Then stop justifying their actions by talking nonsense about using pictures of underage girls and boys, as if that is in any way meaningful, when it is their responsibility to stop.
Are we talking about those countries? We are talking about men from the UK they are aware that soliciting sex with a minor is illegal. So when they know they are speaking to someone under the age of 16 it is their responsibility to stop. Simple as
Let's put it this way. I am going to be 26 years old soon, I get mistaken for being aged between 16-21. I have seen 14 year old girls who look about the same age range as me. So that is enough to show personal perception about looking a certain age, is besides the point.
What are you using then? Because all your responses so far seem to be justifying grooming, that in some cases it OK to groom because the person looks older and is willing to meet up and therefore you wouldn't personally worry about them.
That is correct. He never makes first contact, they contact him first, he then informs them that he is under 16 years of age in his first message and it's up to them how they lead the conversation from there.
I'm not sure if this is a fact, but it may be illegal for him to use pictures of a person who is under the age of 18, especially without consent, so he consensually uses photos of over 18's who look as young as possible. The fact is though, these men are still a threat to children/young people...
In the UK if you send 2 or more messages to someone under the age of 16 that are sexual it is classified as grooming. They were breaking the law, therefore they are a threat to children/young people under the age of 16. It doesn't matter that they are a young teen, it's illegal in the UK...
What you're saying makes no sense. They are a threat to children if they are using the opportunity to groom someone they believe is a child and meet up for sexual purposes. That COULD have been a real child. If it was a real child that they were interacting with, they would have done the same...
And? They have taken the opportunity to break the law and possibly assault a child. That is their full responsibility, it doesn't matter if they wouldn't have done it without the opportunity to. When given the chance to interact with a child/young person they steered the conversation into...
its a poor excuse and victim blaming. when someone replies to your message saying "I'm only 12 so I know you probably don't want to speak to me" that's the right time to end the conversation not then continue it and say things like "if we cuddled I might get an erection" there is plenty of...
This really is such a typical victim blaming excuse. "It's not my fault officer. A 12 year old girl/boy responded to my message, what was I suppose to do?" Ridiculous
What is "as long as they start puberty to you?" Some girls start their period at 8/9 years old.
Actually he has caught paedophiles, one who said he was accused of touching his grandaughter. Another who assaulted an underage girl before. It's not baiting if you are told several times the person...