[NumberCruncher]

I wish I would not have a standard post for topics like this:

Every time a surveillance system and violation of privacy rights is advertised in the EU as a solution against child abuse and trafficking I ask myself how such a system could have changed the outcome of a case like Dutroux. Would have been the dozens of witnesses and police officers involved in the investigation suicided a way sooner, later, more silently, or at all? We will never know...

[themafia]

Surveillance, as typically deployed, cannot _stop_ the acts of abuse. It may be helpful in locating evidence that they occurred, but by that point, you've already allowed nearly irreparable harm to a child.

Even if it did work it would be completely ineffective at reducing the number of victims. Even if it somehow did by proxy then criminals would simply get smarter and find new ways to completely evade this system.

I have a large amount of disrespect for people who should know all this yet push these types of solutions anyways.

[mvdwoord]

Sad but true. Many such cases as well not only limited to this field. There is a huge scandal in the Netherlands where it has been shown that Tax officials have repeatedly, and knowingly, did unlawful things which literally drove some people to suicide, and did irreparable damage to lots of people / families. They also repeatedly lied to parliament about this.

We have the proof. We do fuck all about it. And yeah, the Dutroux case (as well as e.g. Rotherham c.s.) hit hard. Too hard for most regular people to even properly come to terms with it.