Critical Amber Alert

[Resolute 14]

Well, your sophistry game is on point, at least.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Sophistry? I'm at a loss as to how I could have been more explicit. I actually said, outright, that I was post policing and that that's normally jayswin's job. I'm left marveling at how someone could be stupid enough to miss the obvious, literal self-reference in my second post and still have the brains to operate a computer.

[Resolute 14]

Jayswin is right. You are far more angry than usual. Go get laid, dude.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

I am sure that everyone who is advocating for no alerts from 11pm to 6am or something is not working very hard to imagine themselves in a situation where it is their child that is missing.

If it were my child, I might become a selfish prick and disregard the impacts on the people I'd wake up. I'd possibly be the worst person in the province to objectively balance my own interests against those of the general population. "Put yourself in the shoes of the most biased person in the situation" is a not a good way to make policy.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by ken0042

With the alerts going to phones- how many would be abductors (I’m thinking parents) reconsider their options knowing that now the whole province will be watching them. Take a person who is normally reasonable but is now at their wits end- does it now give them enough pause to reconsider?

I would guess the number to be quite high. Once an alert like that goes off one would think/hope that it would emphasize the magnitude of the situation to the individual.

Which also asks the question, is their a criteria for these alerts? Would they determine the likelihood of the abductor to hurt the children if panicked/cornered before releasing them?

[woob]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Sophistry? I'm at a loss as to how I could have been more explicit. I actually said, outright, that I was post policing and that that's normally jayswin's job. I'm left marveling at how someone could be stupid enough to miss the obvious, literal self-reference in my second post and still have the brains to operate a computer.

Hey, lets maybe try and have less calling people outright stupid?

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Appeal to emotion is never a useful argument.







Still appeal to emotion. Also, nobody said not to send alerts. But not to use the emergency alarm chime during that time. People who are awake are still likely to see the message notification light on their phones and check.



Everyone else will see it when they wake up. And, notably, information such as vehicle make and licence plate will be fresher in their minds right as they leave for their commute, as opposed to completely forgotten if they were woken up at 2AM for a message they would just delete without reading.

The police are also looking for leads and witnesses with any information to something that happened prior to the alert being issued - it is not exclusively to have people be on the lookout for license plates when they leave the house. I am not sure why some people think this is the singular reason for the alert.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Wormius

The police are also looking for leads and witnesses with any information to something that happened prior to the alert being issued - it is not exclusively to have people be on the lookout for license plates when they leave the house. I am not sure why some people think this is the singular reason for the alert.

And I am not sure why you think that changes the argument. I'm still not reading the message if it wakes me up in the middle of the night. I'm just deleting it, muttering to myself, and then trying to get back to sleep. Also, since I was already sleeping, the odds of my being able to provide any meaningful information are exceedingly low.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

And I am not sure why you think that changes the argument. I'm still not reading the message if it wakes me up in the middle of the night. I'm just deleting it, muttering to myself, and then trying to get back to sleep. Also, since I was already sleeping, the odds of my being able to provide any meaningful information are exceedingly low.

What is your argument then? That because somebody is sleeping at the time the alert is issued that it means they have no meaningful or actionable information of the events preceding the abduction that could help the police?

[ben voyonsdonc]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Also, since I was already sleeping, the odds of my being able to provide any meaningful information are exceedingly low.

What if you saw something that was relevant before you went to bed but dismissed it at the time?

[PsYcNeT]

Also it's not like the entire province is asleep at 2 AM. I'd be willing to bet around 15% of the working population is awake at somepoint between 11 PM and 6 AM.

Like, 11 PM - 3 AM for those in the service industry is pretty common awake hours.

[powderjunkie]

This conversation is definitely looping itself now.

Here's something new (though maybe I asked it a while back): what is the age threshold for an amber alert? 10? 11? 12? 13? 14? This is another spot where the 'nuclear or nothing' approach seems a little odd from a societal perspective - for under a certain age we're leaving no stone unturned, but once you reach a certain age you've got to be missing for a week before you might get a news story, but otherwise it's up to your family to put up posters...

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

This conversation is definitely looping itself now.

Here's something new (though maybe I asked it a while back): what is the age threshold for an amber alert? 10? 11? 12? 13? 14? This is another spot where the 'nuclear or nothing' approach seems a little odd from a societal perspective - for under a certain age we're leaving no stone unturned, but once you reach a certain age you've got to be missing for a week before you might get a news story, but otherwise it's up to your family to put up posters...

18.

The amber alert isn't for missing children. It's for abducted children:

• The child is under the age of 18;
• A belief that the child has been abducted;
• A belief that the child is in grave danger;
• Information is available that may help locate the child and/or the abductor (e.g., description of the child, the suspect, or the vehicle driven by the abductor); and
• That the alert be issued within a reasonable amount of time from the moment of the abduction.

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

18.

The amber alert isn't for missing children. It's for abducted children:

That's either an older set of criteria, or possibly an American one. I know for Alberta, our first criteria is this:

"A child or an adult with a proven mental or physical disability has been abducted"

and it's usually read as "a child (with/without proven mental or physical disability) and/or an adult with a proven mental or physical disability."

So there technically isn't an age limit on an Amber Alert (in Alberta) but it is circumstantially hard to get them after 18. I've also never seen your 5th point before in Alberta's criteria list.

[powderjunkie]

^ That leads to another interesting question - we presume that abducted children are at greater risk of danger than missing children or missing adults, but are they?

FWIW, I don't really recall any recent amber alerts being for kids older than ~10?

I suppose I just find it interesting that a child in danger under one particular set of circumstances is equivalent to a nuclear attack, but children in danger in many other circumstances don't warrant the same level of concern/resource.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

I suppose I just find it interesting that a child in danger under one particular set of circumstances is equivalent to a nuclear attack, but children in danger in many other circumstances don't warrant the same level of concern/resource.

Why wouldn't they?

Time, how they went missing, people involved, can the public help, etc. Yes. There are many circumstances. They basically decide the level of danger and the response.

Should a 10-year-old lost at the zoo for 30 minutes be treated the same as a 10-year-old abducted by a violent parent? I'm going to say no, but that's why we consider the circumstances before responding to things.

[Wormius]

Gees. What is wrong with these people? at 5 pm people still find a reason to whine about the alerts?

https://toronto.citynews.ca/2019/10/...-public-again/

Toronto police say once again, they have received multiple calls from the public complaining about an Amber Alert.

The alert went out just before 5 p.m. Tuesday after five children were allegedly abducted by their father in the Niagara region.

TPS Media Relations Officer Alex Li posted about the calls on Twitter, telling people not to call police to complain.

“Instead, find compassion and have the understanding to help locate these children. Amber Alerts are issued for a reason,” read the tweet.

[Lubicon]

Maybe the solution to all this is to allow people to opt out of receiving Amber alerts under the condition that they will also be opted out of receiving help if they attempt to call 911 should they ever be in the position of needing assistance.

[monkeyman]

I wish they’d track each and every one of these complaints down and impose steep fines.
Then I’d eagerly await for the first moron who runs to the media to complain about the fine.

[CaptainCrunch]

If you complain about an amber alert call at 5 pm about 5 abducted kids in your area or province, and you up the ante by calling in to complain, you are a tremendous ######bag and $$$$ $$$ sir or ma'am.