Please note that I specified premediitated and murder. Going into a killing rage because you catch your spouse in bed with your best friend doesn’t count; nor does killing in self-defense. In fact, let’s say that, for the sake of this argument, premeditation requires at least a day’s forethought and planning.
And yes, I am perfectly aware that I did not include the usual “Fool of a Took!” option.
And thanks, Czarcasm, for closing the other thread.
Given dire enough circumstances, I think very many.
Premeditated murder without getting caught? Very few.
I think pretty much anyone. Of course, in most cases I would suspect that it would be justified. For example, if an evil individual murdered your whole family, I can’t imagine someone NOT being capable.
I think there are a lot of people who would be capable of doing it if they could somehow be absolutely certain of not being caught, but who would never dare in realistic circumstances.
If it was that easy of a decision then there would be a heck of a lot of murderers. We probably hear about every single premeditated murder in our local news in Canada, because there really ain’t a lot of total murders to begin with.
Data from 2006 here.
That’s .00368% at the highest, and for all types of murders. If the premeditated ones were even half of that (which is probably generous) it would be .00184%.
If for every one premeditated murder committed, a thousand more were considered, then the rate of possible premeditated homicides is still only 1.84%.
Wow, you guys have a low view of humanity. I said less than 1%.
I guess it depends on what you mean by “capable of.” Do most people have the intelligence and resources to commit murder? Sure. But I think very, very few people have the will to do it.
Suitably motivated, I’d say about half of both men and women.
Those number will actually drop the longer they wait. While I think they would given a day or two planning, I believe the motivations would drop off if they had to wait several weeks to carry through.
Not that they would reconsider, just that the killing rage would diminish to the point they wouldn’t go through with it.
I voted for about half because of this:
About half to a third of the population lacks the organizational skills to plan and execute the crime. Between poor planning, procrastination, failure to obtain the necessary confederates or materials, and low attention span, well, a fair number of lives are saved by inertia.
Under the right circumstances, which would vary from person to person, absolutely anyone is capable of it.
Will is the aspect of personality I was really thinking of.
I voted between 67% and 99% for both, partly because of the organizational obstacles amarinth mentioned, and partly because I imagine there is at least a small minority of people who would not commit premeditated murder under any circumstance. What can I say – I’m an optimist. 
But for most people, I don’t find it difficult to imagine that there would be some set of circumstances that would impel them to plan somebody else’s death, and even go through with it. Obviously, the vast majority of people never face those circumstances, and for most I think they would be pretty dire. But I’m reasonably sure they’re there all the same.
Wait…did you think that you wre voting that 67% to 99% of men and women are INcapable of committing a murder?
The question isn’t who would commit premeditated murder, it’s who is capable. Therefore anyone but those with extreme physical or mental handicaps would fit the bill, which has to be above 90% of the population.
Part of the reason I disagree with you is that, by some accounts, the majority of conscript soldiers do not fire in combat. Cite. I think most people have a lot of difficulty forcing themselves to commit lethal violence.
Nope! My feeling is that the proportion of people who wouldn’t be able to commit premeditated murder (either because they’d screw up or because they just wouldn’t have the will to do it) is probably substantially less than 33%. Maybe you got the wrong impression from my suggestion that this is an optimistic assessment. 
Killing some random dude in war is different from killing someone who, say, raped your daughter and paralyzed her somehow. There is not much reason to kill someone in war other than self-defense, but that’s not the point of the question is it?
It seems to me that it would be easier to kill the random dude in war, as presumably he is trying to kill you, and also presumably does not have an identity of which the soldier is aware.
Bingo. Barring some physical or mental disability, every person is capable of committing premeditated murder. Most of us have just never been in a situation that would motivate us to do so. Then there are those of us with a sufficient motive to do it, but have enough self-control to stop ourselves.
Capable of committing murder? Quite a lot. Getting away from it? Significantly lesser.
Every last one of us can kill - that fact has made warfare so highly popular throughout the centuries.
For those who worry about people being too stupid to premeditate - the planning might be piss poor - but about anyone can think of taking a gun to the victim’s workplace and opening fire.