Posted on 02/10/2006 7:41:45 AM PST by Sopater
My point is, let me be clear, anyone can make statistics say anything they want it to say. Anyone includes both of us, the government, or ABC as well.
I see this whole thing as something to be aware of if you aren't already. No agenda. Be cautious, and take precautions. Do you find something wrong with that? I hope not, but I know some people will.
Actually, it really isn't. Crime, especially violent crime, has been way down over the past 15 years. Crime rates against children have not risen in decades -- and if kids are abused, it's almost always by a close friend or family member.
While all parents should take reasonable precautions, the odds that your child will be kidnapped at gunpoint and turned into an enslaved prostitute are somewhat less them finding a suitcase with $50 million in it on a suburban sidewalk.
I merely tried to point out that MSM often uses bad numbers in order to push their agenda, hype their stories and sell their product. Just because ABC says something is a problem does not make a problem.
There are children in the US who need help. I don't dispute that at all. But my life will not manipulated by the MSM "crisis of the week".
Clinton blames the NRA.
Do you think this is a problem?
I would have to see the original documents. But knowing how the press is so easily confused by anything doing with statistics it would not surprise me to find they made an error in reporting.
I think the vast majority of the kids forced into this are runaways to begin with, who are very vulnerable.
Yeah, I think it's a problem. What solutions do you propose?
I just noticed that in the report the FBI uses the term at risk- nowhere did I find an actual number of children involved in sex trafficking. So once again the news shows its inability to actually report what was said.
This is what the ABC report says.
The inability to actually report what is said isn't limited to the media....
The DOJ, DOS, as well as the President have put together some pretty good plans including the Tier ratings for the different countries.
The one big thing that needs to change is the penalties given for those caught trafficking. They're far too lenient right now.
I bet I've seen a thousand on the streets of D.C. Of course they're probably not abductees but they look 11 or even younger.
DISCUSSION ABOUT:
"Teen Girls Tell Their Stories of Sex Trafficking and Exploitation in U.S."
I think that this is firmly rooted in the break down of moral family values. Parents are so eager to have their children like them, that they fail to do what is necessary to protect them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To be included in or removed from the MORAL ABSOLUTES PINGLIST, please FreepMail either MillerCreek or wagglebee.
So wonderful that these two children have been found, saved and returned to their families, but how many more are not?
And, WHO are the MEN involved? This is a grim statement as to the lunacy that many individuals in our society walk around with, unnoticed to their own wives, families, neighbors and coworkers. Each and every one of them described in this story, as with the unidentified probable others, should be...well...a very bad fate awaits them for the evil that they do.
I wish it was possible to save all children from harm, I really do.
From the report at www.fbi.gov dated 2005, this seems to be the most recent report on sexual trafficking of minors.
"According to a study by the University of Pennsylvania, a child is defined as any male or female under the age of 18, and with that, they have detailed there are approximately 300,000 youth currently at risk of becoming victims of commercial and sexual exploitation. Other organizations have estimated this number is as high as 800,000.
We do not currently have a definitive number for the serious problem of child prostitution itself, although judges, police, and outreach workers report both the increase in the numbers and a decrease in the ages of the children involved. Unfortunately, we know of no studies to date that specifically and primarily address juvenile prostitution.
Notice the FBI gives an at risk estimate. ABC changed this to an estimated number of those involved in sexual trafficking. At risk would mean that there is the potential that this number of children will become victims of sexual exploitation. But when ABC writes " The FBI estimates that well over 100,000 children and young women are trafficked in America today." they are saying that the FBI knows based on stats it has, that this number of children and young women are being currently trafficked.
For example people with very high blood pressure are at risk of having a stroke. This is not the same as saying that the CDC estimates there are xxx number of stroke victims a year.
But no matter the numbers the problem is sickening and I am glad that the FBI is addressing it. Thank you Bush. Clinton administration was more concerned with the rights of sex workers than with the problem of exploitation.
Funny how that works, eh! LOL
Although I disagree with how ABC presented the report, I have a feeling the number may be higher. As horrible as it is to contemplate I don't doubt that a number of victims are exploited by their own families or family friends. Because of the degree of dependence and trust the victim would have for the person exploiting them, it would be unlikely they would report the matter to the authorities. And sadly these situations do not always come to the attention of child services or law enforcement.
What are you talking about? I used to drive a cab at night in DC and I've never seen or heard of a child prostitute.
I've had them trying to reach into the car. Scores of them. Not in bad areas either, e.g., driving into the Four Seasons Hotel, down by Watergate.
Skeptical readers (of which there are quite a few on this thread) can make some calculations to see whether such an allegation is credible.
What does the report of more than 100,000 underage prostitutes with an average age of 11 imply?
1. There is no point kidnapping a girl and prostituting her if there are no customers (johns). Actually, it would require quite a few johns to support each girl (and her pimp).
2. Research on prostitution gives various estimates of the number of johns per prostitute. One estimate is that the average prostitute has 694 paid encounters per year (which the researchers claim is a conservative estimate). (Source: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=11027304) Let’s assume that they’re not all unique, i.e., that johns are habitual and visit a “provider” once a month. Then we’re talking about 694/12 = 58 johns per girl.
3. To support 100,000 such underage prostitutes would therefore require something like 6 million johns with a monthly habit. (100,000*58=5.8 million) (Of course, if they didn’t go monthly, it would require even more johns.)
4. How many men are in the pool who might be johns? Well, they have to be old enough to have the money to spend (let’s say at least 20 years old) and young enough to still have a sex drive (let’s say at most 60 years). The number of American men in that range is approximately 78 million. (Source: http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/idbpyrs.pl?cty=US&out=s&ymax=300)
5. If there are 6 million habitual johns in a possible pool of 78 million men, then one in thirteen of such men are patronizing child prostitutes.
6. I don’t know about you, but I don’t know anybody who is doing this (even taking into account their possible reluctance to brag about it). Furthermore, the only way such a large number of men could be involved would require plenty of word-of-mouth (since advertising would be out of the question), and I’ve never heard anything about it – have you?
7. Next time you’re in the office, or school, or church, or at a ball game, look around and see if you think 1/13 of the men are perverted enough – not to mention accepting of the risk of very long prison terms if caught – to be patronizing child prostitutes with an average age of 11.
My point, of course, is that estimates like these, especially coming from sources with an agenda, and reported in the press, which, as ThinkDifferent said in post 86, “is so easily confused by anything doing with statistics,” should be taken with a pound of salt. I am not justifying, extenuating, or minimizing the sex trafficking of children. As I said in an earlier post, the perpetrators should be locked up and the keys discarded. I just don’t believe the problem is a great as reported, and I know that most FReepers read what’s reported in the press very skeptically, as they should.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.