What was it about the 70s and 80s that allowed so many serial killers to get away with their crimes for years?

What was it about the 70s and 80s that allowed so many serial killers to get away with their crimes for years?
The most shocking part is these women were not drug addicts or prostitutes who nobody would care if they went missing. They were white middle class college students. Some never even had their bodies recovered despite being dumped not far from urban areas. How long can a body float downstream in the US before at least one person be it a fisherman, hunter or camper comes across it? Was law enforcement just downright incompetent? And if that's the case what made them change their tactics?

Attached: 12047919[1].jpg (2025x3000, 792K)

In the 60 and 70s, serial killing was still a new thing. Most crimes, at least what the police were aware of, was mostly crimes between people who had some connection to one another or there was some understandable reason for them. Husband kills wife. Robber shoots home owner. Serial killing is the hardest crime because its usually a crime committed by someone who has no ties to the victims in anyway.

Law enforcement was not structured in a way to deal with these crimes effectively. If you're a truck driver driving through a town and pick up a hitchhiking run away girl and kill her in the middle of the woods at 3 am and then drive to another state, you will most likely get away with it unless somoene can place you with that girl.

There wasn't cameras everywhere like there is now and definitely wasnt technology like your cell phone capturing your every move

>What was it about the 70s and 80s that allowed so many serial killers to get away with their crimes for years?
Lack of technology in forensics, mostly DNA related. Next question.

i never thought about it before but the contemporary serial killer is basically a product of the interstate system

no its the american family structure to blame. kicking kids at 18 years old doesn't foster good familial bonding

cia engineered the serial killer meme in southern california in the 70’s to create an atmosphere of terror in adult society

school shooters were added in the 90’s for the teens so they didn’t miss out

Attached: 8F4608B1-A6F4-4F92-889F-BF548758BC7A.png (512x512, 361K)

seriously though, look at how many serial killers underwent some “experimental treatment” at a military base somewhere before their murders.

And what do they gain from that atmosphere of terror? People stay indoors more and consume less when they're afraid.

it doesn’t matter
if you honestly think that southern california organically became ground zero for serial killers overnight you’re deluded

Sounds like a lot of projection. You could kidnap anyone outside their home at night. It's not purely the 'collapsed traditional family structure' that has kids and young adults outside without escort. The sheer idea that family means having a bodyguard at all times is ridiculous.

You buy more products when you dont socialize

>what is it about this society that had high trust and primitive crime solving techniques
wow you really fucking got me there I have no clue what it could be

in civilized countries women cant go outside without a male escort

>Was law enforcement just downright incompetent?
Yes.
>And if that's the case what made them change their tactics?
Public acceptance of a full police state happened. See the rise of technology and SWAT teams throughout the 80s and 90s. Then 9/11 happened and everyone agreed to sign away their privacy and rights to the GOP-controlled Congress and White House.

This is why shooting sprees are the most popular form of mass homicide now. Guns are easily accessible in the USA and its too easy to get caught with the police state lockdown if you're trying to be sneaky. So they just shoot a bunch of people at once and blow their brains out afterward.

vietnam was going on they didn’t want hippies in california focusing on protesting the war, so charlie manson is programmed to kill and boom, anti war activists are really scary satanists

California became a freak capital because it attracted all the people with big egos looking to become 'stars'

Women going anywhere without a male escort is objectively fucking retarded and only serves to support the criminal

Pretty much this. This was the era before different police precincts had a shared evidence database to link crimes in different counties/states together. That alone made a massive difference. That plus the development of modern forensic techniques of course.

see:

This. Institutionalized feminism has destroyed the nuclear family, leading to a lot of issues like the single mom epidemic. Look up statistics of prisons, more than 70% of men in prison grew up without a father. Most serial killers didn't have fathers and had serious issues with their mothers.

Sounds like a kneejerk quip coming from a person who's never lived in a society like that

manson was in vacaville during mkultra

lookitup

Consider race

Agreed. The jews destroyed multigenerational households cause surprise surprise the best way to generate family wealth is to keep costs within the family. It also churns out a new consumer ASAP (age18) before that they are just an extension of their parents consumption.

Bring back multi-generational households with your children if you can. Buy a decent sized house, with a decent plot of land, build acabin, add a wing. If you have tradesmen friends you can buy the supplies and just offer beer and food over the weekend for labor.

the cia allowed them to kill people because they were experimenting with programming and brainwashing assassins.

Pretty much came to say this. Serial Killers weren't a thing back then, nobody expected the same man to be murdering multiple random girls they barely knew.

those society's dont have serial killers eating people

You guys keep talking about conspiracies but Charles Manson isn’t even considered an actual serial killer. Certainly nothing like Bundy.

if you look it up it’s a running meme that 9/10 serial killers were raised to believe their grandmother was their mother and wet the bed as a teenager.

Hardly an issue. Blacks in the US were fine until we forced integration. Living in our separate communities and developments was fine and there were little problems. Look at pics of them before the 50s and compare it today with the nigger rap culture that was forced on them.

... based retard. That's cause charlie never technically killed anyone, just ordered it

just read programmed to kill already

Those societies also don't respect women as people and take a woman alone as a bigger excuse to lynch them and put a flaming tire around their neck.

Fun fact: Jack Nicholson and Ted Bundy were both raised to believe their actual mother was their older sister.

Bundy was a product of ignorance.
Manson was far more dangerous.

>feminism
no friend. It was the jews, they pushed feminism cause they know it destroys every society.

checked. What about reading Helter Skelter?

>no respect for women
>every facet of the civilization is built around protecting a womans innocence
They have an immense amount of respect for women and their culture. Their respect of women is tied to culture, if a woman stops respecting herself (no escort, dressing immodest etc) she is harming her culture as well as other women.

And even then it’s not a typical serial killer scenario. The Manson Family murders were motivated by quasi-political reasons.

70s-80s were peak serial killer. Im sure the amount of serial killers have remained the same but we will never reach such Kino levels again.

I never said it wasnt. The Judaist faith is inherently maternal and the leaders of the feminist movement was lead by Jews. The international Jewry and ita henchmen are responsible for a lot of problems. Same reason they forced integration, they saw another demographic to push products on and to help destroy their biggest enemy: the White race.

If we use the real definition of a serial killer and stopped making excuses for negros by calling everything "gang violence" we would have A LOT more serial killers today than any decade

Sounds like a contrarian rush to judgement only possible in a first world country where you can complain that free will can lead to mistakes

europe is a scary place

No it's based around one concept. Men are stronger than women. A woman alone, around nefarious men (a % of men) is not safe. Removing the need for a woman to have an escort in public only emboldens the criminal. It doesnt make the womans life better nor does it make her more safe or secure. Sorry I actually care about women bro and you just want these drones walking around society so maybe you can get laid

Based and Dave McGowan pilled. Don't forget to look into Laurel Canyon and the grateful dead/phish.

Gang Bangers just aren't as interesting as serial killers. I dont want any blacks or cholos in my Serial Kinos

Yes they do. The reason women need an escort in those countries is because the population is more likely to kidnap rape torture and kill random women they see alone. They need an escort because they're greater targets of violence, and the cost is a lifetime without their own decision making.

>technology was still in infancy so harder to place people at the scene of crimes
>dna evidence wasn’t even a thing
>Most of the time the spree was only for a couple months at most so nobody really could know it was one person killing these people
>society as a whole was still naive

People were a lot more trusting and detective work was a lot more painstaking all in all

wrong muslim men do not rape you racist

Just carry guns or pepper spray. Sorry your 17 year old ass considers women infinitely weak and makes retarded guesses about third world murder rates.

I remember watching some hour long videos from the writer about this research is the book worth it? I gather i know the gist already but its always good to have sources

even gang violence is lower today in most of America compared to the late 80s-90s

Is this one of those things where you act like a ridiculous liberal and say worse things than you complain about hearing?

Part of it was media attention. The news media at the time really did treat serial killers like celebrities. It encouraged a lot of copycats. It stopped, or at least slowed down because the government changed some laws regarding how cases were publicized to help suppress that kind of thing. Of course, now we have the internet, so now everything is sensationalized beyond reason, but DNA testing makes it a lot harder to get away with repeated offenses. The authorities are also a lot better at tracking people's movements, because so many electronic devices were carry around are secretly recording our locations, and because there are so many cameras everywhere now.

Women are infinitely weak when compared to men. I agree guns would be a great idea but most women are anti gun you fucking moron. And pepper spray will stop no one who doesnt want it stopping them. You are incredibly naive. Escorts are necessary for the safety of women.

>Manson never killed anyone
This meme again, he killed a rancher with a meat cleaver, his body was found actually years ago

You just implied that an entire group of people go out and rape and kill women so much that they have to have constant protection. you are a racist

naming serial killers and categorizing them was a new thing, serial killers themselves werent new. Before they just called them something else like a sex fiend or madman and wrote it off as a once in a blue moon freak. Hell they didnt start putting kids on milk cartons or talking of stranger danger until the 1980s, it wasnt socially polite to talk about these things and it capped off with the free spirited era of the 1960s when it was a serial killers paradise. There were lots of serial killers getting nabbed in the 60s, but it wasnt until the 1970s and 1980s when LEOs started talking with each other

>you are a word invented by trotsky
Oh man anything but that

Cool man I guess your flippant authoritarian posts are super important and binding compared to real life or anything tangible people have in healthy society. Your salty Yea Forums post is just so smart and like washing over me with realism and smartness.

Shut the fuck up smartass, I'm not trying to be fucking safe or progressive. I'm remarking that it's an utter lie that societies that forbid women alone have more moral and less abusive people in them. Pull yourself together and figure out your perspective, instead of snarkily pretending to be a stupid version of someone you disagree with.

>Mmmmmmmmerica legalises abortion and women get the pill
>Suddenly violent crimes drop across the board
>But muh family unit
>Muh Jews

Fuck off

Stupid hippie and liberalism thought process was rampant back in those areas where most serial killers operated. They thought any strange looking person who seemed a bit off kilter was a good idea to ride with cause no way Jose would he use my decapitated head as a puppet!

Kemper said as much in his interviews

I wasn't memeing just uninformed friend. That is interesting to know though, thank you!
>onions: the post
are you actually denying that men are biologically stronger than women, and saying if any average man wanted to take any average woman he couldnt? because that is an absurd denial of reality. women are objectively safer when they have a man who cares about their safety around, there is no arguing this statement.

Can you post some some more of your dialogue tree in really retarded attempts at greentext? Its infinitely funny to me how pathetic and lacking in self-awareness you guys are

I'm denying that it's the enlightened thing to forbid women to ever be alone in public simply due to the fact that any man is likely a criminal due to strength. I'm not denying men are much stronger by average, I'm denying that keeping the world's women in a fucking bottle is the proper way to cope.

>a Yea Forums post being thankful they were corrected

I’m sorry desu, forgive me for being combative

Police were shit. It's absolutely insane America legit had serial killers that would be fucking with the police and leaving clues and shit at their murders only 30 years ago

just imagine, there are some hardcore would be serial killer, just playing fortnite fro twitch viewers right now.

WWI and WWII parents created serial killers
That's why there was such a sudden boost and then decline

>nightstalker got stopped at a red light by a cop after he just raped and murdered a family in another district

California cops were utterly useless

Well what would you have done and how would you have figured it out?

You fail to realize that America is a huge place compared to your 3rd world shithole

>muh enlightenment
ah I see, enjoy your day sport
we should all seek to enhance our wealth of knowledge

Yeah let's just sacrifice half the world's ability to leave the home out of fear of abuse. That'll be good.

Yes, I prefer women keep their innocence. What have they gained from leaving the house? Have you heard of the paradox of declining female happiness?

>what made them change their tactics?

DNA tech, widespread surveillance, GPS, etc., sherlock.

>serial killers themselves werent new
This. Elizabeth Bathory, Gilles de Rais, Jack the Ripper; serial killers have existed since the dawn of man, but only the establishment of mass media even allowed for their existence to be widely advertised.

Being aware of a potential serial rapist and murderer in the area would be a good place to start. California is huge but when none of the police districts are cooperating for each other it comes down to being negligent than someone is crafty enough to avoid capture

They don't deserve freedom because they can't handle it, I get it. Just keep them in a little pumpkin shell forever and consider any women ever found alone a natural rape subject. I love working 60 hours a week and then having to escort my wife to the store because society accepts the idea of her being kidnapped into sex slavery without my escort.

Would be great in a perfect world but obviously the problem was a lack of information and a lack of worry

No you dont get it. They dont "deserve" (nothing to do with it) it because THEY DONT WANT IT, google paradox of declining female happiness. You should love that idea it sounds like a wonderful relationship and getting back to the true meaning of marriage. Two beings joining to become one.

legalization of pornography caused serial killers

You realize that women are allowed to stay home and be worried to be caught alone of their own free will, right? You don't literally have to legislate and have the police or nearby men fucking bully or punish women out of society for that to be an option. The idea is personal responsibility, not enforced paranoia, and you can still hold fast to decent values without forcing demands.

>In the 60 and 70s, serial killing was still a new thing.

No. It wasn't.

watch mindhunter already

>protecting women is bullying/punishing them
sorry id rather reduce crime and harm to women than support some retarded enlightenment ideologies

You're talking about pressuring women not to leave the house, and having society or the police actually tell them to go home when they're caught out, right? What possible world where this is the norm is that not the case? The only way a philosophy like yours stands as a national value is to literally ask people to banish women when they see them outside alone. Your values aren't that wrong even, it's just you can do them PERSONALLY and with SELF-RESPONSIBILITY rather than demand it become a national value just to cope with an outlying scenario.

If they are without escort yes. If we could do this without all these bad things happening I'd think we'd see the fruits of those efforts a few centuries later. Enlightenment is so dumb it always has these "growing pains" that are just sooo necessary whilst their ideology fully flourishes and everyone understands it, maybe we should just add Locke to the public school curriculum? All in the name of tearing down "unjust oppression" or dangerous "inequality"

fuck em let them walk the streets just make sure police kill whoever does crimes

Alright man, sorry the 'growing pains' are too much, but I understand not everyone can really handle it. Feel free to track the success of muslim nations and consider female freedom a lost cause. I'm acting like a dick but I can actually begin to agree with you if you live in a city, but I live in the suburbs and an attitude like that is just self-destructive and paranoid considering how safe women are and how naturally protective the average society member is of them. The crime rate in most places is certainly not bad enough to sacrifice half of society's freedom over.
If I lived in a ghetto yeah I'd buy my gf or daughter a gun and try to be aware when they're out.

why do you want women to be unhappy and in danger?

city folk just want cities to be nice and crime free literally impossible
just live like a criminal

I want them to be able to choose. It's also an absolute fact that the vast majority of women aren't unhappy to be alone outside, and are never accosted for it. You talk like everyone is shivering in fear, but it's just not the case.

go say that to women see if they want it

>he still hasnt googled the paradox of declining female happiness
Choice is meaningless when you are consistently making bad ones

thats due to weak men where these male escorts coming from

We're not. You have a bad image of society and assume the worst based on what is basically internet paranoia. You're used to being cynical on Yea Forums because that's what we do. But is it really true, even according to your own real perspective, that the majority of people are abusers or live in life-destroying fear of abuse? Would you really be comfortable asserting this idea to your local city hall, or god forbid in front of an actual woman?

Some its from bad men some of its from themselves. Your egalitarianism has only been hurting women from its inception. The studies back this up if you would just google it.

>muh fear
Do you have any real argument? this is all rooted in pretty empirical data, crime statistics and females self reported happiness getting lower and lower every year
>would i assert this in front of a woman
yes all the women in my life know how i feel, and my woman agrees

>What was it about the 70s and 80s that allowed so many serial killers to get away with their crimes for years?

Nothing, people have always done that shit, it's just that forensics, police records and profiling was getting good enough to catch them but not as good as it is now adays to catch them before they get a big kill count, so it was the sweet spot for the media craze to develop. If Ted had lived in an earlier time period he could have probably done his thing indefinitely because the police would never have been able to put together a picture of his activities and if he was ever caught only get done for that one murder without linking it to the rest.

Daily reminder the Golden State killer (a serial killer from 80s) was put in jail literally a year ago.

This movie was so strange in its tone. Sometimes it was funny, sometimes it was sad and near the end it becomes straight up campy and weird (WHERE IS HER HEAD!!?)

this woman you escort everywhere apparently

You're ignoring the benefits of reserving half the world's freedom of movement in their own communities.
Furthermore, most abuse happens in the home. By far and wide.
I'm not mad its just you have a really limited perspective on this.

And you really insist the absolute truth of that statistic, and insist it is only because women are unhappy to leave the house alone? Like, to pick up milk or get gas or go to work or something.
I'm not denying the value of patriarchy and male dominance, or that motherly homemakers aren't generally more happy people. I'm denying the value of police and public enforcement of that. I'm denying that asking men and the government to usher women away from the public is a reasonable route to repairing the family unit. I would insist that repairing the family unit is the first step, and making up laws to keep people in little boxes despite other complications is a short-sighted misunderstanding of the human condition and a misuse of government.

This combined with the general culture being different. Back in the 60s through early 80s, hitchhiking was commonplace and young runaways were able to leave home and be incredibly hard to track down.

>What was it about the 70s and 80s that allowed so many serial killers to get away with their crimes for years?
lack of dna and advanced forensics. lack of communication and sharing between agencies and departments. lack of surveillance and tracking in every day life

things were better then

hitchiking gets a bad rap it's no different to uber

Except uber is GPS tracked.

Just my girlfriend :^)
What benefits? Economics? Yes we need more slaves to the capitalist machine! I agree, how could I be so stupid.
No, its because women get to make decisions, something that for thousands of years they were not capable of doing properly, because they never had to. Its just like how we KNOW for a fact that men are better navigators, because they were the navigators for millennia the same logic extends to all other mental faculties.
>usher women away from the public
no one but your strawman is telling you that

When did he start going by Zac? I thought it was always ZacK Efron.

i dunno you the one that sounds like a slave to me have to take you gf everywhere

That's because you have a skewed view on the nature of a relationship. I am happy to be with her and keep her safe, it is one of my natural duties and it adds to my fulfillment in life.

Until the advent of the affordable car and the explosion of population and urbanization after the 1920s, serial killers were much rarer simply because more people noticed things and there was little to no dependable way for killers to make off with victims besides foot or horseback. By the 1950s most everyone had a vehicle and social atomization was taking an irreversible hold, meaning people were more and more minding their own beeswax while killers had a method of speedily wisking away victims.

It seems like the 60s and 70s was when serial killers first appeared because that was the nadir of when technology and social isolation enabled killers to operate, withour corresponding technology and invetsigative techniques in place to combat. Once the police began to professionalize in the late 1980s and technology such as DNA and wide spread cameras started making abductions and murders riskier, the number of serial killers dropped because they were being caught before they could go on sprees. This is also why so many older killers were caught in the 1990s and 2000s-once useless boomer cops were ousted the new generation used new technology to catch killers.

The cliche is that serial killers are intelligent predators but that's not true at all. Most are profoundly stupid. The only reason they got away with their crimes is due to police incompetence and the lack of CSI technology-once those two were addressed the number of serial killers has dropped drastically.

And as otherd have mentioned, potentially serial killers are also being satiated by video games and violent porn. There is at least one guy reading this right now who, 40 years ago, would've tried to abduct women, and instead now gets his kicks off Facial Abuse and Guro and calling children niggers on PubG and Rust.

>no one but your strawman is telling you that
I'm completely entitled to draw my line in the sand, and I drew that line where it is on purpose, so you could keep your opinion without petitioning the government and society to keep women from being alone in public (which is the precise subject of this conversation).
As for the rest of your post, its really quite run of the mill gender abuse paranoia, we are perfectly aware of it, and frankly that's not the project we as a society are working on right now. I'd be more convinced if you argued how to create better societies and work with the human condition, but instead you just insisted on a tradition of calling women too stupid to make their own decisions. I appreciate tradition and quality national society, but you're taking away independence from even the best of people out of worry about the worst. For me, its encouraging personal responsibility and self-governance of people, not washing away that option due to guess correlation about a google search.

I dont care about your egalitarian principles. They only serve your ego for spreading them. They don't keep people safe. And none of your strawmen are what im saying.

Most abuse occurs in the home

Fact: people only started caring when middle class white girls started getting killed. Blacks, Asians, and Hispanics had been targeted and killed by serial killers for years with no serious effort done by police to solve the crimes. The media coverage of privileged white women getting murked is the only reason serial killers started being seriously investigated. Dispute this.
Pro-tip: you can't

My point doesn't revolve around you. I'm allowed to argue an egalitarian point despite your abject denial of it. I've been doing plenty things this last hour by the way.