Dante, I generally agree with everything you say, but I think you have an important point wrong.

"Despite myths and profiling, [pedos] have no greater propensity to be criminal than any other group."

It sure seems to be that when the society DEFINES AS CRIMINAL everything that a pedo has a propensity to do, THAT causes pedos to have a "greater propensity to be criminal" than many other groups. But that is not the fault of the pedos. Would it surprise you that in a society that DEFINES it as a CRIMINAL ACT to wear a yarmulke, even in private, that Jews in that society would have a greater propensity to be "criminal" (i.e. violate their laws)? That is NOT to say pedos have any greater propensity to do things that SHOULD be illegal. You seem to constantly conflate "illegal" and "abusive" and then argue that since pedos have no greater propensity to be abusive, therefore they have no greater propensity to be criminal, because your argument doesn't take into account that they're not equivalent. I think it's self-evident that pedos are more likely to violate certain laws than the average person taken at random would, but those are the exact laws that are relevant to this discussion. That those laws should not exist in the first place does not mean that pedos are no more likely to break them than others are.

That said, it's a far lesser error to conflate illegal and abusive, then argue that pedos are no more likely to be illegal, than the opposing side in the argument makes, by conflating illegal and abusive, then arguing that pedos are more likely to be abusive. BOTH sides should stop conflating the two entirely different concepts.