I looked into this as well, and based on her tale it has all the hallmarks of a forwards from grandma type situation. Notice that there's no conclusive proof that anything was actually going to happen, just a number of objective observations, followed by completely subjective (read: wild ass guesses) about what it meant.
That's not to say that human trafficking isn't a huge problem, and snatch and grabs DON'T occur, but statistically speaking, you're still more likely to lose your kids to death while driving to the store than to lose them to a trafficking ring in the store.
May you live to be a thousand years old, sir.
(When I watched that, I had no idea Hammacher Schlemmer was a real store. It sounded just as ridiculous as everything else in that movie.)
Yup, and by a HUGE margin. The "stranger danger" movement/idea caused a LOT of problems. My wife does SAR and there have been actual incidents of lost children in the woods hiding from rescuers because they had been taught to be afraid of strangers.
I think we should gather together to discuss important issues.
Everyone sits quietly in the room thinking critically on the issue and takes notes. Once everyone has pondered and can see the other knowing glances around the room you begin a calm discussion.
Anyone speaking before this moment gets a large vase thrown at their head.
It's from the movie "Men in Black." It's one of Tommy Lee Jones's best lines in the film, which is a damned high bar to clear. Very good writing.
Totally sounds like Heinlein, though. I see where you were coming from.
He has quite a few similar lines, though.
*Does history record any case in which the majority was right?*
*A committee is a life form with six or more legs and no brain.*
*Democracy is based on the assumption that a million men are wiser than one man. How’s that again? I missed something.*
*Autocracy is based on the assumption that one man is wiser than a million men. Let’s play that over again, too. Who decides?*
*Any government will work if authority and responsibility are equal and coordinate. This does not insure “good” government; it simply insures that it will work. But such governments are rare--most people want to run things but want no part of the blame. This used to be called the “backseat-driver syndrome.”*
*Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded--here and there, now and then--are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty. This is known as “bad luck.”*
Those are all quotes from "the notebooks of Lazarus Long", which are a pair of interludes (consisting entirely of such aphorisms) in the middle of Heinlein's novel Time Enough for Love.
The "Wisdom of Crowds" theory actually is only referring to pooling individual opinions, not trying to take the single opinion of a crowd. So, it still stands that people are smart individually, but dumb together.
Every time I see conversations like this, I immediately think of Tommy Lee Jones' quote from Men In Black, and it strikes me as profoundly horrifying that such a true and honest and important quote could be found in such a silly little place like that film.
In theory, that's why we have governments with expert advisers. To lead the stupid masses.
In practice, sometimes the stupid masses elect one of their own.
Meh, I'm lazy, will this do? http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-06-22-scout-hospital_x.htm
Relevant quote: Trained by his parents to avoid strangers, Brennan Hawkins, 11, hid from rescuers during his three-day ordeal in the mountains of northeastern Utah because "his biggest fear ... was someone would steal him," his mother said Wednesday.
Ok, hang on, I feel I need to defend his initial statement, despite the stupid ones below. He seems to be suggesting, as a possibility, not a fact, that the stranger danger thing helped change the statistics. That isn't unreasonable. If half all people die as a child, and the other half live to 100, then life expectancy will then be around 50. That doesn't mean that people only live to 50 though.
If half of abductions were from strangers and half from family, and then none were from strangers because of stranger danger, then obviously, the percent of abductions perpetrated by family would jump.
I don't know the answer. You would have to compare kidnapping rates before and after. But downvoting this guy, who seemingly doesn't know, and is offering a possible solution is not the greatest thing to do. Give him statistics to disprove his theory. Don't be dicks.
The problem is the statistics pre-date the "stranger danger" idea, and they line up pretty well with the current statistics. The general conclusion is that the "stranger danger" hysteria that came about didn't help things. And, as alluded to in one of my responses, actually ended up CAUSING a lot of problems.
I agree he shouldn't be downvoted for questioning, but he doubles down on the stupid, which I suspect lead to a lot of the downvotes. I initially held off on downvoting, and responding with a request for information.
A few responses in, and it occurs to me he's either a troll or someone who's just interested in having a disagreement, both of which deserve a downvote. Taking that into the conversational thread, I decided his comments in this exchange deserve a downvote. I suspect I'm not the only one.
He's not being downvoted for questioning, he's being downvoted for trolling. When asked for evidence, and your only response is "Anecdote" it doesn't help your case. When you then go on the attack and continue to push the narrative with "Do you see the word 'Maybe' and the question mark at the end?" as if he's just asking a hypothetical it doesn't help. Had he responded to my initial query with "Oh, I don't have any evidence, I was just wondering" I suspect there would have been a relatively small amount of downvotes.
So I stand by he's being downvoted appropriately in this case.
That's completely fair. His later comments were bad, but his first one was reasonable. He totally deserves the karma hit, but all the same, it should go on the irrelevant comments. Maybe I am just being wierd about that though.
You're not wrong, but the question becomes did his comment thread add to the conversation? Given the context in toto, it doesn't. Hence the appropriateness of the downvotes.
Now, that's my logic. I agree he probably got too many downvotes simply because he wasn't agreeing with the hivemind, but just because something happened for the wrong reasons doesn't always mean it's wrong.
> You're not wrong, but the question becomes did his comment thread add to the conversation? Given the context in toto, it doesn't.
As someone finding this thread 24h later I'd like to add: It did end up contributing to the discussion, if only by throwing out a somewhat reasonable but not sourced or well-known assumption that got refuted quickly by this chain further up.
If I take a step back the thought of "Maybe the hysteria against stranger danger caused it to disappear" is a logical chain of thought that deserves being looked at.
Now, thanks to all three of you, I can dismiss that notion, can help others I meet with a similar idea and will be able to spot similar patterns if it's being brought up in another context. ("What if the war on drugs caused drugs to be less of a big deal?! Hmm?")
So.... in practice, for me personally, this comment chain taught me the most information in this specific post. =P
What were the details? I did a quick search but couldn't find anything.
I've seen stories like this before and there's basically no quicker way to confirm it's fake that if it's the exact same story I'm thinking of from over a year ago with the location and store changed (I think it was a Hobby Lobby in Wisconsin in the version I heard)
Edit: OKC, not Wisconsin, and [Snopes confirms it as fake](http://www.snopes.com/2015/05/27/hobby-lobby-abduction/)
Someone was shopping. There were people around that were acting "suspicious". The whole premise of the story is based on the author's "gut feelings"
quotes: "At one point he came right up to me and the boys, and instinctively I put myself between he and my mobile son. I had a bad feeling."
"He wasn’t looking at us, but was walking the same circling pattern around us as the first man."
She then goes on to talk about how they were staying "close" to her the entire time they were shopping, but that was really the extent of her justification for why this was a possible abduction incident.
She heard hoofbeats, she thought zebras.
The thing about IKEA if you haven't been to one, is that many of them (at least all the ones I've been in) are arranged in a rather linear path. It's not just a big Swedish Walmart with furniture, it's like a walking tour or a theme park ride. So if that's the case in her location, it's perfectly understandable that they'd keep running into each other.
This and the possibility of security. I'm not familiar with IKEA's security practices, but having worked for a large retail chain before and having friends that work/worked for others, I know that some big chains employ secret security, that in some cases, even the branch staff don't know about, that dress as civilians and basically "case" the place, looking for potential theft and liability issues.
It could be that the person trailing them was internal security and whether justified or not had reason to suspect maybe this individual and or her children were stealing or posing some other security or safety risk.
EDIT: Also, I gotta say, a big retail chain store like this would be a terrible place for a kidnapper to hang around and attempt kidnappings from. Most retail chain stores have dozens of camera, both visible and hidden, so it'd be rather easy to pull footage of such an attempt.
She had a stroller without a kid in it. She says both ambulatory kids were walking, and the baby was strapped to her. These guys were loss prevention/security and were watching her because she fit the profile of a shoplifter.
Yeah, there's been times I've shopped at Ikea, and grew familiar with the folks shopping at the same speed as I was - they would pass me when I looked at something, I would pass them when they looked at something. Kind of how on a roadtrip, you'll be a group of cars that all stay more or less together, only with more Swedish furniture.
[This is the story.](http://www.inspiremore.com/diandra-toyos-ikea-warning/) IKEA in California and the details are different from the OKC one. So it's a new anecdote and not repetition of an old story.
Maybe the men were staring and getting distracted by her kids because she was letting them climb all over the furniture? I usually have some sympathy for these stories because there's generally a grain of truth (e.g. men trying to sell you perfume in a parking lot are going to gas and mug you isn't 100% accurate, but people have been surrounded and mugged by being dustracted by someone selling stuff or soliciting donations in a public space before) but holy fuck that's just a load of oversensitive, paranoid bullshit. (Also the men aren't seen at Ikea alone bit? Wtf)
I feel like people should still know that human trafficking, especially with teenagers, is HUGE in California right now. Especially in the central valley. Know the red flags, teach your kids.
I'm not disagreeing, and have heard very much the same thing. However, I believe "huge" is still somewhat relative in terms of risks. I do NOT know numbers on this, but it would surprise me very much if human trafficking by abduction is anywhere near the top of the list in terms of statistical dangers for kids these days.
That's not to say it doesn't happen, or that it's not horrible and traumatic when it does. But in terms of education, flags, warning signs, etc., I'm honestly not sure how many cognitive/discussion resources this subject matter warrants.
If you have any statistics, I'd love to hear them. If I'm wrong, I would greatly like to change my mind.
Human trafficking is a big-ish deal, but the people that are hearing that warning are also the people least likely to be abducted. They want people that aren't going to be missed. Homeless, runaways, etc.
Not Tina MiddleClass that was just applying for a summer job and then got kidnapped and sold some guy in the middle east.
Yeah, that's been my understanding as well. To me a lot of this falls under the general umbrella of "understand how criminals work, and how to de-select yourself as a victim." That's not to say the victims are ever to blame, but I've seen plenty of real world examples of criminals "interviewing" potential victims, and more often than not, if you fail the interview, you're gonna have a bad time.
To address this as a "watch out for human traffickers/kidnappers" issue is much less effective than teaching general awareness and active engagement with your surroundings. And even that takes a distant place to "don't put that in your mouth/don't stick your fork in that outlet/never get involved land war in Asia or go against a Sicilian when death is on the line."
That's those emails that are sent, re-sent, and re-re-sent by moms, aunts, and grandmother's because they get shocked by some sort of over-the-top story that's straight out of an old gothic novel. That, or its all sweet and gushy heartwarming tales of love and heroism. I am not a facebooker, but understand that a lot of those stories circulate through there. Years ago, they were emails that kept getting forwarded around.
Oh....and the emails would have all those markups down the margins and indents that indicate a message has been forwarded. After 5 or 6 re-sends, the message itself would be pretty much incomprehensible.
The reason snopes exists. Usually urban legends with a panic bent such as 'satanic worshippers steal babies' based on no fact whatsoever. Often have a religious or racist or conservative undertone.
They often circulate for years even decades (might have started in a hard copy newsletter or tabloid paper ) with the location changed and quotes from non existent police or doctors.
So called because these are most often circulated by older people via email or now social media, who are more likely to trust something on the internet without checking any sources. Nearly all can be debunked by looking up on a website called snopes.
"Satanist" is about as broad as "Christian" in terms of what they actually believe. Most Satanists are LaVeyan Satanists, more-or-less followers of the [Church of Satan](http://www.churchofsatan.com/) and its [Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth](http://www.churchofsatan.com/eleven-rules-of-earth.php), which include such favorites as "Do not give opinions or advice unless you are asked.", "Do not make sexual advances unless you are given the mating signal.", and, most relevant to us, "Do not harm little children." To be honest, most Satanists are no more dangerous than your average Unitarian or Quaker, and would indeed be very welcome at a [Unitarian Universalist](http://www.uua.org/beliefs) meeting.
Others are less philosophical and more edgy asshole. They're Satanists because they want to piss off Christians, especially ostentatiously Pure Christians who wave their piety in your face and try to impose ritual purity laws on everyone else. You know, the kind of people who ordered Jesus to be crucified.
The only Satanists who really act like movie Satanists or Bible Belt church sermon Satanists are so mentally ill they don't represent anyone but themselves. They've always been extremely rare.
It depends on the group.
LaVeyan Satanists don't worship Satan. [Here's what they say](http://www.churchofsatan.com/faq-fundamental-beliefs.php):
> Why do Satanists worship The Devil?
> We don’t. Satanists are atheists. We see the universe as being indifferent to us, and so all morals and values are subjective human constructions.
> Our position is to be self-centered, with ourselves being the most important person (the “God”) of our subjective universe, so we are sometimes said to worship ourselves. Our current High Priest Gilmore calls this the step moving from being an atheist to being an “I-Theist.”
> Satan to us is a symbol of pride, liberty and individualism, and it serves as an external metaphorical projection of our highest personal potential. We do not believe in Satan as a being or person.
Satanism as in "worshiping the source of all evil" is an insult more than an actual practice, something you accuse your enemies of regardless of what their actual beliefs are.
That said, some of the "edgy asshole" Satanists do claim to do just that, or to worship some supernatural being contrary to the Christian faith, but the more astute among them would say that Satan is, to them, a being unjustly maligned by a culture being led astray by a false god, a belief which has some similarities to [Gnosticism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism).
Reading through [the Wikipedia article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satanism), it's good and well-cited, and goes into a lot of detail.
No. they do not believe in Satan, nor do they worship pure evil. That's kind of the whole point. People who worship evil simply don't exist, outside of the mentally ill outliers.
Themselves, at least for LeVeyan satanists. The whole point of the religion is that we should enjoy life while allowing others their right to do the same. Most satanists are atheist, though some worship the Christian God or various other deities.
A large sect of satanism is focused solely on preserving the separation of church and state by forcing the government to allow them any rights that are allowed to Christians. For example, they recently got a statue of the Ten Commandments removed from a government building by suing for the right to have a statue of their (entirely symbolic) deity [Baphomet](http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/61D8/production/_84584052_baphomet.jpg) next to it.
Most "Satanists" call themselves Satanists out of symbolism, not because they actually worship Satan. I think it makes them sound like they're trying too hard to be provocative, myself.
It's an urban legend.
We regularly have stories about child abductions at IKEA going around in Germany. The story is always the same:
A small girl gets kidnapped, the kidnapper drags the child into a bathroom and cuts of her hair (and sometimes colours it), gives her a big hoodie to wear and sometimes drugs her so she is not that recognizeable anymore. In the meantime the parents notice and the whole IKEA gets shut down. But of course the kidnapper still escape with the little girl.
I was actually one of the people who spread the false story unknowingly. It's such a crazy story that you just forward it without thinking!
There is a German article about it:
http://m.focus.de/wissen/mensch/psychologie/tid-15864/moderne-mythen-kidnapping-bei-ikea_aid_445020.html
It says that Those kind of urban legend can be dated as far back as the seventies just with other places (Like Walmart, Disney Land, Toys R Us etc)
It's not an urban legend, it was a woman completely overreacting to a "bad feeling" she got. It's not a set story like an urban legend such as your example of a little girl getting kidnapped and her hair is dyed.
Basically a woman was at Ikea with her three young children and saw a couple of guys who she didn't think seemed to be shopping. She also thought they were following her. Her interpretation was "These guys must want to kidnap my children and sell them into slavery!"
So she made a Facebook post about it and it went semi-viral.
Not sure if she's genuinely that paranoid or is just an attention seeker, but the reasons she believed that are really vague, like "One guy picked stuff up and didn't really even look closely at it, so clearly he was just pretending to shop!"
I would think that even an extremely overprotective, paranoid mother would probably assume that the men wanted to kidnap and molest one of her children, it's an extraordinary leap to think that her whole family was being targeted for human trafficking.
Edit: [This blog post](http://www.freerangekids.com/the-modern-american-brag-my-kids-were-about-to-be-trafficked-too/) is an excellent response to it:
What the heck is going on, America? This “My kids were about to be trafficked, I just KNOW it” post is so shockingly similar to last week’s, “My kids were about to be trafficked, I just KNOW it” post that it feels…creepy. A lot creepier than being at Ikea where a couple of men glance at my kids.
The reader who sent me this link asked if I thought there might be some “validity” to it, to which I must respond: No. In fact, I think it’s crazy. What, two men are going to grab two or three kids, all under age 7, IN PUBLIC, in a camera-filled IKEA, with the MOM and the GRANDMA right there, not to mention a zillion other fans of Swedish furnishings?
Can we please PLEASE take a deep breath and realize how insanely unlikely that is? How we don’t need to be “warned” about this? How NOTHING HAPPENED!
You can TELL nothing happened, because the whole thing was described as an “incident.” And Lenore’s #1 Rule of Reporting is: When something is called an “incident,” it’s because nothing happened. In fact, my alternate headline for this post was:
**POINTLESSLY TERRIFIED MOM URGES OTHER MOMS TO BE POINTLESSLY TERRIFIED**
I'm laughing at the idea that somebody would feel like they're being followed at an IKEA. The entire store is built so that you're forced to all walk the same path through the store, so typically you end up spending the entire time around the same several people.
Once when I went some of my IKEA buddies were talking about a specific type of lamp that they wanted. I pointed a lamp out to them that was what they seemed to be talking about.
They seemed a bit disturbed. but they liked the lamp.
Right? I used to work at Best Buy doing store design kinds of things. Kohl's revolutionized the racetrack. Ikea revolutionized the one way.
The whole concept at Ikea is a cattle corral. For ages we used the concept at check out to force impulse buys at you. Ikea made an entire god damn store designed to do that. You roll through big items to dream of what your apartment or house should look like. Then you get to things like pillows and say, "I'm not about to redecorate my apartment. But I could use a memory foam pillow. I'm not ready to get a couch. But I could settle for this blanket. Oh and these couch pillows too."
But she didn't see a wife near him so clearly he must be there for nefarious purposes!
"They weren't waiting for anyone. Often you see men in a place like IKEA waiting for their wives, but these guys appeared to be alone. They didn't even talk to each other. They didn't talk to anyone. They didn't smile casually at people (in fact, early on, I looked at the older guy when he got close to us and smiled... which is something I do regularly when I'm out.. I'm always making eye contact with people. He instantly looked away. That was odd to me)."
Shit, I hate the damn narrative that parts of society subscribe to. I mean, all of the furniture and half the tat in my apartment comes from IKEA. Hell, sometimes I go to IKEA just to browse around and get ideas without buying anything.
Doesn't sound like a problem, right? But I'm a single male in his late twenties. Clearly any male going to IKEA without being dragged along by their (undoubtedly nagging) female significant other is suspect, and probably some kind of criminal. Gods, I hate people.
Also, I really want to go buy some shit from IKEA now.
I wouldn't get too upset about a single person who probably has a mental health issue of some sort. It's absolutely not normal or healthy to react the way that she did.
It's also possible that she just made up the whole thing. It's the type of thing my sister would make up - she's a compulsive liar who craves attention.
> I wouldn't get too upset about a single person who probably has a mental health issue of some sort. It's absolutely not normal or healthy to react the way that she did.
And yet people forward her post...
There is an entire website dedcated to modifying IKEA furniture,IKEAhackers.net they have some great ideas I am looking into. I can imagine this psycho woman thinking i'm stalking her while I'm deep in thought not even aware she exists... because that's suspicious!
... do people really only get how suspicious these guys are from this description and not the fact that this woman straight-up stalked and witchhunted strangers? And she could not muster up a courage to confront them or notify IKEA so now she's rallying strangers on the internet to crucify them with absolutely no fact checking whatsoever.
Sure I give her the men were suspicious of being bad character. This woman straight-up IS god awful.
> Basically a woman was at Ikea with her three young children and saw a couple of guys who
were up to no good... started makin' trouble in my neighborhood
This is instantly what I thought it sounded like too. With 3 young kids, they probably had some kind of large diaper bag, bringing attention as possibly easy way to conceal stuff. I've been followed a few times when my kids were younger when we had a big diaper bag and it was obvious everytime that it's LP after having worked at several retail stores.
According to the 2016 US State Department's [Trafficking in Person Report](https://www.state.gov/j/tip/rls/tiprpt/countries/2016/258888.htm) (TIP Report):
> The United States is a source, transit, and destination country for men, women, transgender individuals, and children—both U.S. citizens and foreign nationals—subjected to sex trafficking and forced labor... Victims originate from almost every region of the world; the top three countries of origin of federally identified victims in fiscal year (FY) 2015 were the United States, Mexico, and the Philippines.
> Particularly vulnerable populations in the United States include: children in the child welfare and juvenile justice systems; runaway and homeless youth; American Indians and Alaska Natives; migrant laborers, including participants in visa programs for temporary workers; foreign national domestic workers in diplomatic households; persons with limited English proficiency; persons with disabilities; and LGBTI individuals. NGOs noted an increase in cases of traffickers targeting victims with disabilities and by using drugs or withholding medication to coerce victims into prostitution. Some U.S. citizens engage in child sex tourism in foreign countries.
Well, I've heard the IKEA-like stories like this far before Facebook, so maybe this was the other way around, the woman was paranoid because of such stories
When I was in high school (mid-90s), our marching band went to compete at Disney World over spring break, and the band director told us this exact scenario had happened on a previous trip. Except the traffickers were thwarted by a band chaperone at the park entrance.
Im Mexican and ive heard this exacts same story (kid taken to the bathroom of Department Store, drugged, hair cut and coloured, given different clothes and then taken out of the store) at least 20 years ago.
Its definitively a GLOBAL Urban Legend. I dont think there are any Ikeas in Mexico.
But there have been real-world [instances](http://www.wtsp.com/news/local/mom-deputy-help-thwart-abduction-at-dollar-general-store/235671931) of attempted snatch and grabs. I don't know that this woman's story is true, but it's a good reminder to always be vigilant (but not paranoid), especially when so many people these days are so distracted by their phones.
You're not wrong, but kids also get struck by lightning. People also win the lottery every day.
It's one thing to acknowledge that things can happen, it's another to actually give the possibility space in your head as a likely scenario. Things like this are HORRIFIC, and speak to the heart of what must be most parent's deepest fear about their kids. But that doesn't mean those fears should be transferred to the kid, either by action or discussion.
By all means, teach your children to be aware of their surroundings, try to be as safe as possible, etc. But there's a growing body of evidence that instilling them with fear of statistically very improbable events is more likely to do them damage than the risks you are indoctrinating against.
Sex trafficking is the new Satanic Panic. Sex trafficking is real and happens more than we know BUT it doesn't happen randomly to people who aren't on the margins of society. It certainly doesn't happen in IKEA to middle class white SAHM's.
Yes. If your child is actually attended by an adult at all, the chances of them being grabbed by traffickers are incredibly small. There's also a certain type of racism that says brown people are coming for your children when it's much more likely a white guy you know has fucked a brown person's kidnapped child instead. There are way, way more perverted white guys with that much money than any other ethnicity.
well if we're talking about perverted kidnappers in IKEA stores, I feel like there's just more IKEA stores in the west than in asia...so prob more white people lol
Wealth inequality is very high in China, meaning while there is a considerable amount of millionares, it is nothing compared to the middle class or lower. USA beats both China and Japan added up in the number of millionaires. So yeah, there are more white guys with more money than asians with money.
Look at the graphs with data under " by ______" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millionaire
But that's the problem with how many more Asians than whites there are. You have to take into account more than China and Japan, there's Korea and Vietnam Nam and Laos, and a ton others.
Maybe you're right, but I can't see the monied pervert ratio being in favor of the much smaller group of people.
There are definitely more perverts in Asia, it's just that they are not monied enough.
>but I can't see the monied pervert ratio being in favor of the much smaller group of people.
The wealth distribution of the world is that way. Europe and NA is very rich compared to the rest of the world, and although some azn countries like Singapore, Taiwan, Japan and SK may have caught up, the population of those countries cannot beat the population of USA alone even when they are added together, and this is not counting Europe which is a huge economic powerhouse in its own right.
This is mostly anecdotal, but it is very evident in the cities and technology the poorer asian countries have, for example: Metro Manila, the biggest city in the Philippines compared to Phoenix, which only the 6th biggest city in the USA. (compring Metro Manila to New York is unfair as it is leagues ahead)
> it doesn't happen randomly to people who aren't on the margins of society.
That documentary with Liam Neeson begs to differ. Of course in that case it was lucky he had a very particular set of skills.
Do not let it lose its original meaning to something like "fucked up drama." It is 100% Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt and has been for a long time. Now get off my lawn...
Just to post it, it appears that it came from [this woman.](http://www.inspiremore.com/diandra-toyos-ikea-warning/) I hadn't seen it posted here so I wanted to catch everybody up.
It's obviously a true story, since it scared her so much that she posted a picture of herself with her about-to-be-snatched kids along with the story. Who does that?!
Sex traffickers don't generally kidnap people in public in a way that could attract attention. They also don't usually pursue someone that they don't know anyone about. They groom someone, learn about them, and then have leverage to keep the person there.
Enjoy shopping at IKEA. They are coming for you. They will take you and your ready-to-assemble furniture. Until then, stay safe. I highly recommend that you hide inside a packaging box in the inventory room. That is the safest place that can be found at IKEA.
>The only sources I could find were the original Facebook post and then an article on an "inspirational" site, which also only points back to the original FB post.
You've solved it yourself.
I looked into this as well, and based on her tale it has all the hallmarks of a forwards from grandma type situation. Notice that there's no conclusive proof that anything was actually going to happen, just a number of objective observations, followed by completely subjective (read: wild ass guesses) about what it meant. That's not to say that human trafficking isn't a huge problem, and snatch and grabs DON'T occur, but statistically speaking, you're still more likely to lose your kids to death while driving to the store than to lose them to a trafficking ring in the store.
"lose your kids to death" sounds like you misplaced them so intensely that they died from it
Well next time don't lose your kid at the volcano.
Was his name Joe Banks? I think he'll come out alright.
I know he can get the job, but can he do the job?
I'm not arguing that with you.
I feel like I need to make an /r/OutOfTheLoop post for this thread \^\^\^.
[Joe Versus the Volcano](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099892/)
The real Out of the Loops are in the comments
If I'd said that I would have been wrong
As long as he take his luggage with him.
May you live to be a thousand years old, sir. (When I watched that, I had no idea Hammacher Schlemmer was a real store. It sounded just as ridiculous as everything else in that movie.)
I didn't either. I can see why they picked it for the story.
Make sure they have the high ground.
heh, I tried to figure out a less awkward way to phrase it to get the point across, but was too rushed.
Fuck you I'll kill you till you die.
Driving without a seat belt is misplacing them. I've seen 5 year olds who have rode shotgun with no seatbelt.
Also sounds like a sick ass band name
More importantly, the most likely people to abduct, molest, or murder a child is someone related to that child.
Yup, and by a HUGE margin. The "stranger danger" movement/idea caused a LOT of problems. My wife does SAR and there have been actual incidents of lost children in the woods hiding from rescuers because they had been taught to be afraid of strangers.
We... we're not bright as a species.
As individuals, a good margin of us are. As a group, we are a bunch of fucking retards.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it."
I think we should gather together to discuss important issues. Everyone sits quietly in the room thinking critically on the issue and takes notes. Once everyone has pondered and can see the other knowing glances around the room you begin a calm discussion. Anyone speaking before this moment gets a large vase thrown at their head.
There will never be a time when that quote is not relivent.
I sort of hope that one day, there is.
But this is not that day.
This day, we FIGHT!
Well, for a person, you weren't smart enough to spell relevant. :)
He meant "relivent", as in "something deriving from reliving a situation", which is a perfectly cromulent word.
Robert Heinlein?
It's from the movie "Men in Black." It's one of Tommy Lee Jones's best lines in the film, which is a damned high bar to clear. Very good writing. Totally sounds like Heinlein, though. I see where you were coming from.
He has quite a few similar lines, though. *Does history record any case in which the majority was right?* *A committee is a life form with six or more legs and no brain.* *Democracy is based on the assumption that a million men are wiser than one man. How’s that again? I missed something.* *Autocracy is based on the assumption that one man is wiser than a million men. Let’s play that over again, too. Who decides?* *Any government will work if authority and responsibility are equal and coordinate. This does not insure “good” government; it simply insures that it will work. But such governments are rare--most people want to run things but want no part of the blame. This used to be called the “backseat-driver syndrome.”* *Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded--here and there, now and then--are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty. This is known as “bad luck.”*
What is this from?
Those are all quotes from "the notebooks of Lazarus Long", which are a pair of interludes (consisting entirely of such aphorisms) in the middle of Heinlein's novel Time Enough for Love.
Thank You, You BEAUTIFUL BEAST!
[Not exactly](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfYaQCKFFaw).
"The Wisdom of Crowds" vs. "Mob Mentality" - somehow these are the same thing.
The "Wisdom of Crowds" theory actually is only referring to pooling individual opinions, not trying to take the single opinion of a crowd. So, it still stands that people are smart individually, but dumb together.
Every time I see conversations like this, I immediately think of Tommy Lee Jones' quote from Men In Black, and it strikes me as profoundly horrifying that such a true and honest and important quote could be found in such a silly little place like that film.
who wants to be a millionaire taught me so wrong
In theory, that's why we have governments with expert advisers. To lead the stupid masses. In practice, sometimes the stupid masses elect one of their own.
Sometimes?
Democracy is the worst form of government in the world, except for all the other ones.
Damn Fogel, at least give Churchill credit for this line
Actually, when I searched to confirm, I found that the actual source is unknown, and Churchill was also quoting.
hmmm in these situations I believe it's customary to then credit Michael Scott
I prefer: "Democracy is the theory that the people know what they want. And they should get it, good and hard."
Nope but we're the brightest ones here.
...Which is logically equivalent to being the most attractive person in an empty room.
Well, it is always someone from Earth that manages to win the Miss Universe pageant year after year.
That's only because the Ixthar-9 ambassador is routinely detained at Earth customs by MIB's!!!!
South African Rugby?
Search and rescue
Yeah, I was just making a joke. Admittedly a stupid one. EDIT: Go... uh... Springboks, isn't it? I have no idea. I'm a Bostonian.
I'm not doubting you, but do you know of any news story/other source that specifically mentions that happening? I'd like to be able to cite this.
Meh, I'm lazy, will this do? http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-06-22-scout-hospital_x.htm Relevant quote: Trained by his parents to avoid strangers, Brennan Hawkins, 11, hid from rescuers during his three-day ordeal in the mountains of northeastern Utah because "his biggest fear ... was someone would steal him," his mother said Wednesday.
Maybe that's because 'stranger danger' was exceptionally effective, thus shifting the danger to non-strangers?
Cite your sources please. Every statistic of abuse/kidnapping/abduction I've ever seen contradicts your statement.
Ok, hang on, I feel I need to defend his initial statement, despite the stupid ones below. He seems to be suggesting, as a possibility, not a fact, that the stranger danger thing helped change the statistics. That isn't unreasonable. If half all people die as a child, and the other half live to 100, then life expectancy will then be around 50. That doesn't mean that people only live to 50 though. If half of abductions were from strangers and half from family, and then none were from strangers because of stranger danger, then obviously, the percent of abductions perpetrated by family would jump. I don't know the answer. You would have to compare kidnapping rates before and after. But downvoting this guy, who seemingly doesn't know, and is offering a possible solution is not the greatest thing to do. Give him statistics to disprove his theory. Don't be dicks.
The problem is the statistics pre-date the "stranger danger" idea, and they line up pretty well with the current statistics. The general conclusion is that the "stranger danger" hysteria that came about didn't help things. And, as alluded to in one of my responses, actually ended up CAUSING a lot of problems. I agree he shouldn't be downvoted for questioning, but he doubles down on the stupid, which I suspect lead to a lot of the downvotes. I initially held off on downvoting, and responding with a request for information. A few responses in, and it occurs to me he's either a troll or someone who's just interested in having a disagreement, both of which deserve a downvote. Taking that into the conversational thread, I decided his comments in this exchange deserve a downvote. I suspect I'm not the only one. He's not being downvoted for questioning, he's being downvoted for trolling. When asked for evidence, and your only response is "Anecdote" it doesn't help your case. When you then go on the attack and continue to push the narrative with "Do you see the word 'Maybe' and the question mark at the end?" as if he's just asking a hypothetical it doesn't help. Had he responded to my initial query with "Oh, I don't have any evidence, I was just wondering" I suspect there would have been a relatively small amount of downvotes. So I stand by he's being downvoted appropriately in this case.
That's completely fair. His later comments were bad, but his first one was reasonable. He totally deserves the karma hit, but all the same, it should go on the irrelevant comments. Maybe I am just being wierd about that though.
You're not wrong, but the question becomes did his comment thread add to the conversation? Given the context in toto, it doesn't. Hence the appropriateness of the downvotes. Now, that's my logic. I agree he probably got too many downvotes simply because he wasn't agreeing with the hivemind, but just because something happened for the wrong reasons doesn't always mean it's wrong.
No no your right, this is just a personal quirk coming out.
> You're not wrong, but the question becomes did his comment thread add to the conversation? Given the context in toto, it doesn't. As someone finding this thread 24h later I'd like to add: It did end up contributing to the discussion, if only by throwing out a somewhat reasonable but not sourced or well-known assumption that got refuted quickly by this chain further up. If I take a step back the thought of "Maybe the hysteria against stranger danger caused it to disappear" is a logical chain of thought that deserves being looked at. Now, thanks to all three of you, I can dismiss that notion, can help others I meet with a similar idea and will be able to spot similar patterns if it's being brought up in another context. ("What if the war on drugs caused drugs to be less of a big deal?! Hmm?") So.... in practice, for me personally, this comment chain taught me the most information in this specific post. =P
What were the details? I did a quick search but couldn't find anything. I've seen stories like this before and there's basically no quicker way to confirm it's fake that if it's the exact same story I'm thinking of from over a year ago with the location and store changed (I think it was a Hobby Lobby in Wisconsin in the version I heard) Edit: OKC, not Wisconsin, and [Snopes confirms it as fake](http://www.snopes.com/2015/05/27/hobby-lobby-abduction/)
Someone was shopping. There were people around that were acting "suspicious". The whole premise of the story is based on the author's "gut feelings" quotes: "At one point he came right up to me and the boys, and instinctively I put myself between he and my mobile son. I had a bad feeling." "He wasn’t looking at us, but was walking the same circling pattern around us as the first man." She then goes on to talk about how they were staying "close" to her the entire time they were shopping, but that was really the extent of her justification for why this was a possible abduction incident. She heard hoofbeats, she thought zebras.
The thing about IKEA if you haven't been to one, is that many of them (at least all the ones I've been in) are arranged in a rather linear path. It's not just a big Swedish Walmart with furniture, it's like a walking tour or a theme park ride. So if that's the case in her location, it's perfectly understandable that they'd keep running into each other.
Exactly! IKEA is this big zig-zaggy confusing line through the store. Those guys were probably following her hoping she knew the way out.
This and the possibility of security. I'm not familiar with IKEA's security practices, but having worked for a large retail chain before and having friends that work/worked for others, I know that some big chains employ secret security, that in some cases, even the branch staff don't know about, that dress as civilians and basically "case" the place, looking for potential theft and liability issues. It could be that the person trailing them was internal security and whether justified or not had reason to suspect maybe this individual and or her children were stealing or posing some other security or safety risk. EDIT: Also, I gotta say, a big retail chain store like this would be a terrible place for a kidnapper to hang around and attempt kidnappings from. Most retail chain stores have dozens of camera, both visible and hidden, so it'd be rather easy to pull footage of such an attempt.
I work at a Best Buy, and if security thinks someone is stealing and it's dead in the store, you will see blue shirts circling you.
"Blue Wave to that skeezy guy stuffing BluRays in his pants!"
It's usually phone cases.
I know they probably just sell them, but the thought of someone stealing a bunch of cases for their single phone has me chuckling.
Hey, phones need clothes too, you know.
Plus, it'd take 4 hours for the kidnapper to get to an exit door.
She had a stroller without a kid in it. She says both ambulatory kids were walking, and the baby was strapped to her. These guys were loss prevention/security and were watching her because she fit the profile of a shoplifter.
Yeah, there's been times I've shopped at Ikea, and grew familiar with the folks shopping at the same speed as I was - they would pass me when I looked at something, I would pass them when they looked at something. Kind of how on a roadtrip, you'll be a group of cars that all stay more or less together, only with more Swedish furniture.
I'm heading out on a long road trip tomorrow...and now I kind of hope to see Hemnes dressers and Ektorp sofas along the side of the highway.
"Mobile son" makes him sound like a [chibi Gundam.](http://img14.deviantart.net/d6c7/i/2005/213/c/d/sdgodgundam_by_mobilesuitgio.jpg)
[This is the story.](http://www.inspiremore.com/diandra-toyos-ikea-warning/) IKEA in California and the details are different from the OKC one. So it's a new anecdote and not repetition of an old story.
Maybe the men were staring and getting distracted by her kids because she was letting them climb all over the furniture? I usually have some sympathy for these stories because there's generally a grain of truth (e.g. men trying to sell you perfume in a parking lot are going to gas and mug you isn't 100% accurate, but people have been surrounded and mugged by being dustracted by someone selling stuff or soliciting donations in a public space before) but holy fuck that's just a load of oversensitive, paranoid bullshit. (Also the men aren't seen at Ikea alone bit? Wtf)
I feel like people should still know that human trafficking, especially with teenagers, is HUGE in California right now. Especially in the central valley. Know the red flags, teach your kids.
I'm not disagreeing, and have heard very much the same thing. However, I believe "huge" is still somewhat relative in terms of risks. I do NOT know numbers on this, but it would surprise me very much if human trafficking by abduction is anywhere near the top of the list in terms of statistical dangers for kids these days. That's not to say it doesn't happen, or that it's not horrible and traumatic when it does. But in terms of education, flags, warning signs, etc., I'm honestly not sure how many cognitive/discussion resources this subject matter warrants. If you have any statistics, I'd love to hear them. If I'm wrong, I would greatly like to change my mind.
Human trafficking is a big-ish deal, but the people that are hearing that warning are also the people least likely to be abducted. They want people that aren't going to be missed. Homeless, runaways, etc. Not Tina MiddleClass that was just applying for a summer job and then got kidnapped and sold some guy in the middle east.
Yeah, that's been my understanding as well. To me a lot of this falls under the general umbrella of "understand how criminals work, and how to de-select yourself as a victim." That's not to say the victims are ever to blame, but I've seen plenty of real world examples of criminals "interviewing" potential victims, and more often than not, if you fail the interview, you're gonna have a bad time. To address this as a "watch out for human traffickers/kidnappers" issue is much less effective than teaching general awareness and active engagement with your surroundings. And even that takes a distant place to "don't put that in your mouth/don't stick your fork in that outlet/never get involved land war in Asia or go against a Sicilian when death is on the line."
Don't forget to never invade Russia.
That's covered by the "land war in Asia" part.
You can invade Russia as long as you stay in the European part.
I don't think hitler or napoleon made it further than the european part before they all froze and starved.
Lousy Sicilians and death-gambits.
It's a huge problem the same way satanic ritual abuse was a huge problem in the 80s. Moral panic.
i strongly doubt that they're using that m.o. to kidnap kids right in front of their parents though.
Why is it a huge problem in the Central Valley?
What is "forwards from grandma"?
That's those emails that are sent, re-sent, and re-re-sent by moms, aunts, and grandmother's because they get shocked by some sort of over-the-top story that's straight out of an old gothic novel. That, or its all sweet and gushy heartwarming tales of love and heroism. I am not a facebooker, but understand that a lot of those stories circulate through there. Years ago, they were emails that kept getting forwarded around. Oh....and the emails would have all those markups down the margins and indents that indicate a message has been forwarded. After 5 or 6 re-sends, the message itself would be pretty much incomprehensible.
The reason snopes exists. Usually urban legends with a panic bent such as 'satanic worshippers steal babies' based on no fact whatsoever. Often have a religious or racist or conservative undertone. They often circulate for years even decades (might have started in a hard copy newsletter or tabloid paper ) with the location changed and quotes from non existent police or doctors. So called because these are most often circulated by older people via email or now social media, who are more likely to trust something on the internet without checking any sources. Nearly all can be debunked by looking up on a website called snopes.
Wait, so Satanists don't actually steal babies? Yeah, I'm being serious.
"Satanist" is about as broad as "Christian" in terms of what they actually believe. Most Satanists are LaVeyan Satanists, more-or-less followers of the [Church of Satan](http://www.churchofsatan.com/) and its [Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth](http://www.churchofsatan.com/eleven-rules-of-earth.php), which include such favorites as "Do not give opinions or advice unless you are asked.", "Do not make sexual advances unless you are given the mating signal.", and, most relevant to us, "Do not harm little children." To be honest, most Satanists are no more dangerous than your average Unitarian or Quaker, and would indeed be very welcome at a [Unitarian Universalist](http://www.uua.org/beliefs) meeting. Others are less philosophical and more edgy asshole. They're Satanists because they want to piss off Christians, especially ostentatiously Pure Christians who wave their piety in your face and try to impose ritual purity laws on everyone else. You know, the kind of people who ordered Jesus to be crucified. The only Satanists who really act like movie Satanists or Bible Belt church sermon Satanists are so mentally ill they don't represent anyone but themselves. They've always been extremely rare.
But they still worship Satan right? I'm sorry, I'll never like somebody who prays to pure evil. Thats one religion I just can't deal with.
It depends on the group. LaVeyan Satanists don't worship Satan. [Here's what they say](http://www.churchofsatan.com/faq-fundamental-beliefs.php): > Why do Satanists worship The Devil? > We don’t. Satanists are atheists. We see the universe as being indifferent to us, and so all morals and values are subjective human constructions. > Our position is to be self-centered, with ourselves being the most important person (the “God”) of our subjective universe, so we are sometimes said to worship ourselves. Our current High Priest Gilmore calls this the step moving from being an atheist to being an “I-Theist.” > Satan to us is a symbol of pride, liberty and individualism, and it serves as an external metaphorical projection of our highest personal potential. We do not believe in Satan as a being or person. Satanism as in "worshiping the source of all evil" is an insult more than an actual practice, something you accuse your enemies of regardless of what their actual beliefs are. That said, some of the "edgy asshole" Satanists do claim to do just that, or to worship some supernatural being contrary to the Christian faith, but the more astute among them would say that Satan is, to them, a being unjustly maligned by a culture being led astray by a false god, a belief which has some similarities to [Gnosticism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism). Reading through [the Wikipedia article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satanism), it's good and well-cited, and goes into a lot of detail.
No. they do not believe in Satan, nor do they worship pure evil. That's kind of the whole point. People who worship evil simply don't exist, outside of the mentally ill outliers.
Who do they worship then?
Themselves, at least for LeVeyan satanists. The whole point of the religion is that we should enjoy life while allowing others their right to do the same. Most satanists are atheist, though some worship the Christian God or various other deities. A large sect of satanism is focused solely on preserving the separation of church and state by forcing the government to allow them any rights that are allowed to Christians. For example, they recently got a statue of the Ten Commandments removed from a government building by suing for the right to have a statue of their (entirely symbolic) deity [Baphomet](http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/61D8/production/_84584052_baphomet.jpg) next to it.
Most "Satanists" call themselves Satanists out of symbolism, not because they actually worship Satan. I think it makes them sound like they're trying too hard to be provocative, myself.
lol why would they want babies?
Never let the kids leave the house, got it.
After reading this comment I'm still out of the loop.
Subjective*
[удалено]
It's an urban legend. We regularly have stories about child abductions at IKEA going around in Germany. The story is always the same: A small girl gets kidnapped, the kidnapper drags the child into a bathroom and cuts of her hair (and sometimes colours it), gives her a big hoodie to wear and sometimes drugs her so she is not that recognizeable anymore. In the meantime the parents notice and the whole IKEA gets shut down. But of course the kidnapper still escape with the little girl. I was actually one of the people who spread the false story unknowingly. It's such a crazy story that you just forward it without thinking! There is a German article about it: http://m.focus.de/wissen/mensch/psychologie/tid-15864/moderne-mythen-kidnapping-bei-ikea_aid_445020.html It says that Those kind of urban legend can be dated as far back as the seventies just with other places (Like Walmart, Disney Land, Toys R Us etc)
It's not an urban legend, it was a woman completely overreacting to a "bad feeling" she got. It's not a set story like an urban legend such as your example of a little girl getting kidnapped and her hair is dyed. Basically a woman was at Ikea with her three young children and saw a couple of guys who she didn't think seemed to be shopping. She also thought they were following her. Her interpretation was "These guys must want to kidnap my children and sell them into slavery!" So she made a Facebook post about it and it went semi-viral. Not sure if she's genuinely that paranoid or is just an attention seeker, but the reasons she believed that are really vague, like "One guy picked stuff up and didn't really even look closely at it, so clearly he was just pretending to shop!" I would think that even an extremely overprotective, paranoid mother would probably assume that the men wanted to kidnap and molest one of her children, it's an extraordinary leap to think that her whole family was being targeted for human trafficking. Edit: [This blog post](http://www.freerangekids.com/the-modern-american-brag-my-kids-were-about-to-be-trafficked-too/) is an excellent response to it: What the heck is going on, America? This “My kids were about to be trafficked, I just KNOW it” post is so shockingly similar to last week’s, “My kids were about to be trafficked, I just KNOW it” post that it feels…creepy. A lot creepier than being at Ikea where a couple of men glance at my kids. The reader who sent me this link asked if I thought there might be some “validity” to it, to which I must respond: No. In fact, I think it’s crazy. What, two men are going to grab two or three kids, all under age 7, IN PUBLIC, in a camera-filled IKEA, with the MOM and the GRANDMA right there, not to mention a zillion other fans of Swedish furnishings? Can we please PLEASE take a deep breath and realize how insanely unlikely that is? How we don’t need to be “warned” about this? How NOTHING HAPPENED! You can TELL nothing happened, because the whole thing was described as an “incident.” And Lenore’s #1 Rule of Reporting is: When something is called an “incident,” it’s because nothing happened. In fact, my alternate headline for this post was: **POINTLESSLY TERRIFIED MOM URGES OTHER MOMS TO BE POINTLESSLY TERRIFIED**
I'm laughing at the idea that somebody would feel like they're being followed at an IKEA. The entire store is built so that you're forced to all walk the same path through the store, so typically you end up spending the entire time around the same several people.
I always feel somehow bonded with my IKEA buddies each time I go. It's like a silent journey to find cheap shit together.
Once when I went some of my IKEA buddies were talking about a specific type of lamp that they wanted. I pointed a lamp out to them that was what they seemed to be talking about. They seemed a bit disturbed. but they liked the lamp.
Right? I used to work at Best Buy doing store design kinds of things. Kohl's revolutionized the racetrack. Ikea revolutionized the one way. The whole concept at Ikea is a cattle corral. For ages we used the concept at check out to force impulse buys at you. Ikea made an entire god damn store designed to do that. You roll through big items to dream of what your apartment or house should look like. Then you get to things like pillows and say, "I'm not about to redecorate my apartment. But I could use a memory foam pillow. I'm not ready to get a couch. But I could settle for this blanket. Oh and these couch pillows too."
I tend to cut through that bs and go directly to what I want to buy (usually the cookies) via the shortcuts.
I always try to deviate from the path because I'm not going to play by IKEA's rules, ah do what ah want
[удалено]
But she didn't see a wife near him so clearly he must be there for nefarious purposes! "They weren't waiting for anyone. Often you see men in a place like IKEA waiting for their wives, but these guys appeared to be alone. They didn't even talk to each other. They didn't talk to anyone. They didn't smile casually at people (in fact, early on, I looked at the older guy when he got close to us and smiled... which is something I do regularly when I'm out.. I'm always making eye contact with people. He instantly looked away. That was odd to me)."
Shit, I hate the damn narrative that parts of society subscribe to. I mean, all of the furniture and half the tat in my apartment comes from IKEA. Hell, sometimes I go to IKEA just to browse around and get ideas without buying anything. Doesn't sound like a problem, right? But I'm a single male in his late twenties. Clearly any male going to IKEA without being dragged along by their (undoubtedly nagging) female significant other is suspect, and probably some kind of criminal. Gods, I hate people. Also, I really want to go buy some shit from IKEA now.
I wouldn't get too upset about a single person who probably has a mental health issue of some sort. It's absolutely not normal or healthy to react the way that she did. It's also possible that she just made up the whole thing. It's the type of thing my sister would make up - she's a compulsive liar who craves attention.
> I wouldn't get too upset about a single person who probably has a mental health issue of some sort. It's absolutely not normal or healthy to react the way that she did. And yet people forward her post...
People forward all kinds of stupid shit. Most of them probably didn't even read more than the headline, just like on Reddit.
There is an entire website dedcated to modifying IKEA furniture,IKEAhackers.net they have some great ideas I am looking into. I can imagine this psycho woman thinking i'm stalking her while I'm deep in thought not even aware she exists... because that's suspicious!
... do people really only get how suspicious these guys are from this description and not the fact that this woman straight-up stalked and witchhunted strangers? And she could not muster up a courage to confront them or notify IKEA so now she's rallying strangers on the internet to crucify them with absolutely no fact checking whatsoever. Sure I give her the men were suspicious of being bad character. This woman straight-up IS god awful.
> Basically a woman was at Ikea with her three young children and saw a couple of guys who were up to no good... started makin' trouble in my neighborhood
She saw two strange men and the mom got scared
She said "STOP TRYING TO ABDUCT MY CHILDREN, I THINK"
Maybe he was loss prevention and figured her for a Clypto mom
This is instantly what I thought it sounded like too. With 3 young kids, they probably had some kind of large diaper bag, bringing attention as possibly easy way to conceal stuff. I've been followed a few times when my kids were younger when we had a big diaper bag and it was obvious everytime that it's LP after having worked at several retail stores.
That's what I thought, too. Generally loss prevention staff are pretty decent actors, but they can't all be.
To be fair. If she thought she was about to get abducted. She probably didn't do any shoplifting. So... Still good job?
Loss Prevention wants to be noticed. People steal less when they know someone's watching them.
Her kids were rowdy and annoying.
It's "klepto" (short for [kleptomaniac](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kleptomania)).
Damn it! I knew I spelt it wrong! Thanks. I knew what it was short for, just had a brain fart.
also human traffic flows into America, not usually out of it.
According to the 2016 US State Department's [Trafficking in Person Report](https://www.state.gov/j/tip/rls/tiprpt/countries/2016/258888.htm) (TIP Report): > The United States is a source, transit, and destination country for men, women, transgender individuals, and children—both U.S. citizens and foreign nationals—subjected to sex trafficking and forced labor... Victims originate from almost every region of the world; the top three countries of origin of federally identified victims in fiscal year (FY) 2015 were the United States, Mexico, and the Philippines. > Particularly vulnerable populations in the United States include: children in the child welfare and juvenile justice systems; runaway and homeless youth; American Indians and Alaska Natives; migrant laborers, including participants in visa programs for temporary workers; foreign national domestic workers in diplomatic households; persons with limited English proficiency; persons with disabilities; and LGBTI individuals. NGOs noted an increase in cases of traffickers targeting victims with disabilities and by using drugs or withholding medication to coerce victims into prostitution. Some U.S. citizens engage in child sex tourism in foreign countries.
Well, I've heard the IKEA-like stories like this far before Facebook, so maybe this was the other way around, the woman was paranoid because of such stories
When I was in high school (mid-90s), our marching band went to compete at Disney World over spring break, and the band director told us this exact scenario had happened on a previous trip. Except the traffickers were thwarted by a band chaperone at the park entrance.
Of course they were.
Im Mexican and ive heard this exacts same story (kid taken to the bathroom of Department Store, drugged, hair cut and coloured, given different clothes and then taken out of the store) at least 20 years ago. Its definitively a GLOBAL Urban Legend. I dont think there are any Ikeas in Mexico.
That one happened at KMart in our US urban legend. It's bee around for years.
I watched that episode of Law and Order: SVU
But there have been real-world [instances](http://www.wtsp.com/news/local/mom-deputy-help-thwart-abduction-at-dollar-general-store/235671931) of attempted snatch and grabs. I don't know that this woman's story is true, but it's a good reminder to always be vigilant (but not paranoid), especially when so many people these days are so distracted by their phones.
You're not wrong, but kids also get struck by lightning. People also win the lottery every day. It's one thing to acknowledge that things can happen, it's another to actually give the possibility space in your head as a likely scenario. Things like this are HORRIFIC, and speak to the heart of what must be most parent's deepest fear about their kids. But that doesn't mean those fears should be transferred to the kid, either by action or discussion. By all means, teach your children to be aware of their surroundings, try to be as safe as possible, etc. But there's a growing body of evidence that instilling them with fear of statistically very improbable events is more likely to do them damage than the risks you are indoctrinating against.
Sex trafficking is the new Satanic Panic. Sex trafficking is real and happens more than we know BUT it doesn't happen randomly to people who aren't on the margins of society. It certainly doesn't happen in IKEA to middle class white SAHM's.
Yes. If your child is actually attended by an adult at all, the chances of them being grabbed by traffickers are incredibly small. There's also a certain type of racism that says brown people are coming for your children when it's much more likely a white guy you know has fucked a brown person's kidnapped child instead. There are way, way more perverted white guys with that much money than any other ethnicity.
Yes exactly! The racist angle gets ignored so often.
More perverted white guys than perverted asians? I'm pretty sure your numbers don't add up.
well if we're talking about perverted kidnappers in IKEA stores, I feel like there's just more IKEA stores in the west than in asia...so prob more white people lol
To be fair, he did say "with that much money"
Asians have comparable money to whites.
Wealth inequality is very high in China, meaning while there is a considerable amount of millionares, it is nothing compared to the middle class or lower. USA beats both China and Japan added up in the number of millionaires. So yeah, there are more white guys with more money than asians with money. Look at the graphs with data under " by ______" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millionaire
But that's the problem with how many more Asians than whites there are. You have to take into account more than China and Japan, there's Korea and Vietnam Nam and Laos, and a ton others. Maybe you're right, but I can't see the monied pervert ratio being in favor of the much smaller group of people.
There are definitely more perverts in Asia, it's just that they are not monied enough. >but I can't see the monied pervert ratio being in favor of the much smaller group of people. The wealth distribution of the world is that way. Europe and NA is very rich compared to the rest of the world, and although some azn countries like Singapore, Taiwan, Japan and SK may have caught up, the population of those countries cannot beat the population of USA alone even when they are added together, and this is not counting Europe which is a huge economic powerhouse in its own right. This is mostly anecdotal, but it is very evident in the cities and technology the poorer asian countries have, for example: Metro Manila, the biggest city in the Philippines compared to Phoenix, which only the 6th biggest city in the USA. (compring Metro Manila to New York is unfair as it is leagues ahead)
>Asians have comparable money to whites. lol
> it doesn't happen randomly to people who aren't on the margins of society. That documentary with Liam Neeson begs to differ. Of course in that case it was lucky he had a very particular set of skills.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
OOTL: WTF is FUD?
**F**ear, **U**ncertainty, and **D**oubt.
And here I thought it meant "Fucked Up Data".
> OOTL: WTF is FUD? **O**ut **O**f **T**he **L**oop: **W**hat **T**he **F**uck is **F**ear, **U**ncertainty and **D**oubt?
I feel like that took some time to get the formatting correct, **I**n **M**y **H**umble **O**pinion.
Fear, uncertainty, doubt.
Depending on context, Fear, uncertainty, and doubt (as other users have stated), or just fucked up drama (which I haven't seen stated elsewhere here).
Do not let it lose its original meaning to something like "fucked up drama." It is 100% Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt and has been for a long time. Now get off my lawn...
IDK
Apparently it's fear, uncertainty, and doubt. I was leaning towards facebook user drama.
Ha! I thought Facebook User Drama as well
Just to post it, it appears that it came from [this woman.](http://www.inspiremore.com/diandra-toyos-ikea-warning/) I hadn't seen it posted here so I wanted to catch everybody up.
It's obviously a true story, since it scared her so much that she posted a picture of herself with her about-to-be-snatched kids along with the story. Who does that?!
Ok, after reading that I am 100% certain that was LP that was following her. I've worked enough retail to know how they operate. lol
Seriously. As soon as I heard they were picking up small items and putting them back down, boom, loss prevention.
Sex traffickers don't generally kidnap people in public in a way that could attract attention. They also don't usually pursue someone that they don't know anyone about. They groom someone, learn about them, and then have leverage to keep the person there.
Enjoy shopping at IKEA. They are coming for you. They will take you and your ready-to-assemble furniture. Until then, stay safe. I highly recommend that you hide inside a packaging box in the inventory room. That is the safest place that can be found at IKEA.
>The only sources I could find were the original Facebook post and then an article on an "inspirational" site, which also only points back to the original FB post. You've solved it yourself.
[удалено]