• III@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    In the book Freakonomics they made the argument that the sudden decline in crime in the late 90’s appeared to be tied to Roe v. Wade. I wonder if this is similar.

  • SaintWacko@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    No need to anymore! Now you can just buy an AR at the corner store and get all your killing done at the same time! No need to waste all that time choosing targets, and then stalking them, learning their habits. In today’s fast paced society, no one has time for that!

  • numberfour002@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Not me! Back in the 1980s I had killed 0 people. Now in 2024, I’ve killed pretty much the same number. No decline at all!

    • BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yes and I think it’s ridiculous. Like that podcast My Favourite Murder? That’s just insulting to the victims who died terrified and alone, IMO. Might as well have a podcast called My Favourite Rape if they’re going to treat human misery as a spectator sport.

  • LillyPip@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Most crime has declined dramatically since the 90s. And yet right wing media is scaring the shit out of people, saying there are murderers, rapists, and terrorists behind every bush.

    The world is actually becoming more empathetic and safer, but some people want us to be scared because fear keeps them in power. Don’t believe them.

  • MNByChoice@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Lots of great possibilities listed in article.

    I was shocked that 60% of murders are solved. It was not that long ago that the solving rate was near 20%.

    • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      It was roughly 60% in 2018, which was lower than it was decades before that. It was 90% in the 1960s for instance. Murder clearance rates have been declining for decades. 2023 was under 50% and is a record low for murder clearance.

      Basically more and more murders are going unsolved, and this is a trend stretching decades. National murder clearance rates have never been 20% since that data has been tracked.

      Some cities are near that currently though, like Oakland. Interpreting police incompetence around murder cases as somehow indicating less serial killing is pretty absurd.

      • Agent641@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Nowadays peopke bring their phone to a murder like a chump.

        Some of the analytical software that can be applied to mobile phone cell ping and metadata alone is incredible. Not only is it able to show snapshots of a given period to identify patterns, but it can also be walked back in time to identify patterns which are increasing in their intensity. This can indicate changing behaviours in individuals and groups.

        You might think the solution is to turn off your mobile, wrap it in foil, leave it at home, smash it ect but that’s not the answer. A suddenly lost mobile agent is a red flag, as is an abnormally stationary one, or an abnormally repetitive one.

        Imagine you’re an analyst, and you’re aware of a potential terror cell consisting of 5-8 members. You’ve identified from cell metadata that each member has met at least one other member at least once in person. Imagine then that 6 of these individuals either go off-line, or their phone remains stationary for an unusual amount of time, eg normally they would be at work. You could reasonably conclude that they are having a secret rendezvous in meatspace. Then, based on the time taken for each mobile to reconnect, and its position when it does, you might be able to heat map a list of possible locations that they could have met at, based on estimated travel time for each. Then you might find evidence of tgeir meetup from osint sources like CCTV or sat imagery.

        If you dont want mobile phone metadata used to uncover your crimes, you should constantly behave unpredictably. Maybe carry a foil bag and keep your phone in it sometimes at work to simulate black spots. Maybe choose a mobile provider with the worst possible coverage. Sometimes leave your phone at home. You know those random spam messages you get on Signal or whatsapp? Converse with them occasionally, these act like red herrings in your interaction matrix. Anything that contributes as chaff, white noise, false signals, whatever you want to call them, anything will help if it makes you unpredictable.

        And that’s just phones. CCTV, satellite imagery, other peoples phones and devices, freeway ALPR cameras, audio devices, all these things contribute to mapping your move.ents, constantly, over time.

        Take solace that probably nobody is actually watching you, at least, no human is. Just an algorithm. When the algo detects youve deviated from your pattern, then it might flag you for human review, so try not to have an easily identifiable pattern, and chaff that bitch up as often as you can.

      • guacupado@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        I know I’ll sound like a bootlicker, but this is why I’m in favor of more street cameras for the city. It’s obnoxious how often there’s a picture of the car involved in something but no one catches them because there’s no way to just follow the car to where it went.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          because it’s also a massive privacy invasion as well. If someone with access to the system decides they don’t like me, they can stalk me, if someone hacks it, whatever is in there about me is now available to them. If the government wakes up one day and decides that it doesnt like people who have differing political opinions, suddenly they have a profile of who i am and what i do almost perfectly.

          It’s very much patriot act levels of national security, but for the individual. “we’ll spy on you, but it’s only so terrorism doesn’t happen, we promise” and then uh, snowden shows up in the story.

          Same thing with something as simple as tracking vehicles, it’s a lose lose most of the time, and a win lose the rest of the time.

    • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I wonder if thats due to increasing competency/giveafuckness by authorites.

      or if its due to decreasing competency amongst killers.

      • MNByChoice@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        I believe that was discussed in the article. Along with early interventions that help little shits not grow into giant shits.

  • wildcardology@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Are serial killers a 1st world country thing? In my country a third world one only have 1 recorded serial killer and that was in the early 1800s and he was a priest.

    • BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      No there are others. Like the one that show The Serpent was based on was in Vietnam. I think it’s mostly North America though.

      • kaosof@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Four of the most prolific serial killers were based in south American countries like Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Venezuela, Brazil etc.

        After those, it’s India, China, Pakistan, former Soviet states, Russia and so on.

        Hardly first world countries, and especially not when these killings took place.

        Those killers’ body counts eclipse all American killers’ by a very significant margin.

        Gary Ridgway (the Green River Killer) is the most prominent American serial killer by a mile, but he’s not that “famous” even though he was arrested and convicted rather recently (about 20 years ago).

        He is an uninteresting person who is rather stupid, doesn’t do interviews and doesn’t revel in his infamy like the more famous serial killers do or did. He’s almost more akin to a rabid animal as far as public perception goes.

        Furthermore, the decline of serial killers, even with more interest and attention than ever, I think is largely attributed to better social safety nets.

        As it turns out, it seems that in at least some cases, socialistic policies work surprisingly well.

    • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      That was specifically covered in he article.

      There’s almost zero overlap in motivations between mass/spree killers, and serial killers.

      • Wolf_359@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        I tend to agree but I don’t know if we can say that for sure.

        Incels who want media attention is one way you could frame both types of killers.

  • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Same with small shops. Big businesses are out competing them and taking over.

    There is no culture left anymore, it’s disgraceful.

  • CoCo_Goldstein@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Could it be that not as many potential serial killers are being born? I believe there is a link between criminality and childhood abuse. Less unwanted kids are being born. Less abuse. Less criminals of all kinds, including serial killers.

      • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        This is the answer. The logistics of staying off camera and getting around without leaving a digital signature is much more complicated. In the 70s you could buy a bus pass with cash and disappear for a few days and nobody would know and you’d never be on any list of suspects. Now you need to set up fake cell phone activity and get an alibi on camera and put on disguises in a dive bar bathroom and shit. Very difficult to get “lost” for more than a few hours if you are working alone and operating anywhere near civilization.

      • minkymunkey_7_7@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        CSI type pop culture television has taught basically everyone on the planet that trace evidence always gets left behind and nobody can hide from DNA. Nowadays through genealogy they don’t even need a direct DNA match.

  • dustyData@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Lead poisoning is still the prevalent theory, I think. It fucks up brain development in ways that make kids tend to sociopathic personalities.

    • tal@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      The rise started before 1950, rose the most rapidly from 1960 to 1970, plateaued in 1980, and then collapsed moving towards 2010.

      https://www.ncesc.com/geographic-pedia/at-what-age-do-serial-killers-start-killing/

      As previously mentioned, the typical age range for serial killers to start killing is in their late 20s to early 30s.

      So figure that the people killing were maybe maybe late 20s to early 30s in late 1950s to 1970, when the numbers were exploding.

      That means people born in ~1920 to ~1940; the serial killers probably were mostly born in the interwar period, between World War I and World War II; born in the Roaring Twenties and then the Great Depression.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennials

      Going based on the generations there, that would have mostly been the Silent Generation.

      The period of rapid increase was only about twenty years long, so it’s really only about the length of one generation (though that doesn’t mean that it need nicely align with the “generational cohorts” thing).

      The Boomers were already falling off.

      By the time Generation X rolled around, the spike would already have been done.

      Millennials were born between 1981 and 1996, long after all this happened.

      And one other point – remember that the graph is of absolute, not per-capita numbers. According to it, in 2010, we have numbers in absolute terms comparable to about 1955. But that’s in absolute terms.

      https://www.populationpyramid.net/united-states-of-america/1955/

      In 1955, the US population was about 106 million. Today, it is 334 million. That is, in per-capita terms, 2010 is somewhat-lower than any period shown on the chart. It’s not just low, it’s lower than it’s ever been.

      Now, all that being said, I’m not sure how they measure the number of concurrently-active serial killers. I would imagine that things like the advent of DNA evidence, buildup of fingerprint databases, and other changes in criminology probably have changed things; one might have assumed that a serial killer was responsible for a copycat/similar crime, or perhaps vice versa in different conditions.

        • tal@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          I think that that’s far too late, if you figure that (a) it has an effect and (b) it’s cumulative exposure over someone’s lifetime, not short-term (which I have not looked up, but would expect to be the case).

          googles to sanity check

          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5801257/

          In this cohort study of 553 New Zealanders observed for 38 years, lead exposure in childhood was weakly associated with official criminal conviction and self-reported offending from ages 15 to 38 years. Lead exposure was not associated with the consequential offending outcomes of a greater variety of offenses, conviction, recidivism, or violence.

          Yeah, so it’s a childhood thing. You’d be talking about on the order of maybe a 20 year delay until a reduction in exposure translates into peak potential serial killer period.

          Also, for stuff like lead paint, it’s gonna be around for decades, gets kicked up over time, so it takes an even longer time for regulations to go have an effect, and that effect is very spread out, whereas this is a pretty sharp increase and decrease.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead-based_paint_in_the_United_States

          In 1971, Congress banned the use of lead-based paint in residential projects (including residential structures and environments) constructed by, or with the assistance of, the federal government.[3] The Consumer Product Safety Commission followed with implementing regulations, effective in 1978.[4] Additional regulations regarding lead abatement, testing and related issues have been issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

          I’d – without digging up numbers – guess that halting leaded gasoline probably had the most-immediate impact on lead in the air, since burning leaded gasoline is gonna put it straight into the air.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline#Lead_Replacement_Petrol

          In the U.S., the Environmental Protection Agency issued regulations to reduce the lead content of leaded gasoline over a series of annual phases, scheduled to begin in 1973 but delayed by court appeals until 1976.

          If something were gonna happen in the 1970s to reduce the rate of serial killing, to be a relevant input, it’d have to be something that had a major immediate effect rather than a long-term developmental effect.

        • borari@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          And leaded gasoline and leaded diesel and leaded aviation fuel and lead pipes in household plumbing. Probably lead in the cigarettes everyone smoked literally everywhere.

      • cogman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        The other theory I’ve heard that makes some sense is lead exposure. From 1925 to about 1976, lead was commonly added to gasoline. Lead is known to cause psychological problems including irritablity and general mood disorders.

        Pretty much everyone born during that period was exposed to aerosolized lead.

        • tal@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          I don’t believe that it’s lead; see my other comment on it. The lead reductions would have come much too late, and the falloff is too sharp.

      • tal@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I was thinking that people returning from WW2 might be a factor, war trauma or something, but that seems like it’s a little too early.

        In 1944, this data shows the largest cohorts in an infantry unit being measured being 19-24 years old.

        https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/7c725k/what_was_the_average_age_of_the_soldiers_that/

        A 19-year-old – the youngest cohort listed – would be 33, maybe the end of the peak period to start serial killing – 14 years after 1944. That’s in 1958, and that’d have been the tail end of American WW2 veterans being in the prime serial killer age. The boom had started then, but the highest rate of increase came later…and that’s looking at the very tail end of the WW2 vets.

        The serial killers would mostly have been children or young teens during World War II, not actually served in it.

      • 4am@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Going based on the generations there, that would have mostly been the Silent Generation.

        It’s always the quiet ones

      • tal@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        It might be interesting to see if countries other than the US – and I have no idea if whatever metrics used by the author here can be applied in those countries, might not have the same data available – saw similar changes in serial killer activity, since that’d help let one know if the relevant factors producing the spike were something that the US in particular experienced or not.

    • Neato@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Who has the money or the leave to travel around, book hotels, go on lots of dates and buy power tools,

      • ZeroCool@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Boomers: Would you rather eat avocado toast or become a serial killer?

        Millennials/GenZ: What the fuck? Uh, I guess I’d rather eat the toast?

        Boomers nObOdY WaNts To SerIaL KiLl aNyMoRe!

      • Zron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Most serial killers had their own vehicle and house, and were able to keep those despite most killers not being able to hold down a job once they started the murders.

        Try doing that today. You can’t methodically kill people if you’re freezing to death on the streets.

        These greedy corporations are just saving us from serial killers by making it impossible to become one without financial ruin.

      • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Plot twist. The serial killers still have all that time, but they realized the could kill way more people by becoming billionaires and exploiting them to death.

    • SolidGrue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Nah. It’s an industrialized, mass-produced economy now. Before the 90s, killing people was a bespoke trade. Mass murder was a one-on-one kind of transaction, each murder personally crafted for the victim by a specialist. The really industrial scale deaths at the time were the stuff of nation-states.

      The transition of mass murders to the private sector as heralded by Atlanta, Waco, Columbine and Oklahoma City coincided¹ with the Clinton admin and the advent of NAFTA, which promoted mass industrialization of heretofore domestic industries².

      Ever since, it’s been death dealt on an ever expanding scale on an j cident-by-incident basis. A sort of Moore’s Law of death and disillusionment.

      I hate myself for even penning this diatribe, but the situation is so bleak it feels like no depth of dark humor will reallybshock anyone anymore.

      1. Correlation does not imply causation
      2. This is such a badly formed argument even for satire, I’m embarrassed
    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Be the change you want to see in the world. Go out and kill your entire neighborhood, it’s the patriotic thing to do.

      • Oiconomia@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Back in the day you could afford both med school and running an elaborate murder hotel with some gruesome custom made contraptions. Now you can’t even afford a simple murder house. What has come of this country.

        • ours@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          And don’t come telling us that cutting on avocado toast will suddenly enable us to afford a reasonable home with a decent torture basement.