From: Delvieron@aol.com
Date: Fri Sep 24 1999 - 16:38:15 MDT
I don't know of any correlation between urban environment and serial
killers. I think a much more significant trend has been the increase in
mobility in American society. while I do not believe that this necessarily
has increased the number of serial killers, it has probably allowed the
organized (more sociopathic versus psychopathic) serial killers to operate
longer before capture. As for the connection between hunting and decreased
level of serial killing, I also know of no connection.
Correlations I do know of in serial killers: As children, they tend to
do two or more of the following; set fires, torture animals, continue to wet
beds late in childhood. The first two are thought to relate to a fascination
with power, destruction, and a disregard for others. That reminds me of
another large factor in the make-up of a serial killer, depersonalization of
the victim. There is a slighter correlation between serial killers and abuse
in the home (i.e., several serial killers come from backgrounds of neglect
and/or violence, but only very, very few people raised in neglect and/or
violence ever become serial killers). Serial killers tend to be fantasy
driven, starting out with a violent fantasy through which they feel powerful,
over time the fantasy builds, becoming more elaborate. The serial killer
will reach a point where imagining is no longer enough, so they begin to act
out their fantasy, often starting with simulated activity, then moving on to
animals. If not stopped, they continue to increase the level of violence and
the type of target evolves. This is both because the serial killer gains in
sophistication through practice and finds that he needs greater levels of
violence and/or more difficult targets to gain the same thrill. Oftentimes
they will make the switch from animals to humans, starting with assaults,
then serial rapes, then finally murder. Also, they may start with children
and work up to adults.
Interestingly, recent studies have suggested that violent crime is not
related to urban vs rural differences, socioeconomic status, or ethnic
background, but rather the values and sense of family within neighborhoods.
In those neighborhoods where people know each other, where it is considered
the responsibility of all adults to look out for the neighborhood kids, these
were the ones with the lowest violent crime rates. The main study showing
this was one done of the area in and around Chicago.
Also, I would suggest that it is not the frequency or severity of
punishment which most strongly effects crime rates, but rather the certainty
and consistency of punishment. Few people commit crimes with the expectation
of being punished (with the exception of those who do it as some sort of
protest or statement).
Glen
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:05:16 MST