A couple of years ago we put up a post called “Halloween is behind us” which cited a 2008, Department of Justice research study that found Children are far more likely to be struck by a car on Halloween than be assaulted. As I do, in November of every year, I perform a quick post mortem on the holiday to identify the tragedies that took place during the recent holiday in order to validate the statistics.
Sadly, this year there were kids struck by cars while trick or treating, such as this 11-year-old was killed in Atlanta. There was also a sewing needle found in candy in Ohio. And, getting my blood really boiling, there was also a registrant in Utah that exposed himself to trick-or-treaters by answering his door naked.
Of these three tragedies, two are extremely, extremely rare occurrences and one is quite common. Can you guess which one? If you watched the news and saw all the warnings, you’d think it was the third, but no. Not even by a long shot.
In an article that came out just last week a University of Delaware sociology professor, who had researched the topic for nearly 40 years, found virtually no evidence that anyone sets out to trick or harm kids by putting razor blades, needles, poison or drugs into Halloween candy. …and then this happens! For years we’ve been challenging readers to identify just one incident of a sexual assault perpetrated by a registrant on Halloween… and then this happens!
As angry as I was to read about all these true Halloween horrors, I was particularly disappointed with the registrant one because I knew that would be the one to drive legislators to create some new law to punish us. There might as well be 10,000 kids struck by cars each Halloween and nobody is going to put a ban on non-emergency vehicle traffic “if it saves just one life”, but because of this one idiot, millions of families will spend this holiday each year on house arrest, lights out and afraid for a knock on the door.
Then I thought about it…
In risk assessment and most actuarial instruments, there’s no such thing as zero or 100% because there are no absolutes. A 100% chance is an absolute certainty. A 0% chance is an absolute impossibility. There is no way possible for someone to prove definitively that something will or will not ever happen. Could someone get struck by lightning minutes after winning the Powerball? It might have never happened to date, but it could. What about that old saying about ‘the only things that are certain are death and taxes’? Isn’t death an absolute? We believe so, but is it possible that scientists come up with some gene altering technology that can program a person’s DNA to never age? (If you ask some people, they think the likelihood of that happening is greater than the lightning-struck lottery winner).
So we are stuck with probabilities, the relative frequency of a random event occurring. When you consider the probability of your child getting struck by a car while trick-or-treating vs. the probability of your child getting sexually assaulted by someone on the registry, the chances are incomparable. So why aren’t there more articles reminding parents to teach their children to stay on the sidewalks when trick-or-treating and why aren’t there laws preventing anyone with a DUI, speeding ticket or other traffic violation from driving on Halloween?
I’m sure a lot is being made about the sex offender opening his door naked, but I’m pretty sure I read that he is mentally I’ll and his parent/caregiver had recently died, leaving him alone and fending for himself. In other words, just a sad story all around and a case of mental illness treatment – or lack thereof – being at crisis levels, assuming he kind of fell through the cracks. I can’t swear that I got those circumstances correct, but I believe there were quotes from his brother indicating that was the case. At any rate, certainly not the norm.
The reason , in answer to the last question is…what causes the most fear in parents? Sexual assault. And because the legislature understands this they use it like Thor’s hammer to crush and prevent full restoration of offenders and give life back to them and their families.
And to add to your list of questions:
1) Why isn’t there a lifetime registry for felony DUI’s and residency restrictions.
2) Why is there a lifetime registry for convicted drug dealers and residency restrictions. Every time there is an arrest in my area I look the person up at the Clerk of Courts and 90+ percent of the time they have numerous prior drug convictions.
I mean these registries would not be punishment for these people, just for public safety. If it saves just one kid. Isn’t that the standard?
I’m far more concerned about my house getting hit up by junkies or plowed over by the same drunk than someone on the SOR coming after a child. …It really pisses me off to see these constant B&Es, DUIers, and “nonviolent” drug offenders get the community outreach and clap on the back along with a second (more likely 5th or 11th) chance.
With that off my chest, I’m not in favor of any registry–no gun, no SO, no drug, etc. The government meddles too much in people affairs and staying the hell out is the best thing they can do. As the US has gotten more regulated, things have fallen downhill quickly.
Wow. One solitary incident where no children were harmed in any way. And yet we are going to focus on a lone incident. But I guess now the media have something besides a 40 year old case committed by someone who would not have been on the registry and knew the victim. What do expect from a nation full of people to lick horse paste and festoon their houses with onions because some talking head told them it cures COVID?
Excellent viewpoint !! How do we teach common sense to those that seem to have none???
I read the article.
A few things peeked my intrest.
“Officer Austin Williams with the Provo police department”
Just to lay a little foundation, this is the officer interviewed concerning this case.
“Williams said Steven Little was arrested for lewd behavior involving children. It’s a misdemeanor charge that was enhanced by police to a felony, given the man’s criminal history.”
“He was already on probation for a previous charge of the latter offense.”
“Williams said in all his 14 years of serving the community, he hasn’t heard of something like this happening around Halloween.”
Nice to read law enforcement making this statement.
“Earlier in the day on Oct. 30, the brother said he went to visit Little at his home, adding that he checks in on him since his father died in January.”
“Little’s father lived with him, but since his passing, Little has been living alone.”
“Little’s brother told KSL-TV Sunday that Steven has a mental illness and is in counseling. He also said Steven is actively in contact with his probation officer.”
God forbid we regard this little piece of information for something wholly more substantial and credible.
While it’s certainly traumatic for a child to confront this scenario, I’ll give them that.
A parent to be present and have the presence of mind to stick around for a second showing so that video proof may be offered is certainly a feat to be applauded.
However…..
I can only surmise from what I’ve read that victimhood has now been elevated to the level of clinical psychologist in regards to medical pronouncements accepted by the media in what I can only guess to be an on going effort to deceive by fear mongering the following statement;
“I don’t believe he has something mentally wrong with him,” said the child’s father.”
And herein lies the problem.
I guess its acceptable for a reporter to disregard an issue involving a mentally disabled person to further enhance the agenda of fear mongering to sell newspapers or whatever.
So kids, remember anyone forced to register as a person convicted of a sex offence will without a doubt re-offend.
😡
I called it when I suggested that he may have a mental illness. We may as well stop caring about mental illness in this country. Start treating people with Down syndrome like they don’t have it. Dementia? Nope, doesn’t exist either. Whatever a person does, they meant it (if it was sexual, that is).
Very niece op-ed! Politicians know it too, but political cred does not have a stat attached to it when it comes to votes to be elected or re-elected.
There is only one time when 100% certainty of no crime gets committed comes in play WRT mankind…when all of mankind is dead. Then, no offense will be committed. Until then, the line will never reach the axis of the graph.
With almost a million registrants as of the last explicit count, the odds of encountering a registrant naked at their front door while trick-or-treating is less than one in 15,000,000 perhaps. You’re way more likely to be killed by lightning (1:138,849) or even attacked by a shark (1:3,748,067 – but not while trick-or-treating I’m guessing unless its a LAND SHARK).
People need to get over their obsession with “predators” and start fixing some of the real problems in this world. If anyone hasn’t noticed, it’s a mess out there in a lot of places.
This is an excellent piece. But on this site, it’s a preach to the choir. THIS is what needs to be said to lawmakers, mayors and governors.
We share with our members so they can disseminate
I think people/governments will always FIND an excuse to implement things, regardless of lack of evidence. Look back in less than 1000 years to how everything was explained through 1)God, 2)Dark Magic. When many great minds showed how things worked, they were ostracized and even killed. So I’m not surprised that others can look at any and all evidence and deny the truths or see something entirely different.
* I say this as a believer in God*
Great piece!! This emotional rather than logical calculation of the probability of something happening and people’s reactions are something Freakonomics has been covering for years.