Sting Operations

Alright, I actually got inspiration for this thread from the most recent episode of South Park (go figure).

The topic here is the fairness of sting operations. For those who don't know, a sting operation is an operation deployed by a law enforcement agency in which undercover agents pose as something illegal in order to catch criminals in the act of committing the crime. Examples include things like pretending to be prostitutes, acting as children in chat rooms to catch pedophiles, pretending to be drug dealers, ect.

I personally feel that there is a moral implication here, because the law enforcement agency is using deception to basically pressure people into committing crimes. An example of this would be a man who wouldn't ordinarily pick up a prostitute, but the enticement from the law enforcement official pressures them into doing so. Similarly when law enforcers basically ease pedophiles into pushing for personal details.

An argument would be that the criminals would be committing the crimes anyway, so they're just an effective way to catch them, but I'm not sure. So I'm opening this up to you guys for discussion to see what you think.

 

I'm not completely sure how I feel about this. I really disagree about the online pedophile thing though, those guys didn't commit any real crime - all they did was talk to somebody online and ask to meet them.

 

1. It's to catch illegal stuff.
2. If you believe its immoral, then you must be part of the reason.
3. It's government run, they only catch guilty people.
4. There are no innocent bystanders, they have significant proof.
-----
On the other hand, I have not heard of sting operations where the general public was affected.
Mostly its drug busts/ mafia raids and etc.

Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time.

 

I don't see how it's wrong, but when are you going to apply it? I mean, if you're going to only use stings to catch immoral behavior, then that takes away prostitution and drug use. (I'm sure I don't need to get into how drug use and prostitution isn't immoral..)

The whole 'I'm want to meet you, little girl' thing is out too. I guess you can apply it if the guy says something like 'Oh, you're 6? I'm gonna rape you.'

What other scenario am I missing?

 

Yea, but look at the pedophile example. Being a pedophile isn't illegal. Being a child predator is. When the law enforcers go out of their way to put a pedophile in a situation where they could make a bad choice, isn't that defeating the purpose of catching a criminal? Out of all the "sting operation" issues, that one is the biggest for me, because the people they trick may not necessarily be on the internet with the intent of looking to prey on a child. Generally their personal instincts (which aren't legal) are played on by the law enforcers to pressure them into doing something they either wouldn't have normally tried to do, of even tried to avoid doing. It's like giving a heroine addict heroine to see if the pressure to take it will get to him, and then arresting him when he does.

 

It's more like arresting someone that's pointing a gun at someone. And you don't know if there are any bullets in there or not. And you won't find out.

 

No, it does not boil down to that. Shooting a gun at somebody is a direct threat against their life. Chatting to somebody you think is underaged and trying to meet them is different because there is no victim

No it isn't like that either. Pointing a gun at somebody is threatening their life.

 

I didn't say anything about laws, and I don't really care what they say.

 

It really depends on the type of sting really... Like leaving a bait car for someone to steal is perfectly fine...

 

If someone offers some crack, and you say yes, you're supporting a criminal and doing an illicit activity. Lol but weed stings, fuck that. America locks away too many petty criminals

 

I agree with most sting operations but petty stuff like an undercover asking to buy a 1g off weed of you is bullshit

 

It's not like they go around with a billboard saying "Crak 4 Sail". They do it discretely like any other dope dealer. With that said, how can they pressure someone into buying crack or whatever drugs when they do not advertise? The buyer's come to them. And if you feel pressured into buying drugs your going to buy from anyone who sells. Period. And even if they do ask you if you want to buy drugs and you accept. Why is that any different than some random dude asking you and you accepting?


Bottom line, if you don't like the punishment, don't do stupid shit.

 

Ok. What's your point? Your premise is still wrong.

 

Tottaly fair
just dont break the law

 

well i think that if they are criminals and this catches them thats good. but i do think its preety deceptive and we are sinking to their level if we do. i think their is some right and wrong in the situation

 

Interesting topic. As far as pedophiles, the cops usually have their targets and they just need to catch them (As far as I understand). As for catching people that are involved with prostitutes, that could be a strong argument. But it boils down to... Do guns kill people or do people kill people?

Answer: People...

 

I have no problem with the police doing their jobs. They are just looking for illegal activity and they absolutely need a good "hint" that an illegal activity is going to happen.

 

I dont see anything wrong with them at all. If it catches people with the intention to commit crimes then whats the harm? It also stops them from commiting the crime on someone else eg Bait car being stolen. Its better than a civilians car being stolen.