
From MSNBC and Newsweek ...
Is there such a thing as a lawful pedophile? Parents and children's advocates in the Los Angeles area have grown worried about Jack McClellan, a self-described pedophile who in recent months has maintained an on-again, off-again Web page where he charts his trips to family-friendly venues like parks, county fairs and bowling alleys to meet what he calls LGs—little girls. McClellan tells reporters that he gets a "high" from being around girls between 3 to 11 years old, but insists he does not molest them.
Have we lost all common sense as a nation? Any law that "protects" scum such as McClellen is being misapplied. He is a danger and one single child hurt, molested, or even stalked and ogled as a result of his despicable activities is one too many.
This is an interesting and relevant current discussion topic on Newsvine ...
The Problem with NBC's "To Catch a Predator"
Personally, I'd love to see Chris Hansen get on this story about McClellen - predators like McClellen and his ilk need to be stopped ... cold.
Be careful, Tom: while I am equally repulsed by this person--don't tell me 'he's really a nice guy'--and fear for the safety of young girls, our laws are such that until he crosses that line he is innocent of legal wrong-doing. I know that's skewed, but that's the way it is. Going further to discuss 'what should be done to this guy' is teetering way close to criminalizing thought. Then we'd have to commission the Thought Police.
I submit that this IS unquestionably thought crimes; planning what to do and how to do it will invariably lead to when to do it. But so far we have freedom in this country, and that includes freedom of thought. 'Big Brother' has been held off; criminalizing thoughts such as these will lead us where we don't want to go.
The truth is, and the article states this, he is an anomaly, in that most predators hide in the shadows. That means there are hundreds more thinking this very same way. What McClellen has done is distinguish himself in a way that allows the legal system to monitor him and his thoughts as a shield of protection. And being online is traceable, so when he moves they'll know that, too. I think we need to be equally--if not more--worried about the ones who are still shadows. I hope there is a way to monitor everyone who visits his site.
I think we need to be equally--if not more--worried about the ones who are still shadows. I hope there is a way to monitor everyone who visits his site.
Excellent thoughts, and I agree with your note.
My concern is when a site is telling you how you can engage in criminal behavior - ala the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) - where is that legal line?
I can tell you if I ever saw McClellen or his ilk stalking my daughter or a group of young girls, he would be praying for the police to get to him first.
he would be praying for the police to get to him first.
I do agree, Tom. And there is reason to be concerned about specific web sites. But what about the sites that teach you how to build a nuclear bomb? Or how to make meth in your own kitchen? Or the numerous books that detail how to commit the perfect murder?
It seems to me it's still freedom of speech. Talking about it, and thinking about it, aren't criminal. Planning it is criminal, thus the necessity of keeping a close eye on things.
Agreed.
By the way, I saw in passing today that this McClellen perv has been ordered to stay away from children by a judge.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |