I didn't realize that most of what's been reported were hoaxes or family members. It's a sad day when you realize family members are more dangerous than strangers.
Sorry, JA. I don't know where this rumor came from. But MOST is not accurate. Maybe it happens ALSO, but it is hardly MOST.
There is a nutbag in every neighborhood. There are pedophiles on every block. There is a pedophile living next-door to my aunt a mile away. He is listed along with his crimes for all to see on the internet. Pedophilia.
And before my aunt knew, she thought he was wonderful. He even asked her grandson, aged 10 to go fishing with him, for no apparent reason. How thoughtful.
So, that is one of the people who hand out candy that no one is related to that I can see.
Like JA pointed out. The whole Halloween scare was debunked and trick or treating is safe. There really wasn't ever the mean old creep handing out poison or bladed apples to kids. The cited cases have been shown to be the work of parents and known adults.
You are watching too much Nancy Grace and her bat crap scare tactics. Statistics and evidence shows children are safer now than they ever have been. Headline news and the other fear mongers has chicken littles convinced that behind every tree is a pedophile or baby killer and that kids are in a state of constant threat. It's just not true and the numbers show that it is less common and likely to happen now than it was in the past. it just seems more likely because of the media makes national news out of isolated incidences.
The biggest threat our children are facing these days is over protection and isolation from the world. Too much scheduled and structured play and not enough exploring and running around freely to play and experience. They are increasingly being made to live in a bubble.
I actually knew a guy who joined a Satanic cult in high school (1980s) and after he quit it we asked why would you join something like that? He said he joined for the sex. My thought was gross....
There were a few copycat cases after Donahue and others presented the made up case.
Sure there are Satanist. What wasn't true was that there was a big conspiracy of Satanic cults abducting and raping children. All the cases of "psychologists" finding people with repressed memories of such and all the first person accounts have been repeatedly been found to be either made up testimonies or the result of implanting into the patient on part of these "experts". There is no fact based evidence that there was a large cabal of Satanist raping children.
That's what the "scare' was all about though. Incest and children. Not consenting adults playing out hedonistic fantasies under the guise.
What your friend seemed to be engaging in if he was telling the truth sounds more like a style sex club operating with a Satanic cult theme in the Levey style. Satan being more of motif and symbolic figure than an actual entity of worship or belief. Then again I'm just speculating on that.
I was almost agreeing with you, until you start obliquely calling the OP chicken little and ridiculing him for what he considers a.danger. Right there I thought you were just being confrontational, and that you didn't really want to share your views but to push yours. What if I want to be more careful than you, so what? What if he does more than I?
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at November 3, 2016 5:16 AM MDT
It was actually a broad net being cast in the use of the term. Not specifically directed. Besides when stating opinions we should all call 'em as we see 'em. I state my opinions and phrase them in reflection to how strongly I personally feel. It's not push my view or belittle others. I don't expect anyone to have to play softball and walk on eggshells to preserve thin skin. My wording merely a window into the level of passion of what is my personal truth.
No Lago. You taught me. You put me in my place. Not really, you set a verbal trap where in you stated an issue over little and did so in a way where anything that goes against total agreement and submission to your feelings is already negated as an attack. As any reply to it other than agreement is broadly precast as confrontational and dismissive. It's a common tactic for a weak accusation or premise. You're asking for neutered language is your point and trying to ensure it by your first reply to me.
Dude, you're an intelligent guy. You know exactly what I mean and trying to say. I should have tried to explain myself in a less confrontational way. I give you that. But that still doesn't make me wrong.
Just Asking 
