First, I wonder if anyone saw the PBS special on John Nash, and saw, as I did, many parallels in his life to Ted Kuzcinsky(sp?).
Somehow I feel this “Smiley” kid (who’s name I haven’t even bothered to remember) is “worse” than the Unabomber, because he apparently did it for some kind of sick yucks and moment of fame.
But the unabomber KILLED at least one person.
So how do we judge them?
Okay, I thought this was going to be a humorous thread. But I’ll give you a serious answer.
Kacszinski (not sure if that’s right, either) was at it for a long time, like decades. He was not interested in becoming known, and probably could have got away for longer if his family hadn’t turned him in. He made better bombs, maybe because he had time to practice.
Have you ever read the Unabomber’s manifesto? I’ve seen parts of it, and it’s disturbingly sane. The conclusion to kill is not a leap I’d have made…
The “smiley bomber”: I also have forgotten his name, probably the best revenge. He’s… a kid. Again, not one I want in my ideal world, but making a big smily map is a childish thing to do.
Both of them are dangerous psychopaths with no consider for other people’s lives. Possibly the smiley kid might have outgrown it. In my opinion, the Unabomber is the scarier of the two, because his planning was better and he reached a lethal conclusion using pretty good logic.