Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Site Notices
Page / 3
Next Page Arrow Left
Link Posted: 4/30/2012 7:44:56 PM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Another false claim I hear a lot is "more white people are on welfare than black people (raw numbers)".  Not true.


I'll need to see numbers on that one.  There are a lot of poor, rural whites around the country.


Again, it's an issue of proportion not total numbers.

Yes, more white receive welfare, etc, but a higher percentage of blacks as they are represented.

Link Posted: 4/30/2012 8:12:12 PM EDT
[#2]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

Essentially, he would "confess" to get better treatment in prison.

A traveling laborer  and generally homeless person who preyed on OTHER homeless people and runaways,  I really doubt even HE knew how many victims he killed, or even where.



First Plumbata what do you do for a living?

Second: No big surprise.

Third: I think that for a long time minority communities (to include all non dominant groups) were under served regarding police services. If a killer is preying on a victim population that has no reporting option, then the killer will go unpursued. If victim selection holds over from standard murder statistics to serial killers, than like will prey on like. So an affluent victim will get better service/notice than a transient victim.
IDK YMMV


Retired headshrinker.   Worked for the state at various institutions, mostly higher risk,  till 2000 then private practice.

Serial killers portrayed on TV, (the genius with an elaborate plan and massive resources) Don't really exist in real life.  

Serial killers are successful BECAUSE there is usually no ties to the victim or area. (trucker for example)


That's something I worry about, because it indicates an attitude in the psychiatric and law enforcement community that indicates a closed mind on the issue. Just because there's no evidence that such a thing exists doesn't automatically mean that they don't. Statistically, something like 2300 people a day go missing here in the US. The number of "found", either as those who are located, or those whose bodies are eventually discovered, does not even come close to matching that number, which leaves a lot of room for any of our theoretical "smarter" serial killers to operate successfully. There's a lot of potential, in other words, for there to be some very intelligent, cunning, and dedicated serial killers out there, who we haven't been smart enough to even notice. The fact that we've got jails full of the less intelligent ones doesn't really mean squat, when it comes to assessing the threat of there being some smarter practitioners.

Personally, I suspect there are a lot of serial killers who've managed to be smart and disciplined enough not to get caught, probably going back a lot further than we'd like to think. With the ease of modern communications and travel, the scope for such things has opened up beyond the wildest dreams of the old-time serial killers. They're out there, and I think at least a few are being protected by the dismissive idea that they "can't exist...". Considering how hard it's been to catch some of the stupider ones, I'm not about to buy the idea that there aren't some smarter ones out there we haven't even noticed, let alone caught.





Link Posted: 4/30/2012 8:39:49 PM EDT
[#3]



Quoted:



Quoted:


Quoted:


Quoted:



Essentially, he would "confess" to get better treatment in prison.



A traveling laborer  and generally homeless person who preyed on OTHER homeless people and runaways,  I really doubt even HE knew how many victims he killed, or even where.







First Plumbata what do you do for a living?



Second: No big surprise.



Third: I think that for a long time minority communities (to include all non dominant groups) were under served regarding police services. If a killer is preying on a victim population that has no reporting option, then the killer will go unpursued. If victim selection holds over from standard murder statistics to serial killers, than like will prey on like. So an affluent victim will get better service/notice than a transient victim.

IDK YMMV




Retired headshrinker.   Worked for the state at various institutions, mostly higher risk,  till 2000 then private practice.



Serial killers portrayed on TV, (the genius with an elaborate plan and massive resources) Don't really exist in real life.  



Serial killers are successful BECAUSE there is usually no ties to the victim or area. (trucker for example)




That's something I worry about, because it indicates an attitude in the psychiatric and law enforcement community that indicates a closed mind on the issue. Just because there's no evidence that such a thing exists doesn't automatically mean that they don't. Statistically, something like 2300 people a day go missing here in the US. The number of "found", either as those who are located, or those whose bodies are eventually discovered, does not even come close to matching that number, which leaves a lot of room for any of our theoretical "smarter" serial killers to operate successfully. There's a lot of potential, in other words, for there to be some very intelligent, cunning, and dedicated serial killers out there, who we haven't been smart enough to even notice. The fact that we've got jails full of the less intelligent ones doesn't really mean squat, when it comes to assessing the threat of there being some smarter practitioners.



Personally, I suspect there are a lot of serial killers who've managed to be smart and disciplined enough not to get caught, probably going back a lot further than we'd like to think. With the ease of modern communications and travel, the scope for such things has opened up beyond the wildest dreams of the old-time serial killers. They're out there, and I think at least a few are being protected by the dismissive idea that they "can't exist...". Considering how hard it's been to catch some of the stupider ones, I'm not about to buy the idea that there aren't some smarter ones out there we haven't even noticed, let alone caught.




Russell's Teapot comes to mind on the first part.  Also, on the second part, that leaves a lot of room for people to walk into the woods or the desert and commit suicide, to get murdered by someone they know and be disposed of in the garbage or at sea, and to assume a new identity and walk the Earth, like Cain in Kung-fu.  Yeah, it's possible for there to be at least one guy like the ones on TV and the movies.  But it would be unreasonable to assume that's the case without any evidence.



 
Link Posted: 4/30/2012 8:55:36 PM EDT
[#4]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

Essentially, he would "confess" to get better treatment in prison.

A traveling laborer  and generally homeless person who preyed on OTHER homeless people and runaways,  I really doubt even HE knew how many victims he killed, or even where.



First Plumbata what do you do for a living?

Second: No big surprise.

Third: I think that for a long time minority communities (to include all non dominant groups) were under served regarding police services. If a killer is preying on a victim population that has no reporting option, then the killer will go unpursued. If victim selection holds over from standard murder statistics to serial killers, than like will prey on like. So an affluent victim will get better service/notice than a transient victim.
IDK YMMV


Retired headshrinker.   Worked for the state at various institutions, mostly higher risk,  till 2000 then private practice.

Serial killers portrayed on TV, (the genius with an elaborate plan and massive resources) Don't really exist in real life.  

Serial killers are successful BECAUSE there is usually no ties to the victim or area. (trucker for example)


That's something I worry about, because it indicates an attitude in the psychiatric and law enforcement community that indicates a closed mind on the issue. Just because there's no evidence that such a thing exists doesn't automatically mean that they don't. Statistically, something like 2300 people a day go missing here in the US. The number of "found", either as those who are located, or those whose bodies are eventually discovered, does not even come close to matching that number, which leaves a lot of room for any of our theoretical "smarter" serial killers to operate successfully. There's a lot of potential, in other words, for there to be some very intelligent, cunning, and dedicated serial killers out there, who we haven't been smart enough to even notice. The fact that we've got jails full of the less intelligent ones doesn't really mean squat, when it comes to assessing the threat of there being some smarter practitioners.

Personally, I suspect there are a lot of serial killers who've managed to be smart and disciplined enough not to get caught, probably going back a lot further than we'd like to think. With the ease of modern communications and travel, the scope for such things has opened up beyond the wildest dreams of the old-time serial killers. They're out there, and I think at least a few are being protected by the dismissive idea that they "can't exist...". Considering how hard it's been to catch some of the stupider ones, I'm not about to buy the idea that there aren't some smarter ones out there we haven't even noticed, let alone caught.



This post is fucking ridiculous.  You honestly think there are serial killers with dozens of different cars equipped with special capture devices,, torture pits with attached secret lab, mega yachts, massive industrial complexes or helicopters to dispose of bodies?

How about the show Dexter?  Think that premise is  REMOTELY possible in real life?

As for people disappearing. Most do because they damn well want to.  No evil intent  needed.   Stranger on stranger  murders are pretty rare, all said and done.
Link Posted: 4/30/2012 9:23:29 PM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Another false claim I hear a lot is "more white people are on welfare than black people (raw numbers)".  Not true.


I'll need to see numbers on that one.  There are a lot of poor, rural whites around the country.


Again, it's an issue of proportion not total numbers.

Yes, more white receive welfare, etc, but a higher percentage of blacks as they are represented.



Uh, I'd advise you to check the stats before you make such statements. In many cases, depending on program, you're going to find that your statement hasn't been true since the 90's. Many programs reached a point in the mid-to-late 90's where black families made up the majority of aid recipients.
Link Posted: 4/30/2012 9:33:11 PM EDT
[#6]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

Essentially, he would "confess" to get better treatment in prison.

A traveling laborer  and generally homeless person who preyed on OTHER homeless people and runaways,  I really doubt even HE knew how many victims he killed, or even where.



First Plumbata what do you do for a living?

Second: No big surprise.

Third: I think that for a long time minority communities (to include all non dominant groups) were under served regarding police services. If a killer is preying on a victim population that has no reporting option, then the killer will go unpursued. If victim selection holds over from standard murder statistics to serial killers, than like will prey on like. So an affluent victim will get better service/notice than a transient victim.
IDK YMMV


Retired headshrinker.   Worked for the state at various institutions, mostly higher risk,  till 2000 then private practice.

Serial killers portrayed on TV, (the genius with an elaborate plan and massive resources) Don't really exist in real life.

Serial killers are successful BECAUSE there is usually no ties to the victim or area. (trucker for example)


Actually they do exist, they are just very few and far between.  Herman Mudgett, aka Dr. H.H. Holmes, was a con man who built an entire hotel in Chicago in 1893.  The entire building was designed to allow him to trap, rob, torture, and dispose of his vicitms.
Link Posted: 4/30/2012 9:37:11 PM EDT
[#7]



Quoted:



Quoted:


Quoted:


Quoted:



Essentially, he would "confess" to get better treatment in prison.



A traveling laborer  and generally homeless person who preyed on OTHER homeless people and runaways,  I really doubt even HE knew how many victims he killed, or even where.







First Plumbata what do you do for a living?



Second: No big surprise.



Third: I think that for a long time minority communities (to include all non dominant groups) were under served regarding police services. If a killer is preying on a victim population that has no reporting option, then the killer will go unpursued. If victim selection holds over from standard murder statistics to serial killers, than like will prey on like. So an affluent victim will get better service/notice than a transient victim.

IDK YMMV




Retired headshrinker.   Worked for the state at various institutions, mostly higher risk,  till 2000 then private practice.



Serial killers portrayed on TV, (the genius with an elaborate plan and massive resources) Don't really exist in real life.



Serial killers are successful BECAUSE there is usually no ties to the victim or area. (trucker for example)




Actually they do exist, they are just very few and far between.  Herman Mudgett, aka Dr. H.H. Holmes, was a con man who built an entire hotel in Chicago in 1893.  The entire building was designed to allow him to trap, rob, torture, and dispose of his vicitms.
I watched a documentary (And read the book) "Devil in the white city" about that SOB.  Scary dude and (Unfortunately) very good at what he was

doing.





 
Link Posted: 4/30/2012 9:41:24 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:

Quoted:
Quoted:
I think one of y'all should start a minority crime thread here like they have on Stormfront.  Never mind that they're racists, fuck them; facts can't be racist, so it shouldn't be a big deal, right?  If you feel this is important and the information is factual, why be opposed to it?


I really don't think I understand what you are getting at.

Are you insinuating that I am racist for starting this thread?  Or are you saying that it is racist to even examine the statement that we've all been hearing tossed around as gospel for a couple decades now?

Or are you saying that those against this examination are approaching it from a racist perspective?


As I said, I simply decided to do a quick internet search based upon a "fact" cited numerous times on another thread to satisfy my own curiosity as to whether the statement was valid.

Turns out–– based upon my quick search–– that it IS valid, but salient information is left out of the statement that allows the statistic to be used for racist purpose in itself.

So, I ask you.... what is the worst offense?  That half the information is routinely cited in order to make a racial point, or that the information is more closely examined, and it is discovered that there could be implications that look less-than-favorable for another race?

I feel that the former is worse.  Whenever half-truths are used to reinforce arguments, it becomes intellectual dishonesty, and serves agendas.  Whenever that information has EVER been quoted in my presence, it has ALWAYS been used to further an argument founded in race.

I'm simply saying that if we ARE going to have that discussion, we better damned well be honest.



–– John
If you think this is important and factual, why not start a "minority crime thread?"  That's all I'm asking.

 


Your Personal Attacks MULLAH are getting way too old.

Link Posted: 4/30/2012 11:28:58 PM EDT
[#9]
It may possibly be that the statistics reflect the records keeping of location where the killers operate.  The US and Europe have very detailed and open court records.  Certainly, there have been serial killers in parts of the world where the information is intentionally suppressed, or where the justice system is inept or non-existent.  Communist China, as was communist Russia, is very tight lipped about news that defames the image of the "workers' paradise".  The toll of the Thugee cult in India is poorly documented, and there are various African warlords that killed probably millions outside of the general mayhem of combat, but are not widely known or researched.
Link Posted: 5/1/2012 12:02:12 AM EDT
[#10]
Don't fuck with the one thing we have.
Link Posted: 5/1/2012 12:31:58 AM EDT
[#11]
Quoted:
Referring this thread, and don't want to derail it anymore than it is.

Has anyone actually looked up that statement? Or are they just parroting what they heard?

A quick internet search (which I did my best to avoid racist websites) seemed to turn up less-than-absolute answers.


African Americans and Serial Killing in the Media The Myth and the Reality


Two of the stereotypes surrounding serial killers are that they are almost always White males and that African American males are barely represented in their ranks. In a sample of 413 serial killers operating in the United States from 1945 to mid-2004, it was found that 90 were African American. Relative to the African American proportion of the population across that time period, African Americans were overrepresented in the ranks of serial killers by a factor of about 2.



Cite:
http://maamodt.asp.radford.edu/Psyc%20405/Student%20Notes%20-%20Serial%20Killers.pdf

According to the above, 32.33% of serial killers are black, which is significantly disproportionate to the demographic of a little over 12% of the US population.



I found that to be rather interesting, and not quite what I've been hearing for decades...




Well, a few things.

First of all, I haven't looked up to prove or disprove the statement.

Secondly, however, it is more of a situation of serial criminals and not just serial killers. Ie, there are serial rapists for example just as there are serial house burglars. The percentage in one crime area may be different in another.

Third, getting into a particular crime, the percentages may (or may not) be vastly different between aspects in that crime. Say, for example, a serial rapist. One might find that an "apologetic" rapist to be more predominately to one segment of the population while an anger excitation rapist is more predominate to another segment. Adding all the numbers up may give one result but one would be technically though not necessarily ethically correct to talk about one kind with rapist as a rapist without listing the particular subsection thus leading to listener confusion. (my terms may be slightly inaccurate; I have not looked at this area for years and I don't have my books with me)

Fourth, sometimes "profiling" just comes down to basic population statistics applied.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
("Ribbed, for her pleasure."––Rachael after strangling her date with a condom, (w,stte), "American Psycho 2")
Link Posted: 5/1/2012 12:41:59 AM EDT
[#12]
I enjoy being feared.
Link Posted: 5/1/2012 7:08:10 AM EDT
[#13]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:


Also, something I don't get about serial killers. There's so many worthless people in the world (drug dealers, purse snatchers etc etc etc) and generally besides the whole murder and rape thing, most serial killers seem to be upstanding non-criminal people. Why not kill worthless fuck bags like pimps and drug dealers instead of some 18 - 24 year old cheerleader in her prime?


The whole thing doesn't make sense to me. I don't have a problem if someone wants to go all vigilante, whatever.

But people who prey on the innocent and defenseless need to be fed their own nut sack before they're executed by fire.



Answered your own question, didn't you?

This part makes your post rather creepy.








How's that creepy? an 18-24 year old person, male or female would be considered to be in their prime, would they not?


Sounds like you are focusing on the "young and pretty" rather than the fact that any murder is wrong.

Note I said "sounds like". No personal accusation.
Link Posted: 5/1/2012 7:34:03 AM EDT
[#14]
Quoted:
Quoted:
All of the people quoting the "majority of serial killers are white" as some kind of racial statement, and all y'all getting sandy over it, are missing the point.
The statement is properly and accurately used only in the context of profiling.
Where it is valid as long as it's not exclusionary; where they messed up on the dude in Atlanta and theDC snipers.


It doesn't work for profilling if blacks are over represented. It would only work if whites were overrepresented.


It works in the fact that for any chosen serial killer, the odds are over 65% he is white.  How many other white or black people (i.e. % of population) is entirely irrelevant.
Absent any clues or patterns that indicate a black killer, it would be frugal to concentrate on white suspects.
Link Posted: 5/1/2012 7:37:24 AM EDT
[#15]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Another false claim I hear a lot is "more white people are on welfare than black people (raw numbers)".  Not true.


I'll need to see numbers on that one.  There are a lot of poor, rural whites around the country.


Again, it's an issue of proportion not total numbers.

Yes, more white receive welfare, etc, but a higher percentage of blacks as they are represented.



Uh, I'd advise you to check the stats before you make such statements. In many cases, depending on program, you're going to find that your statement hasn't been true since the 90's. Many programs reached a point in the mid-to-late 90's where black families made up the majority of aid recipients.


I'm sure I saw .gov stats that they have surpassed whites by a couple of points.
Link Posted: 5/1/2012 7:38:22 AM EDT
[#16]
Quoted:
Don't fuck with the one thing we have.


Hockey?
Link Posted: 5/1/2012 7:56:13 AM EDT
[#17]
Quoted:
Matter of fact I had never even heard of a black serial killer until now.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coral_watts
Link Posted: 5/1/2012 7:59:07 AM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I would like to see stats on kids that are cruel to animals grow up to be serial killers. That seems dumber to me than race.


One of my FTOs told me that kids that habitually play with fire masturbate a lot.



Page / 3
Next Page Arrow Left
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top