Somewhat related: http://graphics.wsj.com/hostage/
They shot him a dozen times in the end. Man, when they’ve decided they want you dead (which is what this guy wanted anyway, so no love lost here) they really make sure don’t they!
Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
21–30 of 78 posts
Re: Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
Before K&R insurers got together, firms and wealthy families were paying badly negotiated sky high ransoms. Now professionals negotiators with ice running through their veins negotiate much better "deals" and also reduce the risk of death by two thirds. Much lower ransoms should mean kidnapping is less profitable and so supply should decrease (of kidnappings).
if no one paid, there would be no more kidnappings for ransom
True, but nobody is going to not pay and sacrifice their life so that hypothetical future people won't get kidnapped.
Re: Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
#23Somewhat related: http://graphics.wsj.com/hostage/
Tangentially related but very good read.
Thanks for sharing.
Re: Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except the insurance policy on a person is cancelled if word gets out that they have it.
Wouldn't certain class of people have a greater propensity of buying this type of insurance. Probably some decent overlap with the kinds of people kidnappers target in the first place?
That's probably why some of the insurance policies require things like curfews and private security.
Re: Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
#25When I lived/worked in a high-risk kidnapping environment, I ever got K&R insurance. What I wanted was "retribution insurance" -- some plan which would guarantee some people would investigate and kill everyone in any substantial way affiliated with the kidnapping -- and to loudly communicate the existence of this policy in advance. Being recovered would be great, but having kidnappings deterred entirely would be even better.
US citizenship largely serves this purpose, at least if it's a high profile kidnapping (which any kidnapping in Iraq/Afghanistan/etc. would have been.)
Re: Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wouldn't certain class of people have a greater propensity of buying this type of insurance. Probably some decent overlap with the kinds of people kidnappers target in the first place?
That's probably why some of the insurance policies require things like curfews and private security.
The war zone policies often mandated inherently unsafe things (movement only in high-profile armored vehicles, with light security, concentration of protected persons in specific places) when those things were actually by that time less safe than alternatives (low profile vehicles, dispersion).
Re: Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
#27When I lived/worked in a high-risk kidnapping environment, I ever got K&R insurance. What I wanted was "retribution insurance" -- some plan which would guarantee some people would investigate and kill everyone in any substantial way affiliated with the kidnapping -- and to loudly communicate the existence of this policy in advance. Being recovered would be great, but having kidnappings deterred entirely would be even…
I'm not sure if that would be an effective way to get kidnappings deterred.
There are varied policies on kidnappings, discussed here: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2017/09/01/548032302/epis...
Interestingly the "no ransoms" policy seems to be quite problematic.
Re: Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
Before K&R insurers got together, firms and wealthy families were paying badly negotiated sky high ransoms. Now professionals negotiators with ice running through their veins negotiate much better "deals" and also reduce the risk of death by two thirds. Much lower ransoms should mean kidnapping is less profitable and so supply should decrease (of kidnappings).
if no one paid, there would be no more kidnappings for ransom
This might not be true: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2017/09/01/548032302/epis...
Re: Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
The kidnappers can remain irrational longer than you can stay solvent.
Maybe something like the Russian model makes more sense, if not legally. The most deterrent response is to hunt the kidnapers down and exterminate them, not pay them.
Sounds like a great way to get the hostages killed at the same time.
Maybe it would work _after_ the kidnappers have been paid.
Re: Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
if no one paid, there would be no more kidnappings for ransom
People are inclined to pay ransoms, so you would have to make it illegal to pay ransom, which would make a disincentive to reporting kidnappings to the police as kidnappers want.
Interestingly in US paying the ransom was illegal, nowadays they are reverting that, since it was highly problematic and resulted to more deaths for the hostages, and longer hostage times. And in the end the ransom often still was paid.
My source (which I have been pasting here already 3 times): https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2017/09/01/548032302/epis...