• It's FREE to join our group and ALL MEMBERS ARE AD-FREE!

Discussion on Serial Killers, Spree Killers, Mass Killers, And single event killers. (8 Viewers)

1602196598394.png

To start. I have always found Serial Killers fascinating. What makes them do what they do?. I know I am not the only one. This is the place to talk about it. I'll start. Who do you find the most fascinating and why?.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Click to expand...
SheWhoMustNotBeNamed said:

What Explains the Decline of Serial Killers?​

Since a dramatic peak in the 1980s, serial killers in the U.S. have been in decline for three decades. Experts have a few theories that can help explain why. ​

From the 1970s through the ’90s, stories of serial killers like Ted Bundy and the Green River Killer — both of whom pleaded guilty to killing dozens of women — dominated headlines. Today, however, we see far fewer twisted tales in the vein of the Zodiac Killer or John Wayne Gacy.

After that three-decade surge, a rapid decline followed. Nearly 770 serial killers operated in the U.S. throughout the 1980s, and just under 670 in the ’90s, based on data compiled by Mike Aamodt of Radford University. The sudden plummet came with the new century, when the rate fell below 400 in the aughts and, as of late 2016, just over 100 during the past decade. The rough estimate on the global rate appeared to show a similar drop over the same period. In a stunning collapse, these criminals that terrorized and captivated a generation quickly dwindled. Put another way, 189 people in the U.S. died by the hands of a serial killer in 1987, compared to 30 in 2015. Various theories attempt to explain this change.


Many theories at the link!
Click to expand...
I will have to read at the link later as it sounds interesting. Off the top of the head though, I wonder if there really is a decline. They have always been loathe to admit to having a serial killer or rapist until they absolutely have to. People are so much more mobile with every passing year too where like with some of them, they concentrated in one area or state...

When one considers say someone like Dahmer, they never even knew there was a serial killer operating UNTIL he was caught and victims were found... No one was looking for a serial killer in the area nor even knew there was one or people missing that were connected to the same person...

On the other hand, one does seem to hear far less of such types so I HOPE it has declined...

Anyhow, I have to remember to come back and read the link later.
 
SheWhoMustNotBeNamed said:

What Explains the Decline of Serial Killers?​

Since a dramatic peak in the 1980s, serial killers in the U.S. have been in decline for three decades. Experts have a few theories that can help explain why. ​

From the 1970s through the ’90s, stories of serial killers like Ted Bundy and the Green River Killer — both of whom pleaded guilty to killing dozens of women — dominated headlines. Today, however, we see far fewer twisted tales in the vein of the Zodiac Killer or John Wayne Gacy.

After that three-decade surge, a rapid decline followed. Nearly 770 serial killers operated in the U.S. throughout the 1980s, and just under 670 in the ’90s, based on data compiled by Mike Aamodt of Radford University. The sudden plummet came with the new century, when the rate fell below 400 in the aughts and, as of late 2016, just over 100 during the past decade. The rough estimate on the global rate appeared to show a similar drop over the same period. In a stunning collapse, these criminals that terrorized and captivated a generation quickly dwindled. Put another way, 189 people in the U.S. died by the hands of a serial killer in 1987, compared to 30 in 2015. Various theories attempt to explain this change.


Many theories at the link!
Click to expand...

I haven't read the link yet, but my guess is DNA identification as well as other advances in investigations. They can identify killers early before they become serial killers.
 
Cousin Dupree said:
I haven't read the link yet, but my guess is DNA identification as well as other advances in investigations. They can identify killers early before they become serial killers.
Click to expand...
That's one of the theories mentioned. As they put it, it's "more dangerous" to be a serial killer because of the advancements in DNA tech, forensics, etc.

GrandmaBear said:
Off the top of the head though, I wonder if there really is a decline.
Click to expand...
That's actually mentioned too! Is it really a decline, or are serial killers just getting better at varying their tactics so the murders aren't linked, or are we just more hesitant to actually call something part of a serial murder?
 
SheWhoMustNotBeNamed said:
That's one of the theories mentioned. As they put it, it's "more dangerous" to be a serial killer because of the advancements in DNA tech, forensics, etc.


That's actually mentioned too! Is it really a decline, or are serial killers just getting better at varying their tactics so the murders aren't linked, or are we just more hesitant to actually call something part of a serial murder?
Click to expand...
I am glad you responded, it reminds me to go read it.

The DNA and such makes sense and yet I think of serial killers almost not being able to control their compulsion but I guess some do stop or halt or wait, etc. Or at least it seems some do...

I think varying methods, victim types and places is possible but I also believe they are loathe to tell anyone there is a serial or even two deaths are linked and always have been. I guess DNA, varying tactics and not acknowledging it could all be part of it IF there is a decline.

I think even on top of DNA and forensics, video surveillance is a BIG consideration and is getting so much more prevalent... I think genetic DNA may have added more fear. If someone is not in the system, not too long ago they did not need to worry about their DNA being matched easily unless they became a suspect of course... Now the genetic way changes that some...

Going to go read the article. :)
 
I finally read the article. It is very interesting and imo there is a lot in there worthy of discussion. To not muddy this post with various things, I will start with this.

"Many researchers also cite longer prison sentences and a reduction in parole over the decades. If a one-time murderer — or robber, for that matter — remains behind bars longer, they’ll have less of a chance to reach the FBI’s serial threshold of two kills (or three, or four, or more, depending on who you ask)."

I think we are seeing a turn on this and I don't agree today. In some states, we are seeing murderers let out, we are seeing in some states far from serious or real time life sentences for some murderers, parole is more common imo, etc. I would maybe agree with this a decade ago, I am not so sure I would agree with this today...
 
GrandmaBear said:
I finally read the article. It is very interesting and imo there is a lot in there worthy of discussion. To not muddy this post with various things, I will start with this.

"Many researchers also cite longer prison sentences and a reduction in parole over the decades. If a one-time murderer — or robber, for that matter — remains behind bars longer, they’ll have less of a chance to reach the FBI’s serial threshold of two kills (or three, or four, or more, depending on who you ask)."

I think we are seeing a turn on this and I don't agree today. In some states, we are seeing murderers let out, we are seeing in some states far from serious or real time life sentences for some murderers, parole is more common imo, etc. I would maybe agree with this a decade ago, I am not so sure I would agree with this today...
Click to expand...
As far as Serial Killers the amount of them has gone down. The well known ones are in Prison forever or dead. It is less likely to get away with it now. But I think individual murders has increased regardless of what they say. I see it more often. Every day there is a new crime story about a murder.
 
Mel70 said:
As far as Serial Killers the amount of them has gone down. The well known ones are in Prison forever or dead. It is less likely to get away with it now. But I think individual murders has increased regardless of what they say. I see it more often. Every day there is a new crime story about a murder.
Click to expand...
I hope they have went down. I agree though there seems to be more murder in general. More mass murders, more complete families of wife and kids, etc. And a whole slew of single murders.

When I look though at some murders, like the one of Abby and Libby and Elizabeth and Lyric (not saying the two are connected), it is difficult to believe the killers are not possibly serial or someone apt to do it again... I mean what one time motive could someone have against two children in each case? If no motive other than their own sick pleasure, then they seem apt to do it again or they have but changed their victim, MO, etc. Also when I consider the number of missing every single day, how do we know there are no connections between some...? Of course that is just conjecture on my part...
 
GrandmaBear said:
I hope they have went down. I agree though there seems to be more murder in general. More mass murders, more complete families of wife and kids, etc. And a whole slew of single murders.

When I look though at some murders, like the one of Abby and Libby and Elizabeth and Lyric (not saying the two are connected), it is difficult to believe the killers are not possibly serial or someone apt to do it again... I mean what one time motive could someone have against two children in each case? If no motive other than their own sick pleasure, then they seem apt to do it again or they have but changed their victim, MO, etc. Also when I consider the number of missing every single day, how do we know there are no connections between some...? Of course that is just conjecture on my part...
Click to expand...
Yes. Good point. Family murders. Murder-Suicides.
 
GrandmaBear said:
I finally read the article. It is very interesting and imo there is a lot in there worthy of discussion. To not muddy this post with various things, I will start with this.

"Many researchers also cite longer prison sentences and a reduction in parole over the decades. If a one-time murderer — or robber, for that matter — remains behind bars longer, they’ll have less of a chance to reach the FBI’s serial threshold of two kills (or three, or four, or more, depending on who you ask)."

I think we are seeing a turn on this and I don't agree today. In some states, we are seeing murderers let out, we are seeing in some states far from serious or real time life sentences for some murderers, parole is more common imo, etc. I would maybe agree with this a decade ago, I am not so sure I would agree with this today...
Click to expand...
It seems like this goes in cycles. For a while, rehabilitation is a thing. Then they find out that rehabilitation doesn't work and it's creating more victims and more crime, and then they get tough on crime again. I'm old enough to see these cycles happen and the sad part is that innocent people get hurt in the middle.
 
Kimster said:
It seems like this goes in cycles. For a while, rehabilitation is a thing. Then they find out that rehabilitation doesn't work and it's creating more victims and more crime, and then they get tough on crime again. I'm old enough to see these cycles happen and the sad part is that innocent people get hurt in the middle.
Click to expand...
I'm old enough too to have seen this and I do not like the trend these days with some serious criminals released onto the streets or not sentenced to enough to begin with...

I know we tout we have one of the best systems in the world but it is seriously broken imo. I mean I guess at least we are not beheading with no trial, no one would want that but it has gone seriously awry imo. Too long until trial, too many years for appeals, too many cases on the roster (think about if someone did a real sentence for a serious crime--or their TENTH one--how many of those would not be on there because they would still be in prison instead of repeat offending)... It makes me downright ill when someone gets more time for stealing a car than killing someone.

They let sex offenders out on tracking or probation or conditions but lose track them on some occasions...

I'm a bit away from the serial killer conversation here but same system... For instance the death penalty, that's another one... It exists in some states but in many has no teeth anyhow... I had probably better stop there...
 
GrandmaBear said:
I'm old enough too to have seen this and I do not like the trend these days with some serious criminals released onto the streets or not sentenced to enough to begin with...

I know we tout we have one of the best systems in the world but it is seriously broken imo. I mean I guess at least we are not beheading with no trial, no one would want that but it has gone seriously awry imo. Too long until trial, too many years for appeals, too many cases on the roster (think about if someone did a real sentence for a serious crime--or their TENTH one--how many of those would not be on there because they would still be in prison instead of repeat offending)... It makes me downright ill when someone gets more time for stealing a car than killing someone.

They let sex offenders out on tracking or probation or conditions but lose track them on some occasions...

I'm a bit away from the serial killer conversation here but same system... For instance the death penalty, that's another one... It exists in some states but in many has no teeth anyhow... I had probably better stop there...
Click to expand...
Letting out sex offenders has been proven time and time again to create more victims. And murder victims. They cannot be reformed according to the Psychiatric experts. But they keep letting them out. They never learn.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 9 (members: 0, guests: 9)

Forum statistics

Threads
3,255
Messages
295,262
Members
1,089
Latest member
David’s Sister
Back
Top Bottom