Police in UK Warn About Dating Apps After Serial Killer Conviction (betanews.com)

Mark Wilson, writing for BetaNews: Police are warning people who use dating sites and dating apps to take extra precautions to ensure their safety. The advice comes after serial killer Stephen Port who contacted his victims through apps such as Grindr and Gaydar. While people making use of dating services have always been warned to take safety precautions, police are concerned that sexual predators are increasingly using such sites and apps as a way of finding potential victims. The UK's National Crime Agency has noticed an alarming increase in the number of people reporting cases of rape after meeting someone through a dating site or app. In 2009 the number was just 33, while in 2014 it had jumped to 184. Clearly things such changes to the reporting of sexual assault need to be factored in, as do considerations such as whether the number of reported incidents represents an increase in actual incidents in real terms.

Comments

Also..

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

They should also warn about the dangers of meeting people at bars, parties, friend's homes, outdoor areas, malls, indoor areas, businesses, parks, playgrounds, movie theaters, civic centers, post offices, forests, etc etc etc.

Re:Also..

[ColdWetDog]

But especially on the Internet. That's even more dangerous.

Where men are men, women are men and children are FBI agents.

Re:Also..

[Calydor]

Sometimes being an introvert who doesn't like social events isn't such a bad thing.

Re: Also..

[Anonymous Coward]

... and they're men!

Re:Also..

[Solandri]

I think that's kinda the point. They're not giving the warning based on the premise that Internet meetings are more dangerous than other types of meetings. They're just warning people that meetings arranged over the Internet are just as dangerous as other meetings. There's a tendency for people to feel safer about meeting someone over the Internet because the initial correspondence is not direct. The nervousness and anxiety which primes your fight or flight mechanisms is missing or isn't as strong. And a lot of the subconscious body language cues which help you notice that something is "off" about this guy are completely absent. This may lull people into a false sense of safety about meeting someone IRL that they "know" from the Internet.

Re:Also..

[Hognoxious]

You left out catholic churches and (topically) football clubs.

Re:Also..

[Hognoxious]

There's a tendency for people to feel safer about meeting someone over the Internet because the initial correspondence is not direct.

Is there? Was there the same tendency back in the days when you had to write to a box number at the newspaper? I ... ummm ... heard it used to work like that.

Re:Also..

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

You left out catholic churches

Good point.

Re:Also..

[mjwx]

They should also warn about the dangers of meeting people at bars, parties, friend's homes, outdoor areas, malls, indoor areas, businesses, parks, playgrounds, movie theaters, civic centers, post offices, forests, etc etc etc.

First off, this is just the UK Police. They're just putting out a public service announcement after a few cases have been reported even though it's just stating the bleeding obvious. Its their way of showing everyone they're Doing Something(TM).

Secondly, its difficult for a predator who looks rats to get a girl into their home from a bar, parties, outdoor areas, supermarkets, B&Q's and what not. You do have to admit that the internet, especially hook up applications like Tinder have made it easier for them especially with fake profiles and what not. As the UK Police don't govern legal activities like hooking up, they've just released a bleeding obvious PSA hoping that people will look after themselves a bit better.

I don't think the number of cases has risen that significantly, neither do the UK police and courts, which is why they've only put out a warning (and not even a stern warning at that).

Re:Also..

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

Secondly, its difficult for a predator who looks rats to get a girl into their home

Gee whiz, I forgot that most rapists and predators and bad people look "rats" or are unattractive.

The UK Police should have just put out a PSA saying, "Only date attractive people! You have nothing to fear from attractive people because none of them have ever done anything bad."

Re:Also..

[RockDoctor]

Those box-numbered adverts were paid for by the person posting the advert(*). If that was done by cheque, then there is a traceable route there. If it were done in cash at the newspaper's office (or by postal order), then there were people who would potentially recognise (or at least be able to give a description of) the poster.

It didn't stop frauds and assaults, but it did discourage them.

(*) Remember - every column inch of "content" in a public newspaper or magazine exists solely for the purpose of selling that advertising space. The situation is different for a "house" journal - for example the "Weekly Slashdot News" recounting the drunken antics of the Editors on Saturday nights - where at least some of the production costs are carried as a loss by the home organisation, but even they tend to try to defray their running cots by selling advertising. The advertising sales and accounting staff of newspapers and magazines normally considerably outnumber the journalism department.

Re:Also..

[Anonymous Coward]

you are misunderstanding the meaning of looks rats

though it still doesn't mean as much as the gp thinks

Re:Also..

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

you are misunderstanding the meaning of looks rats

Enlighten me, please. What exactly does the phrase mean?

Conviction Convention

[Nkwe]

Hmm I first read the title as Convention instead of Conviction. Made the first read more interesting.

Reasonable Precautions

[Jason Levine]

Pretty much anyplace you meet someone (online or offline) has the potential of the other person being a creep or a criminal. This is why you never meet the person alone and in a private area for the first time. My wife and I met online (Yahoo Chat Rooms). We spoke for a month before meeting in person, but even then, my wife and I took precautions. We met in a very public place (a busy shopping area half way between where we each lived) and we each brought people with us to help "rescue" us if the other person wasn't who they said they were online. Thankfully, it all worked out nicely that day. (Except for having to leave each other at the end of the day. We clicked so well that we didn't want to separate.) Had it turned sour, though, we would have had precautions in place to ensure our safety.

Re:Reasonable Precautions

[Anonymous Coward]

Thankfully, it all worked out nicely that day.
 
That's not what she said...

Re:Reasonable Precautions

[Anonymous Coward]

That's illegal in the UK. That's illegal in the UK. Even assault sporks and big pencils are banned there

Stop reading the Daily Mail.

Re:Reasonable Precautions

[Anonymous Coward]

So you feel safer meeting a complete stranger when you know they can be legally carrying a deadly weapon? I certainly wouldn't.

Re:Warn about dating apps?

[Anonymous Coward]

Your "us" being you and those you hold captive in your basement.

British go

[Anonymous Coward]

Gotta ban em all

I met a crazy lunatic on a dating site.

[Anonymous Coward]

Now she's my wife.

Re:Warn about dating apps?

[Anonymous Coward]

Lets be honest about this, these so called internet dating sites, whether straight or homosexual, is a way for strangers to shag on the spur of the moment. If you a mechanism that goes from chatting online to meets on a short time scale then it is open to abuse from predators that lurks amongst us.

Bottom line is be aware of the dangers and use at your own risk.

Where's the control group?

[Anonymous Coward]

Numbers without references are so, so meaningless.

Numbers in the 100s sound really low to me.

First, I wonder how many that is out of. Seems like I've seen numbers of 20% + of dates having internet origin today. So, wouldn't that then be 184 out of millions?

What is the total number of reported rapes by dates? Is this more than 20% of that total?

As much as 70% of adults report having been sexually abused or assaulted at some point in their lives. The percentage that are raped just within the few years of college is usually estimated at over 25%. So, 184 out of a million could be a really low percentage compared to more traditional means of meeting dates.

Re:Where's the control group?

[Anonymous Coward]

The real question is that how many have been unreported?

Re: Where's the control group?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or maybe the real question is: Do these online dating apps keep track of their statistics? How many members do they have that cause most of their matches to never be heard from again? Should be trivial for a nanny state like the U.K. to force all dating app server software to flag potential serial killers. Ideally they'd have to link all of the different servers together and use some sort of real name policy or facial id to do the analysis across databases.

Re: Where's the control group?

[Anonymous Coward]

use some sort of real name policy or facial id to do the analysis across databases.

I would urge those who use online dating apps to be as security-conscious as possible and not to share personal data with anyone until they are sure about those they are communicating with.

Do you really not see the contradiction?

Photoshop has a lot to answer for

[Anonymous Coward]

Granted he put on a wig...

Re:Grindr and gaydar?!?!

[Anonymous Coward]

At least you can screen out people with poor spelling.

Re:Warn about dating apps?

[Hognoxious]

Perhaps there should be a rating system to weed out the naughty boys. Five stars = best bottyshag ever. Three stars = if it's in a hole you scored a goal. Zero stars = totally murdered me and dumped me in a lay-by on the M6.

It's a Welsh regiment, see

[Hognoxious]

Perhaps he should start reading the post he's responding to instead? Didn't see any mention of weapons in Jason Levine(196982)'s post.

Re:It's a Welsh regiment, see

[mjwx]

Perhaps he should start reading the post he's responding to instead? Didn't see any mention of weapons in Jason Levine(196982)'s post.

Yes, the AC was sarcasm. But it wasn't very good sarcasm so it's ended up at -1 where it belongs.

For those in the UK who would actually like to know about the reality of self defence in the UK, I strongly recommend parting with 2 squid for this e-book.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Self-Defence-Law-Practical-Understanding-Defending-ebook/dp/B00V44TZ2U
50 pages that explains the self defence laws in very simple language.

Realistically, I don't feel the need to have a weapon to feel safe in the UK. Most people don't and that is a good thing. But even if you did use a weapon in self defence you'll likely get off (the Rozzers will ask "Did you use reasonable force" and nod their heads slowly... the response should be obvious).

That being said, I know a bit of Krav Maga, so I'm not worried about being attacked by a knife wielding chav in as much.

Re:It's a Welsh regiment, see

[Hognoxious]

Depends whether they like you or not. The corrupt masonic twats confiscated my kubotan when I lamped a car driver who'd knocked me off my bike and made the mistake of getting out to try and finish the job.

And I wasn't even using it!

That was before riding a bike was trendy. In fact, it was practically illegal - it meant you were poor or a greenie.

Re:It's a Welsh regiment, see

[mjwx]

Depends whether they like you or not. The corrupt masonic twats confiscated my kubotan when I lamped a car driver who'd knocked me off my bike and made the mistake of getting out to try and finish the job.

Actually, that one is explained in the book. OK, but I'll save you the 2 quid and explain it.

It didn't matter if you used your Kubotan for defence, you were carrying a weapon so the plod had to seize it regardless. If you had of used it, you still wouldn't have been in any more trouble if you could demonstrate that you felt you needed to use it for defence (he attacked you, so yes you would have been justified). That's the crux of self defence laws in the UK, its based on what you, the victim felt was threatening at the time. Of course they still would have taken it off you.

A Kubotan doesn't really have any other purpose besides being a weapon, unlike say a heavy cane, umbrella, golf bat, cricket stick, big arse steel maglite or Leatherman. Heck, you could even get away with a crow bar as they have legit purposes.

If your attacker wants to claim you used excessive force (as opposed to reasonable force) then they'll need significant evidence that you used far more force than was required to subdue an opponent. Where most people fail to grasp this is that excessive does not mean any more force than is required, but significantly more force. I.E. if you were to strike an opponent once they were down 2 or 3 times that will easily be written off by the judge as the heat of the moment. However if you did it 7-10 times more, its clear that you had time to see the opponent was no longer a threat. Also if you were to break their arm in the struggle, that would also be easily explained as reasonable, if you kicked out 3 of their teeth whilst they were on the ground, that would be excessive.

Re:It's a Welsh regiment, see

[Hognoxious]

A Kubotan doesn't really have any other purpose besides being a weapon

Does, it had my keys attached to it. Tucks nicely through a combat belt.

P.S. I'd query the wisdom of carrying a Leatherman. Not quick to deploy and it doesn't really have the right handle for use as a weapon. But still it's a knife, and walking around with such (unless you can prove you're a chef on your way to work or whatever) is going to get you in hot water.

GAY serial killer...

[Anonymous Coward]

Why did the MSM miss that word out?

Re:GAY serial killer...

[Anonymous Coward]

What they don't want you to know is that Hillary is going to make you get GAY MARRIED!

It was obvious from the user interface.

[Snufu]

You swipe right/left on pictures of windowless vans.