response 75 of 90:

Feb 20 17:32 UTC 2001

Next they are going to require that you mail letters in person at the post
office, and take your fingerprints and a DNA sample.  How many pedophiles in
Michigan are actively abusing children?  This sounds like something calculated
to get votes, not results.

response 77 of 90:

Feb 20 20:26 UTC 2001

Pedophiles are a very real threat.  A commonly cited statistic is that
10% of boys and 25% of girls are sexually abused by the time they reach
majority.  It is very important to reduce these numbers.  

On the other hand, the Internet seems relatively harmless in this
regard.  It's hard to think of how a kid could be abused online --
especially if the kid has reasonably attentive and responsible parents.

I guess that given irresponsible parents, a kid could come in contact
with naked pictures or movies featuring sex.  A clever kid could even
manage to send naked pictures of himself or herself, or get involved in
some inappropriate CUSeeMe exchange.  

The worst abuses seem difficult or impossible to perpetrate via the
Internet.  Non-consensual sexual relations happening online seems
unlikely, and physical contact is obviously impossible.  The other
abuses are easy for a responsible parent to prevent.  

Considering that most sexual abuse is perpetrated by a relative or
well-known acquaintance of the parents, I think efforts to eliminate
sexual abuse should focus in that area.  

I think that the focus should at least be on the physical world. 
Limiting access to communications tools doesn't seem like a solution at
all.  

response 79 of 90:

Feb 21 00:15 UTC 2001

re #77: Those "statistics" first utilize a very broad definition of 
"sexual abuse", second conflate any child molestation with teenagers' 
experiences, and third don't point to pedophiles as the bulk of those 
acts are committed by heterosexuals.

There have been a number of cases where young teens have been enticed to
 meet strangers, often at motels, as a result of contact made over the 
Internet. A surprising number of cases, actually. That has become the 
favorite "sting operation" of late - after the statutes were duly 
amended so as to allow prosecution even though no child was involved, 
police officers have been pretending to be minors in various chat groups
 in order to entice people into propositioning them, a meeting is 
arranged, and the person is arrested.

response 81 of 90:

Feb 21 02:13 UTC 2001

That was totally imcomprehensible, in case you weren't paying attention.

response 83 of 90:

Feb 21 15:11 UTC 2001

Nope. Some are, some aren't. But most child molesters are not 
pedophiles.

response 85 of 90:

Feb 21 18:13 UTC 2001

Not all of them are "regular". Not all of them are "dudes", although 
most are.

response 87 of 90:

Feb 21 22:52 UTC 2001

It is very simple, actually. A pedophile's primary sexual fixation is 
upon pre-adolescent children. That does not mean that a given pedophile 
is a child molester - a person who molests children - as some pedophiles
 will resist the urge to do so. It also does not mean that a person
whose  primary sexual fixation is not upon pre-adolescent children, but
who  molests a child, is a pedophile. Most are not.

response 89 of 90:

Feb 22 23:24 UTC 2001

Aaron's explanation is not only correct, but in fact, regardless of whether
beady understands it, quite simple.