re: Trying to stop child trafficking is now "Qanon-adjacent" and "paranoid"

quote:

---

I literally responded to you with cites to stats and reports. LITERALLY did this.

---

If you literally did, and I literally missed it, you LITERALLY could have simply reiterated it. I suspect in a sea of posts, you literally don't know how easy it can be to overlook one. I mentioned that in a previous post as well.

All the Qanon BS, and hypotheticals lose relevance, given your simple real-world example. It is base to your entire argument. In a situation like this, return to it, repeatedly.

quote:

---

They will argue that your continued participation in this thread is indicative of some deep emotional attachment to the issue.

---

Yeah, well, clearly they don't know my history of hyperfocus on particular subjects over the last 20 years



This is like a 3/10 on intensity scale. Now True Detective Season 1? I had a gif made for me after I demolished people for days after that show fizzled out. PsychTiger is posting. He can confirm.

quote:

---

That's why people who post the "why are you remaining so non-emotional and rational about this issue" don't get it.

---

I missed the post where someone chastised you for being "non-emotional." There are plenty of posters stating their justifiable reasons for having an emotional attachment to this issue. There are also plenty of posters who have mentioned that your comparisons don't stand up to scrutiny and even if they did, would still not diminish the moral and prudent means to devote public attention to this topic. Of course, you will recharacterize these posts as people saying you are wrong for being "non-emotional," and then get very emotional if people use the same rhetorical ploy in summarizing your arguments. That isn't quite as bad as parsing the posts to take items out of context, and railing against other for doing the same, but it is in the same family.

Also, being consistent and not going full Hank in insulting people, does not equate to rationality. Also, the absence of emotion does not equate to rationality. Heck, by those definitions, the "q-tards" or "patriots" or whatever petword you want to use, would be using the most rational sources.

We get it, you love you some Satan, and you love to talk about yourself. But that wasn't the subject of this thread. Its also not an exercise in rationality, but an exercise in anecdote. Those that have engaged you on your preferred discussions on the Dark Lord, have discussed how its distringuishable:

- You don't have some Pazdar like figure promoting junk science to oppress people
- You don't have any Eccols style prosecutions wherein motive has been attributed to your favorite deity (of if you do, that's not the qualitative data you are sharing); and
- You don't have a statistically significant targeting of any industry, etc by federal prosecutors. In fact, the emotional cry you do hear is because many are concerned its underpoliced and improperly prosecuted.

quote:

---

I missed the post where someone chastised you for being "non-emotional."

---

I'm telling you man, this dude is whacked the frick out. Hes literally having conversations no one else is having.

Something is wrong with him.

quote:

---

I missed the post where someone chastised you for being "non-emotional."

---

CA was the primary

I doubt she'll deny it

quote:

---

and even if they did, would still not diminish the moral and prudent means to devote public attention to this topic.

---

Nobody is against factual, rational light being shined on this issue. Nobody.

Presenting this issue in the wrong light ultimately hurts efforts to deal with trafficking. I just posted an article that goes into detail about this by people who are on the front lines. The last major panic was the Wayfair stupidity, which raised "awareness" that ended up hurting their ability to help victims (b/c it was irrational-emotional "awareness" best described as a moral panic).

I'll give an example. Have you ever seen the social media moms losing their shite and creating a share-storm b/c random Latino men happened to be at a store where the moms were with a kid? Of course, it is CLEARLY trafficking and all the moms flip out about it for a few days? That, technically "raises awareness" of the issue, but does it help? Hell no.

quote:

---

We get it, you love you some Satan

---

I don't believe Satan exists.

I don't believe White or Black Magik exists.

quote:

---

I don't believe Satan exists.

---

Yet, you are fixated on the subject

quote:

---

Rog, will you admit you're being a complete idiot if she agrees with what I said?

---

Youre running around acting like numerous posters are telling you that you are too rational and non emotional.

Youre lying. Your ego is out of control.

That is not a good link for your argument. The report argues that there are systemic issues that under-prosecute forced labor trafficking

quote:

---

WHY ARE THERE SO FEW FORCED LABOR CASES?

There is no single explanation as to why forced labor cases are charged less frequently than criminal cases of sex trafficking. However, there are many factors that may contribute to the lower rate of prosecution in comparison to sex trafficking.

First, sex trafficking is often more visible than forced labor, as it often involves noticeable activities that take place in public areas such as hotels or streets. Forced labor, however, often occurs in less prominent settings such as farms, factories, or within homes. The lack of visibility in forced labor cases makes it difficult to identify potential victims or gather evidence against a trafficker.

Secondly, many victims of forced labor may fail to recognize that they are being exploited by a trafficker and similarly, law enforcement and the public at large may fail to understand the distinctions between administrative labor violations and forced labor. Third, forced labor investigations and prosecutions can be incredibly complex and difficult to prove, as they often involve issues such as debt bondage, immigration status, and methods of coercion that are distinct from those methods used in sex trafficking cases. Extrinsic, forensic, and corroborative evidence may be more difficult to obtain in comparison to more objective sex trafficking cases, and therefore cases of forced labor rely heavily on victim disclosure and testimony.

While there are significantly fewer forced labor cases filed than commercial sex trafficking cases, this should not be considered as an indicator that there is less forced labor occuring in the United States. Information such as the data presented in the FHTR should be used to evaluate and shape best practices in the federal response to combat forced labor.

---

That's from page 12 of your link.

quote:

---

Perhaps you are now understanding other posters points. They would like the Feds to want something to do with this.

---

They don't have the resources. They assist local operations but state LEO is much more numerous and have the varied resources to investigate these claims.

The feds have priority crimes and rely on the state agencies to handle the rest. Drugs are not a priority, either. Probably 90-95% of drug prosecutions are state or local level. Now child porn? The feds do consider that a priority and often take state cases to prosecute federally.

Here's my question:

When can we start "Democrat Trafficking" out of this country to Venezuela? Or Columbia? Or China? Or Iran? Or just plain to anywhere but the USA?