Are you possibly underrating the extent to which critics know quite well that the origins are safety-related and are critics precisely for that reason? They see it as another case of fears of crime out of proportion to the actual danger and actual crime rate (basically non-existent for Halloween candy). Here is one of several critical posts (from a decade ago) by the Free Range Kids woman.
Maybe. I usually am sympathetic to safety concerns and out of harmony with those who mock "safetyism." But I also agree with one of the commenters on the Post article - considering the far higher volume of kids on the road on Halloween, a ratio of 54 to 18, even though larger in absolute terms, seems to actually indicate drivers know to be more cautIous on that day.
Are you possibly underrating the extent to which critics know quite well that the origins are safety-related and are critics precisely for that reason? They see it as another case of fears of crime out of proportion to the actual danger and actual crime rate (basically non-existent for Halloween candy). Here is one of several critical posts (from a decade ago) by the Free Range Kids woman.
https://www.freerangekids.com/the-problem-with-trunk-or-treat/
The fears of *cars* are not overrated at all. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/10/28/heres-why-halloween-is-deadliest-day-year-child-pedestrians/
Maybe. I usually am sympathetic to safety concerns and out of harmony with those who mock "safetyism." But I also agree with one of the commenters on the Post article - considering the far higher volume of kids on the road on Halloween, a ratio of 54 to 18, even though larger in absolute terms, seems to actually indicate drivers know to be more cautIous on that day.