by LaSal

Created on: August 18, 2007

If I were to understand the 'illegal entrapment' side of this debate, it would seem that the following facts were not in evidence.

Men looking to have sex with children have INITIATED CONTACT with children online.

Men looking to have sex with children have spent HOURS IN CHAT ROOMS DETAILING THE TYPE OF SEX they would like to have with these children.

Men looking to have sex with children have SENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF THEIR GENITALS to children online.

Men looking to have sex with children have SET UP APPOINTMENTS TO MEET the children with whom they have detailed the desired sex acts, and supplied with explicit photos.

Men looking to have sex with children have spent time, money, and energy to ARRIVE AT THE DESIGNATED MEETING SPOT expecting meet children who have been informed, via chat and photos, of what was wanted.

Men looking to have sex with children have DONE ALL OF THIS KNOWING:
a) it was illegal.
b) that to get caught would mean arrest.
c) it would mean jail time.
d) it would cause pain and suffering for their innocent family members.
e) they were doing this without any regard to the pain, suffering, and life long effect the molestation would have on the innocent young victim.

As far as I can see, if a person INITIATES contact, it isn't entrapment. If a person spends time detailing the type of sex he likes to someone he knows is a child, he's not being entrapped. If a person sends a photograph of his genitals to a child, and no one has a gun to his head forcing him to do such a disgusting thing, it's not entrapment. And if a person sets up a meeting with a child in an attempt to get sexual satisfaction from that meeting, it's not entrapment.

And if (THANK YOU DATELINE!) that person gets caught by the authorities, it's not entrapment, it's a very 'helpful service', by far!

Learn more about this author, LaSal.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.