Most places, where kidnappings happen often, have the same result: victims end up dead regardless of a paid ransom and not notifying police. The only place where most victims end up alive and unscathed once the victims' families pay the ransoms is the Philippines. Not totally sure why. Maybe it's because most of the kidnappers are professional soldiers instead of random gangs?
Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
31–40 of 78 posts
Re: Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
#32Most places, where kidnappings happen often, have the same result: victims end up dead regardless of a paid ransom and not notifying police. The only place where most victims end up alive and unscathed once the victims' families pay the ransoms is the Philippines. Not totally sure why. Maybe it's because most of the kidnappers are professional soldiers instead of random gangs?
the article states the opposite: 9% of those who don't have K&R insurance come to some form of grief vs. 2% of those with K&R insurance (worldwide stats, assumably?)
Re: Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
#33Way back, I had an 18yo Colombian gf whom I considered visiting under the assumption of buying reasonably-priced, short-term K&R insurance. At the time, Colombia was the top kidnapping spot, more-so than anywhere in the Middle East or Africa, because the FARC was funding their operations through drugs and ransoms. Even though she lived in the safest and most protected area, there was the risk of problems in transit in Bogota or Medellín, or merely visiting anyone or traveling inland or at night. I strongly considered it given how hot she was then, but then I met someone else whom I had more in common with and no language barrier. Long-distance physical relationships might just be an oxymoron. ;]
Re: Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
#34When 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…
[deleted]
Re: Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
#35Earlier 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
Who would ever not pay their own ransom?
Re: Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
#36One thing I don't quite get...
Say I've kidnapped someone and the ransom has been paid. I could release the hostage but then there would be someone with knowledge of my operation out there walking about.
If I killed the hostage instead, I'll have eliminated that risk and I can keep the ransom. It's not like anyone is going to sue me for not keeping my side of the contract.
Maybe I'm going to get a reputation for killing hostages and people stop paying ransoms, but then I'll just throw away that identity and give myself a new name.
Any game-theorists wish to comment?
Re: Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
#37One thing I don't quite get... Say I've kidnapped someone and the ransom has been paid. I could release the hostage but then there would be someone with knowledge of my operation out there walking about. If I killed the hostage instead, I'll have eliminated that risk and I can keep the ransom. It's not like anyone is going to sue me for not keeping my side of the contract. Maybe I'm going to get a reputation for kill…
Not a game theorist, but this is probably the same reason "ransomware" actually does unlock your data if your provide the BTC -- if it didn't, people would not pay. It's market forces at play and is what distinguishes organised criminals from garden variety criminals.
(Sorry if that is stated in the article, but there is a pay-wall.)
Re: Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
#38One thing I don't quite get... Say I've kidnapped someone and the ransom has been paid. I could release the hostage but then there would be someone with knowledge of my operation out there walking about. If I killed the hostage instead, I'll have eliminated that risk and I can keep the ransom. It's not like anyone is going to sue me for not keeping my side of the contract. Maybe I'm going to get a reputation for kill…
Not a game theorist, but this is probably the same reason "ransomware" actually does unlock your data if your provide the BTC -- if it didn't, people would not pay. It's market forces at play and is what distinguishes organised criminals from garden variety criminals. (Sorry if that is stated in the article, but there is a pay-wall.)
But that assumes the kidnappers have a long-term game to play, and need to worry about their reputation, no?
That will be the case at least some of the time, I suppose.
Also, some 'ransomware' never unlocks, even on payment. 'NotPetya' is the famous one, perhaps there are others. A sufficiently spooked victim might behave irrationally and fail to research the ransomware's track record before paying up.
Re: Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
#39One thing I don't quite get... Say I've kidnapped someone and the ransom has been paid. I could release the hostage but then there would be someone with knowledge of my operation out there walking about. If I killed the hostage instead, I'll have eliminated that risk and I can keep the ransom. It's not like anyone is going to sue me for not keeping my side of the contract. Maybe I'm going to get a reputation for kill…
If you do get caught however, for whatever reason, you’ll be looking at a much harsher sentence if you killed your hostage.
There’s also more of a chance law enforcement will continue to look for you if you make the news for murder than if you return the hostage (one can easily imagine it won’t be top priority for them then).
With that said, not all criminals are excellent game theorists...
Re: Kidnapping insurance keeps a lid on ransom inflation
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
But if the hostage takers are dead and other potential hostage taker know this, it would reduce the risk?