[bombcar]

That last part is WAY more common and likely than anything else.

> Fewer than 350 people under the age of 21 have been abducted by strangers in the United States per year between 2010–2017.

> According to the NWS Storm Data, over the last 30 years (1989-2018) the U.S. has averaged 43 reported lightning fatalities per year.

So letting kids walk to the park is way less risky than a thunderstorm (though perhaps they shouldn't walk to the park IN a thunderstorm).

> In 2019, 608 child passengers age 12 and younger died in motor vehicle crashes, and more than 91,000 were injured. Of the children 12 and younger who died in a crash (for whom restraint use was known), 38% were not buckled up.

I haven't done the numbers, but driving a kid to the park when not buckled up may be more dangerous than letting them walk.

[gwd]

> Fewer than 350 people under the age of 21 have been abducted by strangers in the United States per year between 2010–2017.

But 2010 is long after the end of the "free range children" era. Is that number so low because we don't let kinds go around by themselves any more?

[asdff]

It's only the end of the free range era among the whites. Other populations in my city have no issues letting their children range around. It's common to be on the bus and hear school aged children talking in various languages around me on the bus.

[twobitshifter]

Annual under 21 abductions by strangers are 8 times more likely than death by lightning strike for all groups.

But there’s lots of confounding variables there. A kid that’s not outside won’t be abducted by a stranger and you won’t be struck by lightning if you’re inside as well. Thunderstorms don’t happen everyday but a kid may walk alone twice a day. So what’s the right equivalence? Is walking alone through a bad neighborhood the same as going into the lightning storm and grabbing a flag pole?

[ultrarunner]

Along these lines I am curious about the number of innocent families affected by the harassment of overzealous adults (my son has had this happen twice) or CPS (zero, fortunately). Given the somewhat subjective nature of "innocent" it's probably not quantifiable, but I sometimes wonder what the risk actually is. Being struck by lightning is unlikely, but the potential effects are serious enough to warrant taking precautions— I wonder how similar the analogy truly is.

[foobarian]

I wonder if it used to be a lot more common before the culture got so paranoid. In which case maybe the shift was warranted.