Talk:Creep Catchers

The below are references to articles and press outlining the group, it's activity and behavior and how it has negatively impacted many people, further to this is evidence toward the fact that police do not work with or in conjunction with 'Creep Catchers' and are likely closer to breaking the law rather than helping to solve crime.

[23]

Truthitmatters (talk) 01:07, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

ask for citation for the non-profit organization tag there Creep Catcher, or any variation of which is not a Canadian registered not for profit organization as it has not been registered by this or like names through https://www.ic.gc.ca/app/scr/cc/CorporationsCanada/fdrlCrpSrch.html

So Perhaps it would be best to say Creep Catchers believe themselves to be an anti-pedophile activist group but many feel they are a vigilante group. Creep Catchers also often misuse pedophile and then provide the link from wikipedia definition of pedophile is there a way it could be anchored to the part of the article that discusses the misuse of the term. as their decoys are generally pubescent or post-pubescent teenagers. ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]} remove police invite evidence include only tips ^[5] I do think a criticisms section should be added but lets start with these or some of the above links could be used to elaborate on the media opinion section. Truthitmatters (talk) 21:31, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

@Truthitmatters: You're not going to find much sympathy online for child predators. You're suggesting that the subject is a vigilante group attacking men for contacting "generally pubescent or post-pubescent teenagers". I'm not buying that. You're making unreferenced claims ("Creep Catchers also often misuse pedophile") and using what we call weasel words ("but many feel"). If you use the actual news sources (not Blackfalds Life) you might be able to add a sentence or two to the media opinion section as there is some criticism of the group. There's a similar section on our article about military imposters. Can you provide a sample sentence you'd like to add? Chris Troutman (talk) 18:52, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

@Chris troutman: I am not trying to garner sympathy for child predators in fact there are some anti-pedophile groups that do it very well both with in the law and outside, but assist the law. I think the initial start of the organization was a bit mixed but quickly spun out of control leading to all the bad press and probably what is currently reflected on the page is what it was suppose to be. I don't feel like my cites where read. let me try again.

Creep Catchers believe themselves to be an anti-pedophile activist group their decoys first pose as adults then switch to being any where from 11 to 15 years old which are pubescent or post-pubescent teenagers would indicate they do not understand the definition of a pedophile. "Pedophilia is considered a paraphilia, an "abnormal or unnatural attraction." Pedophilia is defined as the fantasy or act of sexual activity with prepubescent children. ...." ^[1] "Pedophilic Disorder is a DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition), diagnosis assigned to adults ( defined as age 16 and up) who have sexual desire for prepubescent children (American Psychiatric Association, 2013a).Any behavioral expression of Pedophilic Disorder is a criminal ^[2]

Media, Police and other legal professionals refer to them as vigilantes and the police in many cities where there are chapters discourage the behaviour. ^{[3][4][5] [6][7] [8]}

Remove police accept evidence keep only tips ^[9]

"Camp said even if Creep Catchers methods were proper — which they are not — there are conflicts that would make co-operation with the group impossible. "As we can see from analyzing their website, they're a for-profit organization," Camp said. "They're in it for a number of reasons (and) one of them is commercial enterprise. We can't be involved in anything like that." " is direct quote of Staff Sgt. Stephen Camp of Alberta's Integrated Child Exploitation Unit. ^[10] ""In this case, police believe the victim was targeted online and lured into a situation by a person or group using vigilante-type tactics without justification or facts to support their claims, Blumhagen said in a news release." ^[11] I especially like this quote because it specifically says they don't wait for a catch but choose a target.

I would have to do much more research on the falsely accused as there is many of them in fact I think only on 2 occasions charges where actually filed I really don't want to watch that many of their videos. I would not mind doing a compilation of them targeting the vulnerable the Kelowna social worker was particularity interesting and may be able to find sources from both side but not sure how reputable and the woman in Edmonton who shortly after being caught committed suicide there are many articles on that one. Truthitmatters (talk) 03:44, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

@Truthitmatters: Please notice that the lede addresses Anti-pedophile activism, so there's no need to split hairs about what the DSM says versus attempted statutory rape. I'm fine with removing the words about evidence, as the citations indicate. Canoe.com isn't a reliable source so far as I can tell so that content can't be included. I'm fine with the criticism of vigilante justice with those attendant cites. I don't see any point in including the quote as what we're talking about is entrapment. There is no need for you to do other research as we're relying on secondary sources. It doesn't matter what their videos show. I can make the changes if this sounds reasonable to you. Chris Troutman (talk) 04:39, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

@Chris troutman: I am unsure what statutory rape has to do with only targeting hebephiles and canoe is owned by Postmedia Network one of the larger media companies in Canada. I am unsure what attempted statutory rape (i would think a minor would actually have to be involved for this to occur?)has to do with any of this? The focus of creep catchers is internet luring. I added the extra references for a pedophile in case you didn't understand what I was saying so that you would have a few options to check out. I used the quotes as I felt the cites had not been read. Creep Catcher is a for profit company and is condemned by the police. Please do the edits you feel are fit but would like feed back from other editors as well as it seems as soon as I use a cite that is highly critical or speaks to the ethics and tactics of the group it is then considered unreliable Truthitmatters (talk) 18:27, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

@Truthitmatters: I'm not making any changes. We're in disagreement and I don't think your intent here is reasonable. Chris Troutman (talk) 04:26, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Response to third opinion request:

I am responding to a third opinion request for this page. I have made no previous edits on Creep Catcher and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes.

@Chris troutman: @Truthitmatters:--I think the arguments provided by Truthitmatters is overly critical of the organization.I also feel there is no need to state the DSM definitions etc.It's a fact that the police has over the time condemned some of their methods of vigilant out-of-law activism but I believe your style of writing generates somewhat a wave of sympathy for pedophiles and makes the reader feel that a chunk of them of them are just subject to entrapment without any offence-which is a horribly wrong fact.Probably one/two lines about the mis-adventures of the group with proper citations will be enough.Also it is best to avoid WP:SYNTHESIS as far as possible.Light❯❯❯ Saber 15:55, 17 December 2016 (UTC) Light❯❯❯ Saber 15:55, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

@Winged Blades of Godric: Through the media police, sociologist, social workers, and lawyers have given those criticisms not me. Pedophiles are people and hating them just cause is wrong it is only when they act on the feelings that they should be held accountable for those actions. It is like saying being sympathetic to people who suffer from schizophrenia is wrong. What offenses are you referencing could you please clarify? My understanding is they have outed over a 100 people only 2 where charged. Most of the targets of creep catchers where subjected to the bait and switch method used outlined in the articles and they don't even target pedophiles which is why there has been so many criticisms. I think the dsm definitions should be included isn't this suppose to be a platform to help education people? I look at the sources for the original article and think how did this even make it up here? Given the amount of grief I have been given for few simple changes that reflect what the group actually does. Truthitmatters (talk) 20:44, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

@Truthitmatters:

I have some difficulty comparing pedophiles with schizophreniacs.Inspite of your brilliant(or parodical) username, I am at a loss if you want to paint the organisation as a nefarious one, whose only objective is to bait or lure innocent people into entrapment or harass them.To say it clearly,I think your intents are questionable.

Now, coming to your 1st source, it warns against this type of vigilant lure-based activism.The same view is mentioned in the 2nd source too.The 4th, 5th & 6th source-- all criticizes the ways of vigilant entrapment based activism and how often their evidence are not useful to the law (and)/(or) they create unknown dangers for themselves in the process.Only the 3rd source mentions about how a vigilant of the group harassed an innocent person and was subsequently put to trial.So none but a mere single one of the many sources you brought to your defense, criticises but the general bane of proactive vigilant activism.I did'nt find even a speck of mentioning of members of such groups harassing innocent pedophiles in the 5 articles.

I have just one advice--Don't make a mountain out of molehill.

You said--My understanding is they have outed over a 100 people only 2 where charged.Can you please provide the sources or did I miss the source.Or does it constitute original research?

Your statement-think how did this even make it up here? somehow broadcasts that you maybe don't find the topic suitable of inclusion in Wikipedia.If that's the case WP:AFD is the appropriate place to try!

We make edits on an article constituting about the respective gravity of opinions on any issue.That you like a quote hardly affects the followed stance.

Overall,I still stick to my point hat I agree only to the inclusion of the mal-effects of these type of pro-active vigilante tactics in a suitable manner in the article.

ThanksLight^{❯❯❯ Saber} 12:56, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

@Winged Blades of Godric: when you hate some because of a mental illness it is called holding a prejudice when you act on it it is discrimination and yes they are the same both schizophrenics and pedophiles are considered to be suffering from mental illnesses. You continue to refer to these people as pedophiles when they clearly are not. You also could not support your claim the people they outed made any offenses. I am not suppose to say what I think I am only suppose provide sources to help expand the article. If the opinion of the Canadian Public labels them a "nefarious" or "vigilantes" it should be stated would that not be the respective gravity of opinions on any issue. (I clearly misunderstood as I thought it was suppose to be fact based). Why is it my fault that the use decoys and bait and switch which implies entrapment; it is what they do not me. I also didn't ask them to only target people who may or may not suffer from ephebophilia or Hebephilia. If that garners sympathy for their targets from the general population or the reader maybe they shouldn't do it. I do have other cites stating the group harassed an innocent person(s) and target the vulnerable which are included in the cites lists at the top of the page however would like to get the smaller edits done first. I simply looked at one of video lists to get the approx number of outs and read 3 articles where charges where laid 1 plead guilty and other 2 are going to trial. Not sure that constitutes original research and I also didn't ask that to be included in the article either. I didn't know I also had to have a cite for everything I said on the talk page as well. I have read over 40 articles on this group because my first 4 were dismissed . So basically what I have heard is that because most people hold prejudices against pedophiles and do not accept the Wikipedia definition of pedophilia, I am being held to a much higher standard than the original author. In the first article it clearly says Raymond Dawson uses the bait and switch Truthitmatters (talk) 03:35, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

@Truthitmatters:--I strongly suspect you have certain communication difficulties in English and is essentially mis-construing my words. Cheers, that you are held to a much higher standard but that hardly grants you any permission in sharing your WP:POV on the subject, inspite of your self-proclaimed expertise.Thanks!Light^{❯❯❯ Saber} 08:55, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

This is my last reply till any other editor supports inclusion of your asked edits.Light^{❯❯❯ Saber} 08:55, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

MainSection Edit. The reference or request for reference to chat-logs is as well against the Criminal Code, Thus references to this material, or videos puts wikipedia at risk, thus will not be referenced. Please feel free to remove said information alongside the original reference should it be found too bias. Tristippie (talk) 16:04, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

I find it interesting that rather than a valid conversation about this, the required discussion was removed. furthermore the founding members names have been made available, should we be putting their real names in here? Tristippie (talk) 20:47, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/surrey-creep-catchers-president-ryan-laforge-arrested-during-catch

Ryan Laforge of Creep Catchers detained on a violation — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.130.165 (talk) 05:46, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

https://globalnews.ca/news/3896934/alberta-creep-catchers-sex-crime-red-deer-lacombe-carl-young-karl-murphy/

Karl Murphy of Creep Catchers has been convicted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.130.165 (talk) 05:50, 29 December 2017 (UTC)