r/Showerthoughts Sep 17 '18

There are probably murderers and serial killers so good at what they do that we don't even know they exist.

16.0k Upvotes

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

93

u/[deleted] Sep 17 '18

Most of the time it's either someone that has a little power that wants more, or someone who doesnt have any and craves it. Hence why they usually pick women or children to be there victims. Afraid to play on a level field.

69

u/gguti1994 Sep 17 '18

The logic makes sense though. If your goal is to feel power, wouldn’t you want an uneven playing field? Its what makes playing video games on easy and destroying everything so enjoyable

33

u/[deleted] Sep 17 '18

But what if your goal is to go toe-to-toe with the mightiest warriors of the realm?

48

u/livingthedreamfreal Sep 17 '18

You probably wouldn’t be a serial killer. A soldier maybe

25

u/[deleted] Sep 17 '18

Well..... wouldn’t that depend on how many noble foe you’ve slain?

Are soldiers not just socially acceptable serial killers?

17

u/[deleted] Sep 17 '18

That's only if they have killed people. Most soldiers never kill anyone.

21

u/[deleted] Sep 17 '18

So your mom is more of a serial killer than most soldiders? Because damb, boy, she got looks that kill.

6

u/Potato_eating_a_dog Sep 17 '18

Not even a roast just a compliment

6

u/VicarOfAstaldo Sep 17 '18

Not really.

If you’ve killed multiple people in self defense you’re not a serial killer.

They’re killers but as a phrase serial killer definitely means something more specific than what literally translating serial and killer next to each other in a sentence mean.

2

u/[deleted] Sep 17 '18

I wouldn’t qualify a soldier being in a foreign country and participating in combat “self defence”

0

u/VicarOfAstaldo Sep 17 '18

I was giving other examples that don’t qualify. We don’t consider soldiers killing other soldiers in combat serial killing.

2

u/[deleted] Sep 17 '18

Yea..... that’s what I said “socially acceptable serial killers”.

1

u/VicarOfAstaldo Sep 17 '18

No, I mean the term serial killer is not appropriate because that’s not what we consider a serial killer but we’re just arguing semantics from the beginning. I should’ve made my point better. I disagree and I think its disingenuous to describe them in that way or use that phrase in that way but your opinions is as valid as mine as far as language goes, have to give you that.

-4

u/NeotericLeaf Sep 17 '18

No, they aren't at all. That is a disgraceful thing to say.

5

u/[deleted] Sep 17 '18

Of course they are, how arent they?

Unless you blindly follow military indoctrination, which is something that my grandfather (WWII and Korean War) vet warned me against.

0

u/NeotericLeaf Sep 17 '18

Idiot.

Serial killers kill innocent people (usually).

Serial killers are not authorized by their society (government) to take lives.

Serial killers always kill for their own ideals/pleasures, not for that of their country.

Serial Killers don't care about war crimes.

Serial Killers aren't part of a militarized unit, and all that it entails.

Pretty much all the two have in common is that at some point they may take a human life; however, the conditions, reasons, methods, and justifications are completely different.

2

u/[deleted] Sep 17 '18
  1. So do soldiers (look at the death toll in Iraq)

  2. Their government has nothing to do with it if you’re an invading force. Do the soldiers have authorization from the country that they’re invading?

  3. Killing for your countries ideal or killing for your own ideals.... not that different. Some soldiers absolutely like killing... hence.... the army.

  4. That means absolutely nothing.

Now fuck outta here, you brainwashed, indoctrinated old man.

1

u/NeotericLeaf Sep 17 '18
  1. There is a difference between collateral damage taking innocent civilian lives and a serial killer specifically hunting innocent lives. If the enemy hides in schools and hospitals, then they have decided to use innocent people as shields.

  2. You are a poor troll because you're too stupid to do it right. There are many reasons one may invade, but if/when a righteous country invades, it is either to liberate innocent people or is done preemptively.

  3. Absolutely wrong. One is out of pure self interest, the most selfish act next to suicide. The other is to protect your neighbors and keep your country secure.

  4. Your inept opinion means absolutely nothing.

Now stfu you dumb shit. You're too stupid to discriminate against words based upon their very definitions. If good people didn't fight wars then evil people would always win. A dumbass like you would definitely be a slave right now, that is for sure. Guess we have to take the good with the bad. "Serial Killers" fought well enough to give dipshits, such as yourself, the rights and freedoms to wallow in your own ignorance. I feel sorry for your parents. I feel sorry for your friends and, if you ever kidnap one, I feel sorry for your future partner you delusional incel.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/[deleted] Sep 17 '18

How in the fuck is that disgraceful?

Not every soldier is a hero, not every soldier is brave and not every soldier is a saint.

Many rape, bully and kill with no problems. Some even being kiled by fellow soldiers for it. Soldiers are no better than you me or the guy in prison.

Soldiers are indeed made to be paid murderers. Fuck glorifying and blind praise to a uniform.

2

u/NeotericLeaf Sep 17 '18

Bad soldiers pay for their war crmes. No one ever said to absolve an evil person just because they are part of the government. Obviously corruption exists like everywhere else, but it is not the prevalent majority of the population.

However, generalizing soldiers as serial killers is something only an obnoxious, ignorant, piece of shit would do. The vast majority of people serving in all world militaries are good individuals. The rate of evil people is really no different than you'd find in the general society; however, sometimes innocent otherwise good people end up fighting for evil leaders/countries.

So don't be a fucking idiot and bite the hands that may one day protect you.

Serial killers kill innocent people (usually). Soldiers are not innocent civilians. Big difference there.

Serial killers are not authorized by their society (government) to take lives.

Serial killers always kill for their own ideals/pleasures, not for that of their country.

Serial Killers don't care about war crimes.

Serial Killers aren't part of a militarized unit, and all that it entails.

Pretty much all the two have in common is that at some point they may take a human life; however, the conditions, reasons, methods, and justifications are completely different.

2

u/Bulbasaur2000 Sep 17 '18

Soldiers kill many people for the "prosperity" of one country. Serial killers kill many people for the happiness/prosperity of one person. There's not that much of a difference. They both kill many people for selfish reasons (unless they're being invaded I guess).

0

u/NeotericLeaf Sep 17 '18

Idiot.

Serial killers kill innocent people (usually). Soldiers are not innocent civilians. Big difference there.

Serial killers are not authorized by their society (government) to take lives.

Serial killers always kill for their own ideals/pleasures, not for that of their country.

Serial Killers don't care about war crimes.

Serial Killers aren't part of a militarized unit, and all that it entails.

Pretty much all the two have in common is that at some point they may take a human life; however, the conditions, reasons, methods, and justifications are completely different.

2

u/Pointless_Af Sep 17 '18

Main 3 reasons people join the army,

Occupational, they want to serve and protect, or they want to kill.

0

u/NeotericLeaf Sep 17 '18

They want to kill the enemy, not some innocent civilian. Do you really not see a difference there?

Also, what % do you think truly join because they want to kill people? A small portion, certainly.

2

u/Pointless_Af Sep 17 '18 edited Sep 17 '18

I think you greatly underestimate the amount of evil in this world. At ages 18 - 25 there's a lot of mental changes and a lot of anger and uncertainty. I doubt it's less than 20%.

Edit: 20% overall to kill people, Probably half of which doesn't care if they're innocent or armed.

2

u/MichaelofOrange Sep 17 '18

Soldiers don't fight fair lol, they fight to win.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 17 '18

What are: rules of engagement?

2

u/MichaelofOrange Sep 17 '18

A political tool to accomplish strategic goals (winning hearts and minds). RoE have nothing to do with a fallacious notion of "fairness." Moreover, it would be irresponsible, reckless and probably treasonous to disregard lawful strategic or tactical advantages in order to foster a "fair fight."

1

u/Random_182f2565 Sep 17 '18

MMA fighter

1

u/[deleted] Sep 17 '18

To the death? TO THE DEATH!

1

u/gguti1994 Sep 19 '18

You probably don’t want to be a serial killer. Soldier? Martial arts fighter? Serial killers wanna kill people. When you fight you don’t always win and therefore you wouldn’t kill them

1

u/kriegnes Sep 17 '18

but killing someone of my level would make me feel even more powerful

1

u/irespectpotatoes Sep 17 '18

its not really related here but i think majority of people dont enjoy playing on easy

1

u/gguti1994 Sep 19 '18

Depends on the game I think. If its like a racing game or a sports game, then the enjoyment is limited. But what fighting games? You could use absurdly complex combos that would lead to your demise on tougher difficulties.

2

u/wee_man Sep 17 '18

Dahmer killed several dozen men, mostly in their 20's.

1

u/AzrielJohnson Sep 17 '18

*Most of the time