From: Rabid Wombat <wombat@mcfeely.bsfs.org>
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 16:02:42 +0800
To: "James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com>
Subject: Re: timmy waxes a widdle on AP
In-Reply-To: <199609211946.MAA27996@dns2.noc.best.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960922003553.469D-100000@mcfeely.bsfs.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




On Sat, 21 Sep 1996, James A. Donald wrote:

> At 08:11 PM 9/17/96 -0700, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:
> > but I'm still a bit confused about those prices. what determines
> > them, anyway? risk to the assassin? it seems that it ought to be
> > as easy to snuff out one person as it would another. e.g. everybody
> > walks alone out at night at different times, it seems.
> 
> Although government services to the rich and poor cost about 
> the same, the quality is radically different.  Thus the risk
> involved in killing a poor person is vastly less than the 
> risk involved in killing a middle class person.
> 

I think it is more likely an us-vs.-them mentality, rather than the cost 
of educating the person in question. If someone much poorer than you is 
killed in a poor neighborhood, you don't feel as threatened - it is one 
of "them" - If someone of equal or greater socio-economic background 
suffers a violent death, you begin to think "it could happen to me, too." 
Now it is a matter of "us." The higher up the scale you go, the more 
people on the "us" side of the coin, with more money/political clout as 
well. This increases the demand to apprehend the killer, which increases 
the risk to the killer, hence, a higher price for a hit on a target in a 
higher socio-economic position.

It is not unusual for the investigation of drug-related murders to be 
lax; the "tax-paying" majority often says "let them bump each other off." 
With lax enforcement, lack of public outcry, there's less risk. The price 
is lower. Now if it is the lawyer that lives just down the street ...

Ooops. Bad choice of profession.   :)

Bad wombat. No biscuit.

g'nite, all.