March 07, 2005

Arrest The Men

I've been following the BTK killings and now the arrest, and once again, everyone comments on how normal he seemed. Married, family man who is a regular church-goer and holds a steady, bureaucratic job. Oh, and occasionally, he likes to murder people using a signature method: Bind, Torture, Kill.

It seems like every single serial murder is committed either by a drifter "with a strange look in his eye" or a family man who "seemed so normal" or a "nice young man who kept to himself".

I'm more into prevention than cure when it comes to murder. So as a preventative measure, next time there is a grisly murder or similar outrage, all males over the age of 10 will be rounded up and put in preventative detention until the case is solved. I know that seems harsh, but I'm willing to lay money on a massive drop in crime.

It's probably going to be a bit tricky to incarcerate all those men at once, so some men will be allowed to work and live in the community if they are "bought" by a woman or a consortium thereof. We don't condone slavery, of course. It's more about an enforced symbiosis.

The rest will be snap-frozen for freshness and thawed as fashion dictates.


The thing about being melodramatic is you can never be sure until *after* you make a fuss whether the crippling chest pain is heartburn or a heart attack.

Posted by phreq at March 7, 2005 04:35 AM | TrackBack
Comments

Im not looking foreward to becoming a mansicle.

Posted by: vincent at March 7, 2005 08:54 AM

don't fret. latest research indicates that I am unlikely to take over the world.

Hee hee! mansicles. sounds naughty.

"I'll have 3 grape-flavoured mansicles and fifth of bourbon to go."

Posted by: phreq at March 7, 2005 09:31 AM

ahh.. but it's better to make a fuss and assume heart attack, than presume it's stress or heart burn when it ain't.

on a related note, was just doing v interesting underwriting course the other day about how to interpret medical test results (e.g. blood tests, ECGs) using the test specificity and sensitivity (e.g. specificity is how certain you can be that someone who gets a negative test result DOESN'T have the disease being tested for, and sensitivity is how certain you can be that someone who gets a positive result DOES have the disease). e.g. using the prevalance of heart attacks among 24 yr old females (this was the actual example), and the sensitivity of ECG results - how certain can you be that an asymptomatic 24 yr old female w a positive ECG result actually did have a heart attack? answer: in the absense of other symptoms - not very, there's a high chance that it was a false-positive result. 7th form stats all over again.

actually, it WAS v interesting, but only from a underwriting-geek POV

*hugs* i hope you _are_ making a fuss rather than toughing stuff out. that's what doctors are there for, after all.

luvs
Z

Posted by: Zephfi at March 7, 2005 02:35 PM

You learn some interesting stuff in your job, Zeph! What do you make of State's advertisemnet that they pay out on 95% of all claims? Wouldn't that be kinda impossible?

Posted by: phreq at March 8, 2005 07:29 AM

well, i think they're more general insurance, and i don't know much about that. it would be quite possible - most insurance companies aren't trying to rip off their customers, cos that kinda defeats the purpose (all customers run away). they wouldn't pay out for things that aren't covered by the policy terms and conditions, ppl who gave misleading or incorrect information on their application, ppl who are generally evil lil fraud-bunnies etc. their ad doesn't say if their including fraudulent claims or not in that 5% and i'd imagine that ppl who ring up going "i wanna claim for " wouldn't be included in their claims figures, altho they're prob the ppl most likely to complain their claim wasn't paid out. so go figure.

i know our claims team pay out WAY more than they decline, and that's often cos someone lied on their application, or is trying to claim for something they're not actually covered for(tech not a declined claim i guess)

Posted by: Zephfi at March 8, 2005 04:43 PM

http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~medienfo/estudy/forum_unit4/messages/7657.htm complimentwhosewondered

Posted by: staring at February 8, 2006 08:59 AM

.... maybe we could also dig up all the dead men and parade them through the square in recognition of all the unsolved crimes. (accept the murder of little Lucy Ashton in 1967 - that was Mrs Manny and we all knew her husband whilst scary was not able to kill anyway due to his iron lung) ...fark it!! Dig him up too.

Posted by: Mangina at February 8, 2006 09:12 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?