Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What's The Deal on Child Abductions ?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
stewert Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 12:26 PM
Original message
What's The Deal on Child Abductions ?

Are there really more children being abducted or is the media just reporting it more. I was told that child abductions are about the same this year as they were last year and the year before. That the media is just reporting them more and it seems like more children are being abducted. Idiots like O'Reilly, Grace, and Greta make it look like the child abductions are up a lot this year. But is that true, does anyone have stats on child abductions for this year and previous years.

I would like to clear the air on this issue and publish a report on it at my web site.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
CottonBear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. I believe that numbers/percentages are the same
Edited on Mon May-23-05 12:32 PM by CottonBear
but that there is simply more reporting and publicity. Well, at least for white kids.

I believe that Hunter S. Thompson wrote about child abductions occurring in greater numbers each fall due to a market for "holiday presents" for pedophiles. Gruesome thought. Ugh!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Heddi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
2. if it bleeds it leads
I have stats...shall look for them for you...takes a minute or three...

But as far as your initial premise-no, children aren't being abducted more than in the past. One thing to remember, though, is that news was never meant to be a 24-hour-a-day, 7-days-a-week event. That's why, in the past, the news only came on 2 times a day--once in the morning, once in the evening.

Now we have a plethora of 24 hour news channels, and even local news stations do their best to fill the day with non-news. You've got the 6-8am local news, the 11am-12pm local news, the 5-6pm local news, the 10pm local news, the 11pm local news.

So what do they do to fill the hours? They exaggerate non-news stories into being something of substance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. That's a really good point.
I also think the MSM manufactures its own news when necessary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Heddi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Think about it
watch CNN...what are the top stories? (not today, but in general)

Missing Girl!
A Dog With A Heart Of Gold Saves Drowning Child!
Fluff Story about Potato Chip with Elvis' Face On It!
Pregnant Woman Missing!
Cute Kid Says Something Outrageous In School!
Brittney Spears spends $400 on outfits for her DOGS!!!!!!!

It's all garbage. 1% of what we see on these 24-hour news channels is ACTUALLY news. The other 99% is filler. If they didn't have the filler (or a multi-week 9/11 type tragedy), there would BE no need for 24 hour news.

News was never a 24 hour event. It (news) happened when it happened. Maybe it was 7 hours after the last news, maybe it was 7 days after.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. ack!
I try not to think about it.
I killed my TV months ago but I see the same fluff on the internet.
Isn't there a car-chase channel on cable?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wind Dancer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #8
18. They have also added a new theme to the typical day.
The Virgin Mary grilled cheese sandwich and other religious miracles, the corporate media is a prostitute for Falwell and the like.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberallyInclined Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
3. they make great cover stories...
to distract the public from wondering about reality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Heddi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
4. Here's some from 2002
A bit old...

http://www.stats.org/record.jsp?type=news&ID=46

ill O'Reilly contributes to the abduction hype with wild claims of 100,000 children abducted by strangers every year.

As the media focused on a string of terrible child kidnappings, Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly warned that we were only seeing the tip on an iceberg. In a segment on the July 16 O'Reilly Factor, the host warned viewers that there were "more than 100,000 abductions of children by strangers every year in the United States."

Caught between a media feeding frenzy and 'the no spin zone,' parents could have been forgiven for pulling their children off the streets and putting them back in front of the TV.

The figure of 100,000 child abductions by strangers every year, however, is a massive over-estimate. Most abductions are related to child custody disputes, and of the 3,000 to 5,000 abductions of children by someone who is not a parent or relative that are reported, on average, each year, a substantial proportion are short-term or involve someone known to the children or their families. However, between 200 and 300 of these cases are serious, and involve ransom, murder or sexual abuse. In about 50 of these the child is killed by his or her abductor. Horrific, yes. An epidemic? No. With 50 million children under the age of 13 in the United States, the actual chance of child abduction and murder turns out to be 1 in a million.

snip

If the media's intense coverage of recent abductions suggests a growing problem, figures from the FBI and local police forces actually show a significant decrease in the number of serious abductions, from an average of 200 to 300 per year during the 1990s to roughly 100 in 2001. By the end of July 2001, there had been 51 cases reported. By the same date this year, there had been 49 cases.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Heddi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. more
again, these are old...I wonder if these are the most recent stats available (2001)

http://www.infoline.org/InformationLibrary/Documents/Child%20Abduction%20Prevention%20fj.aspCHILD ABDUCTION: STATISTICS

* Parental abductions and runaway cases make up the majority of missing children in the United States. In 2001 there were about 725,000 children reported missing, or nearly 2,000 per day. The vast majority of these cases were recovered quickly; however, the parent or guardian was concerned enough to contact law enforcement and they placed the child into the FBI’s National Crime Information Center – a computerized national database of criminal justice information. It is available to Federal, state and local law enforcement and other criminal justice agencies.
* Each year there are about 3,000 to 5,000 non-family abductions reported to police, most of which are short term sexually-motivated cases. About 200 to 300 of these cases, or 6 percent, make up the most serious cases where the child was murdered, ransomed or taken with the intent to keep.


http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/PageServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=242#0

How many missing children are there?
Answer: The problem of missing children is complex and multifaceted. There are different types of missing children including family abductions; endangered runaways; nonfamily abductions; and lost, injured, or otherwise missing children. The best national estimates for the number of missing children are from incidence studies conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

To date two such studies have been completed. The first National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway, and Thrownaway Children (NISMART-1) was released in 1990, and the second, known as NISMART-2, was released in October 2002. According to NISMART-2 research, which studied the year 1999, an estimated 797,500 children were reported missing; 58,200 children were abducted by nonfamily members; 115 children were the victims of the most serious, long-term nonfamily abductions called "stereotypical kidnappings"; and 203,900 children were the victims of family abductions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stewert Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. Thanks Heddi.......

Thats a good start, I will see what I can come up with myself too. From what I have seen so far it looks like O'Reilly and the media are just reporting more child abductions, abductions are not up, they are just getting more media attention.

I suspect they are doing it for ratings, and ratings equal money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ultraist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #6
15. Types of abductions
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whistle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #4
17. See the classic pre-nazi German movie "M"....
...for insights into what creates terror on a mass level:

<snip>

It’s generally agreed that M was critical in hastening Lang’s departure from Germany in 1934. The Nazis weren’t thrilled by the film’s original title, Murderers Among Us; they assumed it was about them and tried to squash the production, even going so far as issuing death threats. Of course, in a sense they were correct. M is about more than the landscape of an unbalanced mind. With its palpable air of dread and its direct indictment of mob mentality, the film draws with frightening precision the dark contours of Nazi groupthink.

<snip>

A textbook classic
restored to perfection

BY GARY MORRIS
The roots of noir go back to German Expressionism, and there’s no movie that’s more German, Expressionist, or noir than Fritz Lang’s masterful — and finally restored — M (1931). While this story of the pursuit of a child-killer lacks one of the crucial elements of the genre, the femme fatale, the other components of noir are here in force. There’s the dark cityscape, an unstable environment in which children play in the street singing chants about "black bogeymen" and murderers. There’s the paranoid pathology of the individual in the person of the twisted Hans Beckert (Peter Lorre), who courts and kills his young victims for reasons he can’t express or fathom, and a frenzied mob that brings its own brand of justice against him. Many of the classic noirs of the 1940s and later owe a debt to M’s obsessive attention to the details of the manhunt, with the most minute aspects of police procedure rendered. Most important, though, is the sense of doom that colors the film, a fatalism Lang renders through chiaroscuro lighting effects and enormous high-angle shots that suggest a malevolent spiritual presence hovering above the city and guiding its denizens to their doom.

M is based on the real-life case of child-killer Peter Kurten, the "monster of Dusseldorf," whose crimes of the 1920s were still recent enough to resonate in the viewer’s mind. The film is divided into three distinct sections. In the first, Lang introduces killer, victim, and the desolate urban landscape in which the crimes occur. The style here is oblique and impressionistic — shots of a blind man selling balloons, a little girl taking the hand of a stranger, a ball rolling down a hillside and coming ominously to rest. The director’s discreet rendering of the murder of Elsie Beckmann subtly implicates the viewer in what is not shown — as Lang wrote, "forcing each individual member of the audience to create the gruesome details of the murder according to his personal imagination." Typical of the powerful sensibility at work here is a shot of the balloon Beckert purchased for Elsie, a crudely formed clown; separated from her hand during one of the film’s unseen "gruesome details," it ends up helplessly trapped by telephone wires.

In the second sequence, which makes up most of the film, Lang presents the two groups whose interests are most threatened: the police, who must satisfy an hysterical populace, and the criminal underground, whose economic interests are jeopardized by increased police scrutiny because of the killings. Typical of the director, the film sees the police and the criminals as indistinguishable, intercutting between parallel scenes of each strategizing on how to "kill the monster." Some of the police station footage has a fresh, almost documentary feel, as then-new technologies like fingerprint analysis are methodically examined. Of course, in spite of these innovations, it’s the criminals, who have an extensive network of spies and just as much at stake, who trap Beckert.

<more>
<link> http://www.brightlightsfilm.com/29/m.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karenina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
5. Bright. Shiny. Object.
Caw-caaaawww!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
9. FEAR! FEAR! FEAR! FEAR!!!
Nuff said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kaygore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
11. Also the Amber Alert makes them seem more prominent
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lone_Star_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. That's true
That went into effect in 2003 if I'm correct. That seems to correlate with the increase in the media reports.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kaygore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. And most recently you can get them on your cell phone
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puzzler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
13. No difference...
... the MSM is just reporting them more (and other similar stories). Considering the population of the US, you could focus in on virtually any crime and make it appear epidemic. Of course stories like child abductions, as tragic as they may be, are tailor-made "smokescreen" material. I'm sure that there is a constant digging for these stories by the MSM, because they are an effective way of keeping other stories of more important national (and international) interest out of the headlines.

-P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 01:03 PM
Response to Original message
14. I think they are wanting to implant chips in children first, this is a
great way of scaring parents into getting them. No one wants little Jimmy or Sally taken. They are already doing it to the animals, children next, then adults... Just this Dog's opinion...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. That's my opinion too, Dog.
It will be marketed as "We're doing it to protect the children".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 12:16 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC