Can You Spot a Missing Child? Are Posters the Answer … or People Caring a Little Bit more?

 

Ever wonder why some times it takes a while to locate missing people? Then other times it seems to happen rather quickly. Part of the problem may be in people’s awareness, the size and color of a missing poster and location where its posted.

Then again, sometimes its because people live in their own little world and pay no attention to anything in their surroundings. Take a look at this VIDEO, its an eye opener. We all must do better and be more observant and vigilant. Can you spot a missing child?

Posted February 27, 2007 by
Crime, Missing Persons | 5 comments


If you liked this post, you may also like these:

  • The Corporate Motivational Poster
  • South Carolina Proposed Bill; Execute Two Time Child Molesters
  • “A Child is Missing” Saves Children and the Elderly
  • ABOVE THE LAW: Hillary Clinton’s Mystery Machine Scooby Van Illegally Parked in Handicap Parking Spot … But What Difference Does It Make?
  • How many parents do you know who can’t identify with a mother who just wants to find her child?”




  • Comments

    5 Responses to “Can You Spot a Missing Child? Are Posters the Answer … or People Caring a Little Bit more?”

    1. tuyvnsurvivor on February 27th, 2007 8:20 pm

      Part of the problem is information overload, many of us now do several different extremes regularly in life, like my geology, stock trading, wood art, sports etc. Most multitask and are interested in removed fields.

      Also, I feel the missing persons alerts are abused. I am not typically interested in reading about spouse disputes on who gets the kids today. I am trying to be honest here, sometimes real cases are lost on too many cries of wolf.

      But my personal number one reason we do not look: let me use me again as I do not mind. I got to be a 61 yr old man, dad of 2 most successful great citizen kids, overal a half decent guy all my life. And I resent how someone somewhere is bound to make something out of anything. So, if I say I like little boys and little girls, I just love them…where did that go in your mind? No one asked as they roll their eyes, but I like 35ish atheltic intelligent females for love bug fantacies. ANd too bad, it would be nice if I could go in the local old store, see a young boy I barely know though admire, tell him “hey boy, go get yourself a soda and icecream on me”. Like good old men did me as a kid on nice occassions. I collected pocket knives all my life, now and then a oldman would have me sit on a store bench and telling him a tale or two about the kids world, and give me an old worn pocket knife. No harm done or intended.

      Though the world has changed. **More lost than gained is my view. No, ‘I just love little boys and girls’, from this old man for someone to make something of it. I merely tend to leave kids strictly alone, not so much as eye contact. That is a lot of the not noticing the boy outside the Giant food store experiment.

    2. Scared Monkeys on February 27th, 2007 8:49 pm

      All very good points.

      I personally believe that AMBER’s have the ability to get overused. It sometimes seems that as soon as they are issued, I am receiving a bulletin stating its over.

      Then in other cases I have no idea why more attention is not being provided.
      R

    3. Richard on February 27th, 2007 10:43 pm

      Another part of the problem is that what once was unthinkable quickly becomes routine.

      Anyone here remember when bringing a gun to school or shooting someone in school was beyond belief? I do.

      And now? “OK, get the grief counselors in here … another shooting.”

      I vaguely remember the atmosphere when, at my elementary school, news was released that President Kennedy had been assassinated in Dallas. I imagine that anyone 30 or younger would truly be unable to conceive of the reaction at that time. Whatever your political views then or now, it was seen as something beyond belief.

      If it happened today? Don’t make me laugh.

      When the son of Charles and Anne Lindbergh was kidnapped in the 1930s, it was seen as an unbelievable outrage. Even Al Capone, not widely known as a philanthropist, offered to help in the search.

      Today, sadly, missing children are another facet of the landscape. Nobody wants it that way … but it is.

    4. Patti on February 28th, 2007 1:13 am

      I agree. It used to be that we all knew our neighbors. We all knew if a stranger was seen in the neighborhood trying to talk to the kids. We all knew who was who and could easily spot someone that didn’t belong. I don’t know what has changed, maybe we have grown accustomed to crime. Maybe we just don’t have the time to make an effort to communicate with one another like we used to, or maybe we all live in a state of fear.

      Maybe it does take a village, as was suggested… all I can say, for sure, is that when we thought like a village, we all felt alot safer.

    5. yoyo muffintop on February 28th, 2007 9:22 pm

      Here’s an interesting take from the president of Kidsearch Network (www.kidsearchnetwork.org). He is writing in regards to Greta’s coverage of Natalee Holloway, but it addresses some of what tuyvnsurvivor is saying. This is from the SoCal Law Blog:

      The debate isn’t whether the news should cover stories involving missing and abducted children. Of course they should. It helps distribute information that may lead to solving the case.

      However, rehashing the case over and over again when there are no new developments only hurts that case and others as well.

      Here is why. People get tired of hearing about not only THAT case but of other cases as well. Oversaturation is NOT a good thing.

      When there are new developments is the time to air the story. That is a big help to the family, the police and to organizations like ours that are involved in the search.

      Greta has interviewed everyone but the paperboy on that island, each of which has nothing new to say.

      In my opinion it is about ratings and not out of concern. That is how it appears. It’s probably not even her choice but the choice of the producers.

      If it is about ratings, then stop it because your ratings will be going down due to it now. People are tired of the story.

      If it isn’t then stop doing it until there is a new development.

      Either way stop it.

      Her response asked if the critics actually talked to parents of missing children. This critic does.

      I founded the Kidsearch Network. We participate directly with families and the police in the search for missing and abducted children.

      As a result, we have helped police recover more than 70 missing children, 22 of those were found by our search team and volunteers alone.

      I speak with parents of missing children and adults on a daily basis. I get involved with their cases.

      And I know that oversaturation on one story damages our ability to get the public’s attention when we need them most. When there is an actual new development in the case AND we need the public’s help.

      As I said even if they are doing it with good intentions, they need to know that it is not helping.

      Chris McElroy, President
      Kidsearch Network

    Leave a Reply




    Support Scared Monkeys! make a donation.

     
     
    • NEWS (breaking news alerts or news tips)
    • Red (comments)
    • Dugga (technical issues)
    • Dana (radio show comments)
    • Klaasend (blog and forum issues)
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
    Close
    E-mail It