>  I read that in the US there's such a huge global panic about children
> being kidnapped, that at some places it even borders the illegal to let
> children *walk* on the street alone (eg. to go to school or hobbies).
> Eg. some woman got fined because she let her kid do that.
>
>  Instead, children are always driven by car to and from wherever they
> need to go.
>
>  Now, this seems to be an utter failure of perspective: Approximately
> 100 children are kidnapped each year in the United States. However,
> over 10000 children die in car accidents each year in the United States.
> That's a one hundred-fold difference. Nevertheless, they still consider
> driving them by car safer than letting them walk.
>
>  Thus the "cure" to the problem of 100 children being kidnapped each
> year is to have ten thousand of them die in car accidents.
>
>  Sense or proportion, anyone?

You're comparing the wrong numbers if you want to make a decision about the 
safest way for your kid to get from A to B.  You need to be comparing the 
expected deaths per distance travelled, not the total number of deaths. 
Obviously these numbers are not as easy (maybe even impossible) to find or 
estimate accurately.

Otherwise you end up with absurd conclusions, like the safest way to get to 
school is to walk on your hands with your legs tied together, because nobody 
has ever been kidnapped or killed while walking on their hands with their 
legs tied together.

Post a reply to this message