1. Why is it killers always manage to screw up a good thing and leave behind some trace that inevitably gets them caught?
There are lots of killers who haven't been caught. If they don't have a pattern, their murders may not even have been linked.
In addition, I think many criminals are stupid. Often they are criminal
because they are stupid. Hannibal Lecture types are rare, except in fiction.
If you are going to take such a huge risk as to start killing people, you would think these folks would take more time, think things through a bit more, and come up with a more foolproof plan.
Whenever I've gone down that path, I've concluded that the only real foolproof plan is not to commit the crime.
2. After thousands and thousands of years of civilized life, you would think at least one society would figure out that if the average citizen is able to properly defend themselves, then the risk of violent crime would be greatly diminished.
I think the trend is in the opposite direction. Most societies figure out that there is less violent crime, and fewer long-running violent family feuds, if disputes are mediated by an impartial law instead of personal retribution.
This is currently reversing in the UK. Lots of teenagers are scared of knife crime, so they carry knives themselves, and that leads to more knife crime. Minor disputes get out of hand, and what would have been a fist-fight with no long-term harm because a knife-fight with victims maimed for life. The publicity from such events creates more fear, creating a vicious cycle. It's escalated over the last 5 or 10 years. Thankfully in the UK guns are still rare and hard to get hold of (compared to knives) so it can't escalate in that direction.
Previous Topic
Index
