It’s those lazy millennials. They just don’t have the patience or dedication.
Who has the money or the leave to travel around, book hotels, go on lots of dates and buy power tools,
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!
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.
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.
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.
Going based on the generations there, that would have mostly been the Silent Generation.
It’s always the quiet ones
Or massive amounts of lead poisoning
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.
--
Lead poisoning is still the prevalent theory, I think. It fucks up brain development in ways that make kids tend to sociopathic personalities.
I’m always glad to hear more people know about lead poisoning. It makes a lot of sense.
Mass terror attacks way the fuck up though
John Wayne Gacy killed 33 people, that we know of, in his entire life. 21 killed in Uvalde alone.
We just streamlined things.
Why kill them serially, while you can kill them in parallel.
Stupid IT joke, sorry.
67 domestic terrorism attacks by right wing groups in the US from 2017-2022.
No... Actually they switched to killing homeless and drug addicts and the police don't actually investigate them.
... and Indigenous and Black women, who just run away for no reason so aren't really missing.
lot of comments in here talking about how they're just doing their kills some other way: cops, mass shootings, not getting caught (this one is the most braindead). But everyone is ignoring how we've largely eliminated regular lead exposure that used to be the norm. that shit makes you go fucking insane.
I don't like the way policing has turned many first world countries into semi-police states ... being a person of colour (like me) automatically makes you questionable with the law no matter what you're doing. I know from experience.
But after saying all that, mass murderers and killers are probably lesser now because of better policing, mass surveillance, intercommunications, mass data collection, profiling, forensic science and monitoring. It's a lot harder now than in was in the 60s, 70s or 80s for a random stranger to wander from place to place committing murders and not getting caught. It doesn't mean it's not possible ... it's just that in our day in age of technology, it's a lot harder.
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.
A large percentage of serial killers suffered from childhood abuse and trauma. Kids in the foster system are often abused and traumatized. I can see it.
I thought you were being sarcastic but there is a book called Freakonomics and it does suggest as you said. Check the "Criticism" section for details.
Western society was unclear of whether or not making them executives was a good idea to begin with.
I think the lead poisoning theory is a bit overblown, personally. There’s something to it, but “all the serial killers were just brain damaged” is I think trying to put a very neat little bow around a complex package.
I think a lot of it is simply that it’s harder to get away with murder now. I mean not to make it sound too easy but in 1982 there were a lot of ways to kill someone that basically could not be tracked back to you as long as you weren’t literally seen doing it. People aren’t stupid, they know this, and they change their patterns around it.
Additionally, I’m sure that (potentially as a result of this) we have more spree/mass killings now, and a decent deal of spree killings have a component of sexual frustration to them as many serial killers had.
Now they just do mass shootings.
parallel killers
Interestingly the start of the decline is 1988 which also happens to be the year the seminal Stewart Raffill film Mac and Me was released. Coincidence? I wonder.
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.
Reduction in lead exposure plays a huge part.
The lead generation is currently running the country (that I live in). It shows.
I wonder how many of them just got badges.
They have joined the military or private military companies since. they can kill as much as they like with complete impunity, in many wars like Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Ukraine, Palestine and Gaza, plus it's brown people they are killing so they feel triple the reword, society is fine with that as long as it who they view as the enemy who's the subject of their carnal instincts.
You can't convince me that the image of the horrors committed by the IDF in Gaza and the US military aren't of psychopaths having a blast paid for by their own societies.
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%.
Sounds to me like there's a serial serial killer killer on the loose!!
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.
I think also it's because it's just people are so easily tracked now.
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.
War on drugs shifted police focus from real crimes, to you guessed it, drugs. I bet some serial killers go under the radar due to shitty police work.
"Nah those murders aren't related, let's go do a no knock raid on shitty evidence. Maybe plant some drugs? That always cheers ya up Captain!" - Cops, probably
Besides what they listed in the article, I would add lead exposure.
It's a short read, pretty good.
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!
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.