1) I did not ignore anything - if 1% of rapists hang out at gun ranges and the remaining 99% at sex clubs, then where do YOU think children would be safer at? The parents' "behavior that I believe makes them more likely to meet a potential kidnapper/rapist than at my gun range" was the drinking / drugs / inviting total strangers back to their garage instead of, you know, watching over their children.
2) You got me there - I have no idea if Danielle was at greater risk than she would have been otherwise - given that she is DEAD, I can't imagine what the greater risk would have been. Perhaps if they also ran a brothel and meth lab out of their house, you would have a point. Now, show me ONE member of a swinger's club that is not a bad parent.
If those numbers were accurate, then I'd be in agreement with you; if it really was the case that you're far more likely to run into rapists at a sex club than a gun range (or, for sake of argument, at your local grocery store), then it is a negligent act to meet with such individuals.
However, you have no basis by which to assert such a concentration of rapists in such a venue except for your intuitive sense of, "Well, swingers are sexual deviants, and rapists are sexual deviants, so...". So, nothing. Enjoying group sex has about as much to do with being willing to kidnap, rape, and kill a seven-year-old girl as owning a gun does.
In fact, according to the Toronto Sex Crimes unit, almost every pedophile they've ever busted has been a Star Trek fan. Knowing that, it's probably negligent for a parent who's a Star Trek fan to associate with other Trekkies, since there's a markedly high probability that the parent might meet someone who will hurt their child. But the reason I would accuse such a parent of negligence is because of the increased risk of association with pedophiles in practicing the activity in question, not the activity itself.
The parents' "behavior that I believe makes them more likely to meet a potential kidnapper/rapist than at my gun range" was the drinking / drugs / inviting total strangers back to their garage instead of, you know, watching over their children.
One can be a swinger without being a junkie, and one can be a junkie without being a swinger - and you can do any of the above without bringing it back home for the kids to be exposed to. If Danielle's mom was bringing guys over to her home and doing drugs with them in the garage, that is what makes her a bad parent, whether she was having sex with those men or not.
I have no idea if Danielle was at greater risk than she would have been otherwise - given that she is DEAD, I can't imagine what the greater risk would have been.
But is she dead because her parents were swingers? I don't believe you have any basis by which to assert that their swinging killed their daughter, except by way of increasing their likelihood of associating with potential killers - which, as I showed above, would have been just as bad if they were, say, Star Trek fans.
Now, show me ONE member of a swinger's club that is not a bad parent.
Ya know what? I don't actually know anybody in real life who goes to swinger's clubs, at least not to my knowledge. It's not exactly something we talk about at the office. For your part, though, you know of exactly one couple that happens to be both members of a swinger's club and bad parents - and that case became national news specifically because of its noteworthiness. So, I believe that your blanket condemnation of swingers is baseless, and the burden of proof is on you to justify that participation in a swinger's club endangers external parties (in this case, the kids).