5 ms·

Nobody wants to be the one parent out of a thousand who has their kid scooped up off the street because they were letting their kid explore and be free. Edit:

• obscurette 4y ago
  Yes, I don't want to be this one parent. But it's many orders of magnitude more likely that I handicap my kids if I don't let my kids explore the world with (reasonable) freedom. PS. I'm a father of three girls and live in Europe. Kids here navigate on their own with public transport if needed between home/school/etc since the age of 6.
• uoflcards22 4y ago
  Your kid is 3x more likely to be struck by lightning than kidnapped. Literally.
  • beaned 4y ago
    I'm not sure of the statistics, but even so, it's something you have more control over than a lightning strike. Edit: at first glance I'm not sure the numbers are right... Google says: "Lightning damage in the U.S. [...] In 2021, there were a total of 11 fatalities and 69 injuries reported due to lighting in the United States." Also: "In the United States, an estimated 460,000 children are reported missing every year. Federal Bureau of Investigation, NCIC." Edit again to be more specific: Many of the "goes missing" doesn't mean kidnaps, and according to wikipedia, "The vast majority of child abduction cases in the United States are parental kidnapping". However it also says: "Fewer than 350 people under the age of 21 have been abducted by strangers in the United States per year, on average, between 2010–2017." This number is still a high multiple of the number of people (not just children) struck by lightning each year.
    • kube-system 4y ago
      My uninformed guess is that a not insignificant percentage of "children reported missing" are teenagers who run away or stay out past the time they were supposed to return home. One must remember that about 11% of children are eligible for a drivers license.
      • beaned 4y ago
        Yes, this is why I updated the comment with the "abducted by strangers" statistic.
  • geoffeg 4y ago
    So we shouldn't allow children to go outside where the lightning could get them! (/s, but I wouldn't be surprised if someone seriously believes it is what we should do..)
    • dekhn 4y ago
      I know a guy who continually insisted he was doing the right thing telling his child to get out of the pool if there was thunder. You know what? Far more people die from accidental pool electrocutions due to bad wiring than lighting (yes, I know this may be due to people getting out of the pool and avoiding death).
  • postalrat 4y ago
    I bet those odds are much lower for kids that can't leave the house.
  • kgeist 4y ago
    >According to statistics cited by the NCMEC, most missing children are abducted by relatives or parents It's safer to be around strangers than relatives, when it comes to kidnapping.
    • deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    • csours 4y ago
      10 yard penalty, review logical fallacies, other team gets the ball. https://xkcd.com/1138/ https://xkcd.com/1138/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_rate_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_rate_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_fallacy Children spend waaaay more time around parents and relatives. Same reason why you are more likely to be killed by an intimate partner than a stranger. (This is not monocausal, and I do not mean to imply that simply spending time with someone will cause a crime)
      • Stevvo 4y ago
        Do they really though? In a lot of families kids are at school, then driven off to soccer/dance/whatever in a lot of other time.
        • csours 4y ago
          It really depends on the exact framing of the question. Are children safer ALONE with a random stranger or with a family member? Why is the child alone with a random stranger? There are some broad daylight kidnappings, but they are relatively rare. They are relatively rare because it's much easier for a kidnapper to abscond with someone who trusts them.
    • warinukraine 4y ago
      You're being tricked by sampling bias. It's safer to be around strangers than relatives in every study's sampling, because most people don't leave their kids with strangers. They spend most of their time with relatives, friends and acquaintances. If they did spend as much time with strangers as with relatives, you'd conclude it's safer to be around relatives. It's like saying cyanide is safe because most people don't die from cyanide. Yeah, because most people don't take cyanide.
• wyldfire 4y ago
  > Nobody wants to be the one parent out of a thousand who has their kid scooped up off the street I agreed with you ... because I misread your comment as being concerned that the cops would come pick up your kid (like happened here in TFA). My (semi-legitimate) fear is that I'll be harassed as a parent for letting my kids do normal things like walk around the neighborhood. That'd be the only reason I might not encourage it. Your kid is much more likely to be picked up by the cops over handwringing like this than to be kidnapped.
• dekhn 4y ago
  It's true that parents live in fear of their child being taken (and blamed for some action/inaction that allowed it to occur). Generally it seems like Americans have developed a strong aversion to 'being considered at fault for an adverse event'. It took me quite some effort to overcome that but I made it easier by reading the statistics on child deaths and other crimes.
• iceburgcrm 4y ago
  The odds of winning the lottery are better. The odds would be one in millions for getting scooped off the street by a random person and slightly more common if the kidnapper happened to be a parent.
• cortesoft 4y ago
  People are downvoting you because the one in a thousand number is off by a few orders of magnitude.
• darkarmani 4y ago
  You think that 0.1% of kids are kidnapped while walking?
• jeddy3 4y ago
  First of all, "one out of a thousand" is grossly wrong. And yeah, of course nobody wants that, but you can't take away a healthy part of growing up because of that.