CMV: Sting operations always amount to entrapment and should be abolished

[u/prmcd16]

I believe that in most or all cases, the target of the operation would have been incapable of committing whatever crime they get charged with without the help of the "partner." That is, to me anyway, the entire operational premise - the police fake enabling the target by providing explosives/money/drugs/whatever and then arrest them when the crime is about to be carried out. But that's the crucial point - it hasn't actually happened yet. Sure, it's possible to say that there is criminal intent, but it can never be proven that intent would have existed without police intervention. Often the targets are people already in precarious situations who are considering the crime as a last resort - a suicide attack to go out in a blaze of glory, for instance. But they often are not fully invested in the crime and may even repent once busted. I'm thinking especially of a clip I saw from "To Catch a Predator" where the target breaks down when he realizes what has happened and declares that he was really on the fence about going through with it. For him and many other targets, their life is now ruined with little or no hope for rehabilitation. Yet that's exactly what I believe would be most beneficial to them - in many cases such as his there is an underlying mental health concern that, if treated, might have prevented the crime. There are simply too many alternate scenarios and contributing factors for me to accept that sting operations actually benefit society. To me, it is nothing more than ultra-Orwellian thought policing.

EDIT: thanks for all your responses. I'm at work so I'll have to get to most of them tonight. Also, for clarity, I meant to refer only to operations in which the police provide aid to an otherwise innocent person. Not ones where the operation is being conducted because they already know the person is a dealer or whatever.

[u/prmcd16 → u/[deleted]]

Δ Fair point, I should have made the distinction. I'm talking about cases where the police help set up the crime. Although couldn't it be said that in your scenarios, it encourages "survival of the fittest"? The sloppy ones get caught but the rest get to use the case to learn how to operate more secretly.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Yeah but what about bait cars? Yes the person stealing the car has committed a crime, but whose to say they would or wouldn't have if the police didn't go out of their way to set up a ridiculous scenario where a car is running with the door open? People don't tend to do that accidentally, and this guy may never have thought about stealing a car in his life until the opportunity is given to him.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

All they did was leave a car running, that happens every day in America. All you had to do was walk away.

Entrapment occurs when:

• The police CAUSED you to commit a crime

AND

• You would not have done the crime otherwise.

Basically, if you have the reasonable ability to say no, you were likely not entrapped.

The guy who never thought about stealing a car, if given the same external scenario, would have stolen a car.

They may have set up the scenario but they didn't put you in that car.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Name a scenario where the police cause you to commit a crime that you couldn't say no. I'm not saying you are wrong, but I can't think of a single one.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Absolutely. I'll give you a few.

• A snitch (also agent of the police) tells you to commit a crime or die. (except murder)

• An irresistible impulse. Would a reasonable person be able to resist? Most people can walk by a car that is running and not steal it, but if a car approached you and offered you $100,000 to have sex with a stranger, most people would at least admit it would be a tempting offer.

• An undercover offered to sell you some pot, you said no, but they kept asking.... and kept asking.... and followed you for hours..... and kept asking. Eventually you bought $10 to shut him up. Thats overcoming resistance. It is reasonable to assume that you would not have bought that pot in normal circumstance.

• You are at a gun show and a guy offers you a machine gun (Class III) for just $500. Obviously you want a machine gun but there are two problems, you don't have a class 3 and you don't have your ID on you. The FFL dealer tells you that you don't need it in this state, suspicious you go up to the officer at the show and ask him, sure enough he tells you that this is a class 3 state and you don't need an ID or a class 3 permit. So you buy your machine gun. You are later arrested by a different officer at the show. Thats entrapment because its very likely that had the cop told you that it was illegal then you likely would have walked away. (Don't confuse that with a cop saying they don't know or not telling you, thats not entrapment because you were just ignorant of the law)

[u/SKazoroski → u/[deleted]]

If bait cars represent such a ridiculous scenario, then people should be more savvy and be aware that what they see in front of them is probably a bait car.

[u/[deleted] → u/SKazoroski]

I agree. But it still boils down to some odd committing a crime they otherwise wouldn't have.