Police Publish 'An Introduction To PEDO BEAR'

According to this article, the San Luis Obispo County Sheriff's Department knows that Pedobear is an Internet joke, but that hasn't stopped them from trying to warn the public about him. Their most recent tool in the fight against internet memes is this public safety information bulletin entitled: "An Introduction to PEDO BEAR." I look forward to the bulletin warning parents about the dangers of children playing in Chocolate Rain.

Comments

really?

[Pojut]

"We know that this is a joke, but we're going to approach it as if it's a serious thing."

Your tax dollars at work, people.

Re:really?

[AnonymousClown]

"We know that this is a joke, but we're going to approach it as if it's a serious thing."

Your tax dollars at work, people.

Yeah, well if you did a survey, I bet most of the people in the area would approve that their Sheriff's department is "doing something" about online child predators. And if the Sheriff in the county is elected, you just know in the next election he's going to have something that states he fought child internet predators.

The electorate is a bunch of morons - I mean morans.

Re:really?

[bistromath007]

Actually, they should only know that it is a joke, because that second part is a pile of crap that the police basically made up so they wouldn't look stupid for kicking PedoBear out of ComicCon.

Re:really?

[jythie]

And we have a winner. I am guessing this is exactly what is going on.. .getting a talking point for reelection since any retraction will probably be forgotten.. so instead of looking like an idiot who does not understand a very serious problem, he will get hailed as a diligent working trying to protect children.

Re:really?

[bluefoxlucid]

I don't get why people try to protect children. Lock the god damn things in a cage or throw them all in the deepest hole you can find, just get them the fuck away from me.

Re:really?

[evanism]

I've had a few friends who have been cops, and while being nice guys and girls they can be universally described as totally ignorant to the point of actual stupidity. It always stunned me at how profoundly they misunderstood the simplest things. They could not and would not contextualise anything.

Eveything was either breaking the law (however they chose to define it) or potentially breaking the law.

Needless to say, I have dumped all 5 of them knowing they would end up in trouble, psychotic or corrupt. I was 100% right on every one of them.

Re:really?

[Hoi Polloi]

Their next pamphlets will be titled "Warning Parents! Ceiling Kitty Is Watching Your Family Masturbate!" and "Are Your Kids Getting Rickrolled?"

Re:really?

[d3ac0n]

I've never had kids. I won't have kids

And we all thank you for voluntarily removing yourself from the gene pool.

Re:really?

[MozeeToby]

I would argue that it's a useless warning, in that 99.99% of the time people see Pedobear, it's as a joke. It would be like saying that many domestic abusers wear baseball caps, therefor you should be on the lookout for baseball caps because any time you see one someone will beat your spouse when you're not looking.

Re:really?

[The End Of Days]

I hear the police have also noticed that all pedophiles require food to survive, so we can add "eating" to the list of suspicious behaviors as well.

The more you know...

Re:really?

[Chibi Merrow]

PedoBear may be a joke, but dressing like PedoBear in a mask and costume and handing out candy is an inappropriate joke to play on young children (or their parents)

Why? I can understand the organizers of ComicCon asking the guy to go away, but why should the police be able to tell someone to go away if the organizers haven't asked them to? I coulda sworn we had freedom of speech around here...

Re:really?

[DrgnDancer]

But as someone else pointed out, using this as a "warning sign" of any sort is pointless. If some pedos have started using it, that's all well and good; but the vast majority of its use is as a joke or insult. Therefore the vast majority of the times you see it there's no hidden meaning. It's like saying that anytime you see someone with a cell phone you should be worried, because occasionally people use cell phones to sell drugs.

Re:really?

[Chibi Merrow]

Well, one, are you sure nobody asked them to? I would find it odd for your typical San Diego beat cop to be able to spot PedoBear in a crowd.

No, I'm not sure whether they were asked or not. But I was more questioning your statement, not what actually happened. You seemed to be implying that it would be okay for a police officer to walk up and ask someone to leave an event solely because they were dressed in a bear costume, even though they were breaking no laws.

Two, the Comic-Con organization enlists police to (drumroll please) police the Con. I'm not sure you're aware of the size and magnitude of this event. It's no convention in a hotel lobby; the convention center itself is like a small city. Convention-goers take over all of downtown San Diego for three solid days. It would be impossible for the Con organizers -- who are a nonprofit, volunteer organization -- to police the whole thing themselves.

I'm well aware of the size of ComicCon. That has no bearing on my point. All I was questioning was your seeming acceptance of the idea that police asking someone who isn't breaking any laws to leave an event without the request of event organizers is okay.

Re:Forget chocolate rain

[geekoid]

The dangers of not having a good science education program.

Again paranoia rules the roost

[antifoidulus]

This constant paranoia over pedophilia has gotten insane. While it is a terrible crime, the odds of your kid getting killed by an SUV dwarf the odds that they will get molested by a stranger(some studies suggest that the child knows the perpetrator about 90% of the time). Meanwhile fearful parents park their kids in front of some sort of glowing rectangle and let them eat themselves to an early grave because a guaranteed life of obesity seems somehow better than a slim(really slim if your properly educate and observe the children) chance that they will be molested.

Furthermore the whole police state mentality is driving people who have these urges further and further underground. Dan Savage had a really interesting call on his podcast a few months back about someone who said he couldn't control his attraction to children. He hadn't molested anyone yet but he was scared he might, but thanks to the way the law is written now, if he seeks help the psychiatrist MUST report him to the cops where he will be thrown in prison and then booted out into a world where he is a pariah just for THOUGHTS he may have had. So instead of this man being able to seek professional help(which could include chemical castration), he is now forced to battle his demons on his own and is probably MORE likely to molest a kid than if he had been able to get help. But somehow Americans think that if they can use the police to arrest someone, they should no matter what the actual or perceived crime is.

Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not trying to minimize molestation, it's a real and terrible thing. But being irrationally afraid of the problem isn't going to make it go away and really isn't going to leave your children in a very healthy state when they grow up.

Re:Again paranoia rules the roost

[AnonymousClown]

Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not trying to minimize molestation, it's a real and terrible thing.

I find rather annoying that you had to be that explicit and make that statement even here on Slashdot.

Re:Again paranoia rules the roost

[the_womble]

Not only to kids usually know the abuser, the abuser is usually a member of their family.

Re:Again paranoia rules the roost

[Anonymous Coward]

People make a lot of noise about nothing.

Given the content of your post, it is obvious that you are a pedophile. Also, I see that you failed to post that anonymously. I will be reporting you to the authorities so that they can permanently ruin your life, which is far less punishment than you deserve.

I will also point out that every reader who has not responded exactly as I have is just as guilty, and just as deserving of punishment, as this filthy, filthy pedophile.

Re:Again paranoia rules the roost

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, since you have a few anecdotes to share, I guess that means the reams of studies and statistics demonstrating the very real, long term, and harmful consequences of sexual abuse of children is invalidated!

Thanks for letting us know.

For what it's worth: sexual contact with a child by an adult (which is what we're talking about when we talk about pedophilia) is rape. It is very different from a couple 12 year olds "playing doctor." I also find it curious that you seem to feel most 14 year old girls are trying to hit on you, to the point that you have to sequester yourselves from their attention - is it a function of their actual behavior, or a function of you misinterpreting innocuous behavior?

Re:Again paranoia rules the roost

[Anonymous Coward]

Most studies on the topic only question those cases that are referred to law enforcement.

Population samples are much harder to find and consistently indicate minor long-term problems, but in aggregate, those are minimal... roughly as strong a correlation as growing up black, or poor.

Very few studies (only 3 IIRC) even allow the participants to specify that they feel the experience was positive. Those that do tend to have a not insubstantial number of responses that indicate this outcome.

Overall, the effect is a net-negative, certainly indicating a relative need to curtail the behavior, but it is NOT pervasive, nor it is necessarily automatically harmful.

I should know, I was a "victim" and have participated in victim counseling groups that were just awful. They tried to TRAIN us to blame all of our problems on the abuse, and many people bought it.

I've recently made contact with my "abuser" again, and we have become friends. I realized that using him as a scapegoat was hurting me, so instead I talked to him honestly about the things I liked and didn't like and have since gone on to meet a number of other former "victims" who are in the same boat.

My best friend was abused by a totally creepy guy for over 10 years and while he wishes it hadn't happened, he also recognizes that, frankly, it wasn't as big a deal. He has way more issues today stemming from his mother being overly-protective after this was all discovered, than he ever did with some weird guy tugging on his penis once a month.

Reading about the topic is something I do often and I know many many "victims". Those who are raped... as in... pinned down and penetrated... they have SERIOUS issues with trust and other things, but the majority of us who were gently diddled by someone we trusted... meh. Frankly, not something we should condone, but also not really a big deal.

I don't understand the paranoia. It's so unproductive as to be almost absurd.

Re:Again paranoia rules the roost

[Tetsujin]

Well, since you have a few anecdotes to share, I guess that means the reams of studies and statistics demonstrating the very real, long term, and harmful consequences of sexual abuse of children is invalidated!

Don't be a douche. He was talking about underage sexual activity, not sexual abuse. The law doesn't distinguish the two, partly because it's hard to do so. But if you have have studies and statistics about the long-term aftereffects of consensual underage sex that you'd care to (not) cite, that could be different, you know?

Re:Again paranoia rules the roost

[bluefoxlucid]

I don't understand the paranoia. It's so unproductive as to be almost absurd.

Sheep herder mentality. The politicians incite fear and get control. We always need witches in our society to hunt.

Yes, you're right, this is not something we should condone. But that said, we have absolutely no way of evaluating "13 year old Megan snuck over the neighbors house and asked to suck his dick after going on the Internet to look at NAUGHTY PICTURES teeeheeeheee..." (yes this happens) versus "35 year old Michael Kiddyfucker gagged, beat, and anally raped 9 year old Jenny for 10 hours straight." That means our very reaction to a ... behavioral issue... is harsh and thus likely traumatizing. Worse, pressure and coercion issues (rather than outright rape) cause mental disturbances that are EASY to deal with; but we treat them like serious catastrophic tragedy and ... cause severe trauma, again.

So we're causing damage by evaluating the situation wrong. We're applying the wrong kind of "help" at the very least, and at times where no help is needed (I know, that's a risky thing to say; but it happens to be true, just extremely unpleasant...).

Re:Again paranoia rules the roost

[Tetsujin]

You've got a fair point that underage sexual activity is largely irrelevant to the topic of pedophilia. I think bluefoxlucid may have taken antifoidulus's text a bit out of context, or gone off-topic a bit. But his point, as I understood it, is that there's a distinction between underage sex and sexual abuse - and that it's not the act of underage sex that's harmful, but the scenario of being raped.

The law can put out a blanket definition that classifies any sex with a minor as "rape" - and that can be a very useful thing, since law and its execution are inherently imperfect - but when I use the word "rape" I refer specifically and exclusively to cases where the sexual activity is non-consensual.

It's fine if you don't believe bluefoxlucid's stories are typical of actual reality. It doesn't reflect my world view either. But I think if you (I assume you're the same coward) want to bitch about how his anecdotes contradict piles of research, you should at least make sure it's the right research, that's all.

Let me ask you this very simple question: Would you want somebody who can say these things teaching *your* 12 year old daughter about sex?

This seems like a ridiculous and somewhat vague question.

No, I wouldn't want my daughter to have sex when she's 12, at all. I expect I'd do my best to prevent that. But if she chose to do so, I don't think it would then be right to say the other party had committed "rape". Whatever the law says, I think 12 is old enough that a child should be able to take a certain level of personal responsibility for their decisions. If my daughter makes a decision and then finds she regrets it, is it right then to use the law to ruin someone else's life for it? I don't think that's something to be taken lightly.

But there's how I view the issue in principle, and how I'd actually react when this is no longer an abstract question, and there's decisions I might be obligated to make based on other facets of the law. I honestly don't know what I would do in that situation. I hope I'll never have to find out. :)

While they're at it

[Anonymous Coward]

... they better put up a similar warning page about Chris Hansen, too. He tends to show up in all the same places as pedobear.

Re:Forget chocolate rain

[Moryath]

Given that no cop in the USA is non-corrupt any more? This is completely expected.

I'm actually surprised they didn't beat the poor guy in the costume up, just for the fun of it.

Re:They say it STARTED as a joke

[Scrameustache]

This summary is blatantly false after even only thirty seconds of looking at its links - for example:

The Pedo Bear began as an online Japanese cartoon character, and is known for his "lecherous nature" towards prepubescent children.
Recently, pedophiles have adopted the bear as a mascot.

The summary omits that transition part, wherein the only valid application of Pedobear is that of a joke, and pedophiles haven't picked it up and ran with it.

[CITATION NEEDED]

Which pedophiles, when, and where? Be precise, name names.
Once you're done with that, look up what "FUD" means, you'll obviously learn new things.

Re:sadly

[Scrameustache]

PEDO BEAR is becoming a tool for pedophile to use.

I have doubts about the certainty of your fears. Do you have proof? You wouldn't just be saying that based on absolutely nothing, would you?

Tax dollars

[Anonymous Coward]

Your tax dollars at work

Indeed they are at work, if you're the one on the receiving end. From the top of the power pyramid all the way down to the local sheriff, as long as the money is passing through your hands, you are in a position to exploit that cash flow for personal gain. THAT is why government loves to spend money on failure and pointlessness -- they still win.

Re:Forget chocolate rain

[Jawnn]

Check out the dangers of playing in sprinklers.

How uneducated can you get?

Very, but they still get to vote. Three guesses as to which way "they" lean.
Seriously, I want to laugh (and I do) but this (TFA and the sprinkler idiot) is troubling. Not just because these cops are stupid, but because it reflects a general failure of critical thinking across our society. The intellectual capacity required for a reasonable skepticism seems to be escaping a larger and larger swath of the populace, a swath which apparently now takes in those in important public safety roles. We're doomed.

Re:Forget chocolate rain

[spun]

I'll bite. Which way do cops lean? IMHO they lean towards "more jobs for cops with better pay and less work." This only looks right wing because their interests coincide with those of the right wing when it comes to "more jobs for cops with better pay and less work." Are cops for a balanced budget? Not if it means cuts for them. Are they for states rights? Not hardly! They are for cops' rights, they don't really care if they get them from the fed or the state. Socially, they may be somewhat conservative, especially when it comes to punishing criminals (of course.) And how do cops feel about unions? Great! As long as it is their union. Your union is useful as a cop employment program, you and or the boss need protection from each other, right? Overtime, baby!

A lot of what looks like partisan politics on bothy sides is actually lazy, selfish politics and people only tend to agree with party planks that directly benefit them.

Re:What about Pedobears friends?

[Clandestine_Blaze]

Don't worry, Canonical will eventually get around to using that as an Ubuntu release name.

To disserve and terrorize

[The Archon V2.0]

cute face and non-threatening appearance negate the truth of his sinister, much darker side.

Number of actual children Pedobear has molested: 0.

Number of actual children "respectable" people with power have molested: Seemingly infinite.

Might want to focus on the proven danger there, Mr. Police Officer.

We have gone from a society of doers to a society of press-releasers. Welcome to the empire's fall, kids. Enjoy the bread and circuses.

Pedobear is and should be associated with the internet and pedophiles/sexually-preferential offenders who reportedly use him to communicate their interests in young children to each other.

I love that. The entire point of the document is to FEAR THE BEAR! but their evidence can be summed up as panic-panic-guy-over-there-seen-with-a-kid-REPORTEDLY-child-molester-panic-panic.

So one guy in a suit in public surrounded by cameras watching his every move = advanced agent for the Pedophile Illuminati? I can see some cop sitting inside HQ and cuddling his gun, gibbering "First the queers ruined rainbows and now the baby-rapers are ruining teddy bears!"

And if I was part of some secret and highly illegal group that needed a way of identifying members I don't think I would use the one thing in the entire universe that people associate with the illegal activity in question.

may be an indicator of the presence of individuals who have a predilection to sexually inappropriate, or even assaultive behavior

Translation: We will use it as a justification to kick down your door, terrorize your family, and shoot your dog in the middle of the night. Saves us having to make up an "anonymous tip" and finds you guilty in the eyes of the potential jury pool all at once!

"Beware the Four Horsemen of the Information Apocalypse: terrorists, drug dealers, kidnappers, and child pornographers. Seems like you can scare any public into allowing the government to do anything with those four." - Bruce Schneier.

Re:Forget chocolate rain

[gweihir]

The intellectual capacity required for a reasonable skepticism seems to be escaping a larger and larger swath of the populace

It seems this way, but if you look at history it's really just that more of the population has the ability to communicate to a large audience. Modern communications haven't resulted in better quality of information--it's just made communication cheaper and more accessible.

And everybody gets a say, without any quality control. I think you have it exactly right.

Re:Forget chocolate rain

[FuckingNickName]

Have they ever enforced a drug law? Completely fucking corrupt.

You're an idiot. The police should not selectively enforce the law. In fact, the obvious way of being a corrupt policeman is to selectively enforce the law.

Re:Forget chocolate rain

[Falconhell]

Police are continously selectively enforcing the law. Everry time any cop doesnt book a litter bug or a illegally parked car they are using their discretion. Personally I would like the police to concentrate on protecting people from violence and theft not enforcing pot laws for example.

Re:Forget chocolate rain

[AnObfuscator]

Check out the dangers of playing in sprinklers.

How uneducated can you get?

Very, but they still get to vote. Three guesses as to which way "they" lean.

Hmmm.... I'm guessing the opposite of the way you lean?

Seriously, I want to laugh (and I do) but this (TFA and the sprinkler idiot) is troubling. Not just because these cops are stupid, but because it reflects a general failure of critical thinking across our society. The intellectual capacity required for a reasonable skepticism seems to be escaping a larger and larger swath of the populace, a swath which apparently now takes in those in important public safety roles. We're doomed.

Have you read up on some history recently? Witch burnings. Inquisitions. Holy wars. Mccarthyism. Geocentrism. Racism. Slavery. Feudalism. These aren't exactly a new phenomenon. To be honest, we're probably better off now than we've ever been before, and we've made it this far. I'm not terribly worried.