CONTENTS
Another
page here
Management Alternatives
is honored to sponsor the content of this site.
|
|
Underlying Thesis
Last update:
07/14/06 12:34:29 PM.
Visitors: 
An underlying thesis of The Dying Game
trilogy involves the provocative question, "Do law-abiding people kill?"
O'Neal believes they do. To determine if his thesis was realistic,
O'Neal searched the national crime statistics
to determine why people commit murder. He was not surprised by the
results.
Here is a summary of the table that contained data
related to his thesis:
Murder Victims
(circumstances)
|
Felonies(1)
|
Suspected
Felonies(2)
|
Arguments(3)
|
Other
Motives(4)
|
Unknown
Reasons(5)
|
Total
Murders
|
1996 data
|
3,011
|
79
|
5,341
|
2,837
|
4,580
|
15,848
|
Percent
|
19.0
|
0.5
|
33.7
|
17.9
|
28.9
|
100.0
|
Source: Statistical Abstract of the United
States: 1998, Table 339, p. 213.
These results were also consistent with data for the
years prior to 1996 and when they were compiled into two groups, criminal
and law-abiding, the answer was clear.
Murder Victims
(circumstances)
|
Criminal
(1)+(2)
|
Law-abiding
(3)+(4)
|
Unknown
(5)
|
Total
Murders
|
1996 data
|
3,090
|
8,178
|
4,580
|
15,848
|
Percent
|
19.5
|
51.6
|
28.5
|
100.0
|
Since this data was compiled from police
investigations around the country, O'Neal concluded that the murders
classified as felonies were certainly committed by non-law-abiding people
(i.e., criminals) because their original intent seemed to be the killing
of another person. They equal 19.5% of the total.
Here is where it gets a bit confusing. Since
arguments and other motives are not against the law, the persons doing
those killings were law-abiding at the time prior to the killing.
There are some qualifications that will be mentioned later, but for now
since these murders were not classified as felonies, the killers were
still law-abiding person. That group equals 51.6% of the total and
seems to validate O'Neal's claim.
Other motives is a rather nebulous label and it is
unclear exactly what it includes, but if it involved any criminal intent
then O'Neal reasoned it would have had a label that indicated such intent
for the killer. He further concludes that the category includes the
remaining non-argument and non-criminal motives.
One might argue that the status of the killer,
either criminal or law-abiding, is unknown from the data in this table.
While true, data analysis requires certain assumptions to simplify our
view of the situation and that is what needed to happen here. Since
we do not know that status, we must assume it is law-abiding unless the
subsequent police investigation determined otherwise and classified the
killing as a felony.
While the crime data supports his thesis, O'Neal
asked several thousand people the same question as he traveled around the
country. Most did not bat an eye before responding that they would
kill in certain circumstances. Those who hesitated to consider the
question responded with qualifications such as "Unfortunately, yes," or
"Sadly, I'd kill too." He was surprised that no one disagreed with
him.
Copyright 1996-2003. Management
Alternatives. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
