I think the argument would be that “alone children” aren’t the source but simply create an opportunity for abduction, in that they remove a barrier of “parent catching you.” Which, sure, that’s for sure true (easier to kidnap alone child than with parents around, pretty non-debatable.)
BUT of course that ignores that there could be external reasons for the reduction in crime like anything from “more cameras” to “DNA exists now” to “literal FBI bug in your pocket 24/7” and anything else. Add to that it’s more likely to be a confluence of different and often unrelated factors that all contribute to the reduction in both abduction and violent crime as a whole than “one reason.” Pretty standard tbh, it’s rarely one reason for shit like that.
I think the argument would be that “alone children” aren’t the source but simply create an opportunity for abduction, in that they remove a barrier of “parent catching you.” Which, sure, that’s for sure true (easier to kidnap alone child than with parents around, pretty non-debatable.)
BUT of course that ignores that there could be external reasons for the reduction in crime like anything from “more cameras” to “DNA exists now” to “literal FBI bug in your pocket 24/7” and anything else. Add to that it’s more likely to be a confluence of different and often unrelated factors that all contribute to the reduction in both abduction and violent crime as a whole than “one reason.” Pretty standard tbh, it’s rarely one reason for shit like that.