Is the World More Dangerous Today?

[Rissask]

Okay I got slammed pretty good on that thread in the general forum, and maybe I deserved it, maybe not, whatever. Obviously people have very strong feelings about it, and that's a good thing.

( I thought it made it pretty clear that for the most part I agree, letting a 13 year go out until 12 with older kids who will be drinking - yes, bad idea. But that wasn't what the OP said originally. )


But when I read this, something someone said in that thread:

The world use to be a safer place.

It makes me ask, really?? Did it used to be safer, is it more dangerous today? This would mean, what- that rape rates, murder rates, child abduction cases- have risen?

But, is this actually, factually true statistically? Are children safer today or were they safer 20, 20, 50 years ago?


Or just a result of our media driven society and culture of fear?



Because I keep reading that it's quite the opposite, that violent crime rates have fallen and keep falling- and that kids today are actually much safer than they used to be.

Why 'stranger danger' is a myth.

What is the biggest myth surrounding this issue?
The biggest myth is dangers to children come from strangers. In the majority of cases the perpetrator is someone the parents/guardian or child knows, and that person may be in a position of trust or responsibility to the family.

So what's the truth?

And are there any drawbacks to people believing that the world is such a scary scary place, teaching kids to fear or distrust strangers, when they have more to fear from people they know and relatives?
How about things like obesity, even?

[dartay]

Originally Posted by Rissask

It makes me ask, really?? Did it used to be safer, is it more dangerous today? This would mean, what- that rape rates, murder rates, child abduction cases- have risen?

But, is this actually, factually true statistically? Are children safer today or were they safer 20, 20, 50 years ago?

I understand where you are coming from, but, let me ask you this question. When you were a kid did you run free? i.e. Ride your bike all over without your parents knowing where you were all day? I did. Would I allow my child to do that today? Not a chance.

My family has been touched by a stranger molesting one of our children. Maybe I'm a bit more paranoid.

Is it a media thing? Sure we see it more today. But how can you argue with Dateline and them easily picking up 25-50 predators everywhere they go?

[piedude]

I also think it is a bad idea to let any kids run free in another country. I would not let my son (who is 16 in may)go by himself. He is very responsable. But there are alot of nutbags out there.

[Ginger]

I dunno, looks like Maggie has some hard facts there. I'd sure be surprised to learn that the world is safer now than it used to be. I wouldn't expect it. But, I can sure see your point Maggie that media could have a lot to do with how we perceive the world to be, child-safety-wise.

For me it wouldn't matter...my own experiences compel me to being emphatically over-protective of my children. That is just something I cannot change. Am I right? I'm sure not. I'm sure I have scared my kids more than I should have regarding strangers, and more importantly people they know.

Although, with modern technology, I think there are new ways for predators to get to children, eg. the Internet. We have had an experience with this once with our daughter (long story). I am VERY adamant with teaching my children about their conduct on the Internet, as I think any parent should.

[Luv2Dance]

I would be hard to determine whether or not is not safer today compared to years past. We have means of transportation, communication such as the internet which allow whackjobs to have greater access to us and our children. Crime today compared to way back "then" has many more facets. There have always been weirdos, rapists, people who beat their children but due to having the information crammed down our throats on a daily basis we are more aware of it then ever before.


When I was growing up my parents "danger" was having the Moonies running around and we were always told never to open our door because the person knocking could be one of "them". I was allowed to ride my bike in our neighborhood but never was allowed to run around town with the "hoodlums" as my parents called them.

When we would go into "the city" my mom would always say, "Kids, lock your doors". This was back in the 70's. In general, I think parents have always feared for their children's safety whether it be now or back in the 1700 and 1800s. Some of the fears may have changed but a parent's worry hasn't.

[Ginger]

L2D, what's a "moonie"? I have visions of your mom not wanting you to hang out with these:

[sctx]

It would be alot safer w/o all these stressed out pill poppin cell phone talkin SUV drivin freakin soccer moms in west Austin

[Luv2Dance]

Originally Posted by Ginger

L2D, what's a "moonie"? I have visions of your mom not wanting you to hang out with these:

Oh my! Reverend Moon=Moonies=Cult.

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by Rissask

Okay I got slammed pretty good on that thread in the general forum, and maybe I deserved it, maybe not, whatever. Obviously people have very strong feelings about it, and that's a good thing.

( I thought it made it pretty clear that for the most part I agree, letting a 13 year go out until 12 with older kids who will be drinking - yes, bad idea. But that wasn't what the OP said originally. )


But when I read this, something someone said in that thread:




It makes me ask, really?? Did it used to be safer, is it more dangerous today? This would mean, what- that rape rates, murder rates, child abduction cases- have risen?

But, is this actually, factually true statistically? Are children safer today or were they safer 20, 20, 50 years ago?


Or just a result of our media driven society and culture of fear?



Because I keep reading that it's quite the opposite, that violent crime rates have fallen and keep falling- and that kids today are actually much safer than they used to be.

Why 'stranger danger' is a myth.



So what's the truth?

And are there any drawbacks to people believing that the world is such a scary scary place, teaching kids to fear or distrust strangers, when they have more to fear from people they know and relatives?
How about things like obesity, even?

I believe the truth is usually easier to get to in its correct context...the concept spoken about in this article has nothing to do with the assessment of risk of letting your 13 year old child roam the streets of Playa del Carmen without parental type supervision vs. staying at the resort and spending time with the parents. Apples and Pears.

And when one asks are we safer today or is it more dangerous today than in our past?....one would have to be a LOT more specific regarding what we were talking about in order to discuss it within its proper context.

It IS more dangerous (or safer) today than it was in the past.

And IT IS NOT more dangerous (or safer) today than it was in the past.

Both statements are supportable as true depending upon the context in which the statements are made.

Danger-Stranger is TRUE in many cases of risk to an unattended child and perhaps NOT TRUE in other cases.

In the case brought up on the previous thread, we had a LOT of specific information from which people could derive their opinions...despite that, we could not say the child was absolutely in more danger than even staying at the resort with their parents or loved ones....it is an assessment of risk based upon knowledge and experience (albeit imperfect) and the imperfectness of that assessment ameiliorated by the utilization of the concept of reasonable avoidance of that risk. That is to say, what is the price paid of NOT letting the child go out on her own in this situation vs. the potential price if the assessed risk were to actually occur. In that light, the answer is clear and simple (well, at least to me)

[SunKneeMarie]

So many people talk about how when they were young they rode their bikes and stayed out for hours at a time at friends' homes or playing ball or down by the creek or whatever, and their parents didn't worry. The assumption there is that kids 20, 30, 40 years ago were safe when doing these things. I disagree. I know of too many people (personally, not in the news or in a book) who were molested while out and about doing their carefree things. Was it by a serial rapist run amock? No. Well, none of the people I know. One was raped in her home by a guy that broke in, but for the others it was just someone's uncle or grandfather or older brother. A couple had people bother them in public restrooms. So there have been all sorts of people out there with deviant tendencies. I don't think it's all that new.

Did they tell their parents? No.

But they grew up and had kids and realized the dangers of what can happen when kids run around and there isn't enough accountability for their whereabouts.

I'll bet most of you know someone who has one of those not so carefree childhood memories, if you weren't one yourself. And I don't think I'm some sort of Molested Friend Magnet. So I'm probably pretty typical as far as the numbers go.

And protecting ones' kids is absolutely the most primal instinct there is. So when you hear past stories and recent stories--babies taken from hospitals (2 in Lubbock in the last couple of months--and they have those sensor tags on kids now), Amber alerts for 3 year olds, etc-- it should make a parent cautious. I will stop short of paranoid because I think that implies irrational behavior.

Although one man's caution may be perceived as another man's paranoia.

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by SunKneeMarie

So many people talk about how when they were young they rode their bikes and stayed out for hours at a time at friends' homes or playing ball or down by the creek or whatever, and their parents didn't worry. The assumption there is that kids 20, 30, 40 years ago were safe when doing these things. I disagree. I know of too many people (personally, not in the news or in a book) who were molested while out and about doing their carefree things. Was it by a serial rapist run amock? No. Well, none of the people I know. One was raped in her home by a guy that broke in, but for the others it was just someone's uncle or grandfather or older brother. A couple had people bother them in public restrooms. So there have been all sorts of people out there with deviant tendencies. I don't think it's all that new.
Did they tell their parents? No.

But they grew up and had kids and realized the dangers of what can happen when kids run around and there isn't enough accountability for their whereabouts.

I'll bet most of you know someone who has one of those not so carefree childhood memories, if you weren't one yourself. And I don't think I'm some sort of Molested Friend Magnet. So I'm probably pretty typical as far as the numbers go.

And protecting ones' kids is absolutely the most primal instinct there is. So when you hear past stories and recent stories--babies taken from hospitals (2 in Lubbock in the last couple of months--and they have those sensor tags on kids now), Amber alerts for 3 year olds, etc-- it should make a parent cautious. I will stop short of paranoid because I think that implies irrational behavior.

Although one man's caution may be perceived as another man's paranoia.

Indeed...with all the technological changes going on around us, we sometimes forget that we are not changing sociologically nearly as quickly....someone said that the only significant difference between us and monkey's is that we get car keys.

The veil of civilization, and civilized behaviour, is very, very thin.

[Rissask]

Originally Posted by SunKneeMarie

So many people talk about how when they were young they rode their bikes and stayed out for hours at a time at friends' homes or playing ball or down by the creek or whatever, and their parents didn't worry. The assumption there is that kids 20, 30, 40 years ago were safe when doing these things. I disagree. I know of too many people (personally, not in the news or in a book) who were molested while out and about doing their carefree things. Was it by a serial rapist run amock? No. Well, none of the people I know. One was raped in her home by a guy that broke in, but for the others it was just someone's uncle or grandfather or older brother. A couple had people bother them in public restrooms. So there have been all sorts of people out there with deviant tendencies. I don't think it's all that new.

Did they tell their parents? No.

But they grew up and had kids and realized the dangers of what can happen when kids run around and there isn't enough accountability for their whereabouts.

I'll bet most of you know someone who has one of those not so carefree childhood memories, if you weren't one yourself. And I don't think I'm some sort of Molested Friend Magnet. So I'm probably pretty typical as far as the numbers go.

And protecting ones' kids is absolutely the most primal instinct there is. So when you hear past stories and recent stories--babies taken from hospitals (2 in Lubbock in the last couple of months--and they have those sensor tags on kids now), Amber alerts for 3 year olds, etc-- it should make a parent cautious. I will stop short of paranoid because I think that implies irrational behavior.

Although one man's caution may be perceived as another man's paranoia.

Some great points here, SKM!
For many reasons, from bike helmets to seatbelts to training wheels, kids are much more safe today from physical injury. The only problem is when it's taken to extremes by some people and the child is almost confined to the house playing PS, I would guess.
As far as kids being victim of violent crimes, according to the stats, it has fallen. It may very well be in part because people are more aware, protective and strict, I don't know.
The point I was trying to make is just that the perception seems to be that the world is more dangerous today, and it actually is not. There is just more reporting of it in the media. (You can argue than people never used to report things, and this is true- but the rates of child murders has actually fallen- and this is definitely traceable.)

A good example of perception ruling is this- can anyone tell me how many babies/children have been victims in the US of satanic ritual abuse or cults?
It's actually zero, according to FBI records.
And how many children have bitten into an apple with a razor blade in it? Also zero.

[JEZ]

Originally Posted by Jacko

Indeed....someone said that the only significant difference between us and monkey's is that we get car keys.

This is a good quote!

[Rissask]

Originally Posted by Jacko

Indeed...with all the technological changes going on around us, we sometimes forget that we are not changing sociologically nearly as quickly....someone said that the only significant difference between us and monkey's is that we get car keys.

The veil of civilization, and civilized behaviour, is very, very thin.

Apaprently our brain size hasn't grown since Cro Magnons and Neanderthals were knocking about, in 30,000 BC.
So evolution certainly hasn't caught up to civilization and technology has been growing like mad. Our behaviour is no big surprise really.

[dartay]

Originally Posted by Rissask

Some great points here, SKM!
For many reasons, from bike helmets to seatbelts to training wheels, kids are much more safe today from physical injury. The only problem is when it's taken to extremes by some people and the child is almost confined to the house playing PS, I would guess.
As far as kids being victim of violent crimes, according to the stats, it has fallen. It may very well be in part because people are more aware, protective and strict, I don't know.
The point I was trying to make is just that the perception seems to be that the world is more dangerous today, and it actually is not. There is just more reporting of it in the media. (You can argue than people never used to report things, and this is true- but the rates of child murders has actually fallen- and this is definitely traceable.)

A good example of perception ruling is this- can anyone tell me how many babies/children have been victims in the US of satanic ritual abuse or cults?
It's actually zero, according to FBI records.
And how many children have bitten into an apple with a razor blade in it? Also zero.

What data are you using?