The Fifth Edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) defines pedophilia as the sexual attraction that anyone, 16 years of age or older, has toward a pre-pubescent child under 13 years old (under 11 years old under certain circumstances) who is five or more years their junior. Because Elon Musk refused to adhere to the DSM-5 in that he used the term "pedophile" as a misnomer against someone, that individual turned around and sued him for defamation of character. Elon Musk had to part with a few million dollars and give it to that same person after settling the case. It wasn't too much money for him to give up inasmuch as he is one of the richest men in the world. Nonetheless, I'm sure that he still didn't like having to give that much money to anyone against his will.
I begin to question what makes these predator catchers here in the United States believe that the same thing that happened to Elon Musk could never happen to them. They're always taking writer's license with the definition of "pedophilia" and the likes in their videos. Predator catchers up in Canada have already had to face civil litigation because of their shenanigans against innocent civilians. The majority of these predator catchers have sketchy backgrounds that involve their presence on the wrong side of the law.
Yes, I'm aware of the actual definition of pedophilia, I'm just using the loose term of "pedo" most people use, which is finding anyone under 18 attractive.
That Elon Musk situation annoyed me but good thing is, most people called him out on it.
Pedo vigilante hunters annoy me a lot, they've killed innocent men, like in these cases:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13428229/women-guilty-torturing-neighbour-death-falsely-accusing-paedophile.html
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/nov/28/vigilante-lee-james-life-murdering-bijan-ebrahimi
https://metro.co.uk/2023/06/26/final-moments-of-dad-tortured-and-killed-over-false-paedo-claims-19013155/
"The majority of these predator catchers have sketchy backgrounds that involve their presence on the wrong side of the law."
Exactly. They're either abusers, drug addicts, sexual deviants, have CP (like with the QAnon case), etc.
Some comments I've read from others about vigilante hunters:
"They don't start with good intentions. Vigilantes can't be trusted. We had a guy at work who was always raging about paedos being killed, turned out he was beating his wife.
These are often violent people looking for an outlet. You can't put justice in the hands of a mob".
Even the "To Catch A Predator" series has shady ways:
"The group that worked on "To Catch A Predator" were proper dodgy, loads of those cases collapsed in court because the chatlogs had the so called "decoy" being the ones talking about sex."
"I’ve been listening to a podcast (Criminally Stupid) that covers the chat logs and outcomes of each case. You couldn’t be more right, in every one they’ve covered the decoy is always the one steering the conversation to sex (in an incredibly graphic way). A lot of the cases border on entrapment so it’s no surprise they never went anywhere."
Money and greed are what drive these predator catchers' outrageous actions too. They care more about lining their own pockets than they do about serving the so-called greater good.