Silence Of The Indian Lambs
First of all I want to clarify the various terms that are used in this context and are often confused with one another.
* A serial killer is one who commits a number of murders over a long period of time, with the killings separated by often long periods of apparent normalcy.
* A mass murderer, on the other hand, is an individual who kills several people in a single event.
* A spree killer kills in a series of closely connected events.
The definition of spree killer is especially close to that of a serial killer; perhaps, the primary difference between the two is that a serial killer tends to lure victims to their death; whereas, a spree killer tends to go hunting.
Serial killers are often acting on extreme sadistic urges and are often classified as sociopathic, lacking any ability to empathize with the suffering of others. In recent years, terrorists have performed acts of mass murder as acts of intimidation, and to draw attention to their causes.
My personal favorite is Charles Manson and Bundy is a very close second but these people are the poster-boys of serial killing. The real men are those who never get caught. These people are just the stupid dumb idiots who were naive enough to surrender themselves to the hands of consumer driven society.
To think of it, is it that hard to kill a person and get away with it? Considering the standard of Indian Police Services, it’ll be hard to get caught and even after that Indian laws will always let you go away if you are careful enough in choosing your victims. There hasn't been any famous serial killer in India who killed just for the pleasure of taking another human's life. There are other ways in which you can leave a mark on the Indian History but becoming the Indian counterpart of Jack The Ripper will have its own advantages. I don’t understand that despite of such favorable surroundings, why doesn’t India have a share in the Hall of Fame of Death?
* A serial killer is one who commits a number of murders over a long period of time, with the killings separated by often long periods of apparent normalcy.
* A mass murderer, on the other hand, is an individual who kills several people in a single event.
* A spree killer kills in a series of closely connected events.
The definition of spree killer is especially close to that of a serial killer; perhaps, the primary difference between the two is that a serial killer tends to lure victims to their death; whereas, a spree killer tends to go hunting.
Serial killers are often acting on extreme sadistic urges and are often classified as sociopathic, lacking any ability to empathize with the suffering of others. In recent years, terrorists have performed acts of mass murder as acts of intimidation, and to draw attention to their causes.
My personal favorite is Charles Manson and Bundy is a very close second but these people are the poster-boys of serial killing. The real men are those who never get caught. These people are just the stupid dumb idiots who were naive enough to surrender themselves to the hands of consumer driven society.
To think of it, is it that hard to kill a person and get away with it? Considering the standard of Indian Police Services, it’ll be hard to get caught and even after that Indian laws will always let you go away if you are careful enough in choosing your victims. There hasn't been any famous serial killer in India who killed just for the pleasure of taking another human's life. There are other ways in which you can leave a mark on the Indian History but becoming the Indian counterpart of Jack The Ripper will have its own advantages. I don’t understand that despite of such favorable surroundings, why doesn’t India have a share in the Hall of Fame of Death?
posted by Ravi Handa at 8/31/2004 11:51:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home