bait car is still theft, while meeting a 24-year-old woman is not meeting a child. If the middle-aged detective had not provided a false age to Hambrick, then Hambrick would not have been imprisoned. The fact that Hambrick was imprisoned is a failure of the American legal system's ability to recognize the harm of using false information to induce someone with no criminal record to perform an action that would lead to that person's imprisonment.

Natsu 6y ago
This whole thing is about trying to find and out for pedos to slip into their chats to avoid getting caught in a sting operation. The bait is always fake. No normal person is going to go to the house of someone who claims to be 13 for sex. It's either the FBI, an actual 13 year old, or someone not mentally able to consent to sex. In no event does going there make any sense to a normal person. Moreover, the premise of the headline is absurd. Not allowing any victims to be created is the ideal. If everyone willing to engage in pedophilia ends up chatting with a cop and landing in jail instead, that's the best case scenario.
- commoner 6y ago
  > If everyone willing to engage in pedophilia ends up chatting with a cop and landing in jail instead, that's the best case scenario. The woman was 24 years old, had the appearance of an adult, was identified by Hambrick as an adult, and had her messages written by a middle-aged man, so there is very little evidence that Hambrick would have been willing to engage in pedophilia. Imprisoning people with no criminal records for crimes that they are suspected of being willing to commit is a situation straight out of Minority Report.
  - Natsu 6y ago
    The idea that he was going to rape someone with mental issues does not make things any better in my mind. Rather, this reads like an attempt to create a new defense for pedophiles who get caught in sting operations. As far as I'm concerned, the author of this piece, Michael Winerip, is adjacent to them.

Natsu 6y ago

This whole thing is about trying to find and out for pedos to slip into their chats to avoid getting caught in a sting operation. The bait is always fake. No normal person is going to go to the house of someone who claims to be 13 for sex. It's either the FBI, an actual 13 year old, or someone not mentally able to consent to sex. In no event does going there make any sense to a normal person. Moreover, the premise of the headline is absurd. Not allowing any victims to be created is the ideal. If everyone willing to engage in pedophilia ends up chatting with a cop and landing in jail instead, that's the best case scenario.

commoner 6y ago
> If everyone willing to engage in pedophilia ends up chatting with a cop and landing in jail instead, that's the best case scenario. The woman was 24 years old, had the appearance of an adult, was identified by Hambrick as an adult, and had her messages written by a middle-aged man, so there is very little evidence that Hambrick would have been willing to engage in pedophilia. Imprisoning people with no criminal records for crimes that they are suspected of being willing to commit is a situation straight out of Minority Report.
- Natsu 6y ago
  The idea that he was going to rape someone with mental issues does not make things any better in my mind. Rather, this reads like an attempt to create a new defense for pedophiles who get caught in sting operations. As far as I'm concerned, the author of this piece, Michael Winerip, is adjacent to them.