Thought Experiment

[MediumTex]

Assume you are a middle class white man, married, 1-3 children.  You are intelligent and have above-average earning potential, but you aren't wealthy.  You live in or near a major U.S. city.  You don't have any serious mental or health problems.  You don't have any special Ninja or Navy SEAL-type training or experience, but you are lean and strong, though you haven't been in any kind of real physical altercation in decades.

You find out that sometime in the next five days you will be intentionally killed by another person.  You don't know when it will happen, who will do it, or what their motivation will be, but their behavior will not be out of sync with things you read about in the paper all of the time.  You aren't the victim of some kind of one-in-a-zillion event like a school shooting or other mass murder.  What happens to you is sad, but it's not something that would get more than local news coverage (if it got any coverage at all).

You have a budget of $500 to spend on defensive measures to prevent your death.  You can spend it on whatever you want to spend it on, but you can't alter your normal routine in any way, and you can't hire anyone to pose as you. 

How do you spend your $500?

You may be surprised at what your answer tells you about yourself.

I am going to write out a description of the event and how the $500 could have been spent to prevent it from happening.  The event and its prevention may or may not be obvious, but it isn't so remote that no one would ever be able to guess it.  If someone would like to see what I have written before we start, I would like that so that another member can vouch for the fact that the scenario I have created isn't in any way unfair or impossible to guess or predict. 

Even if the event itself MAY be hard to anticipate (though it might be easy to anticipate as well), the defensive measures to prevent it don't involve something like "buy $500 lockpicking kit and break into local defense lab and steal prototype of battlefield robot suit."  It's nothing like that sort of thing.  The defensive measures are easily within reach of anyone.

Anyone want to validate the experiment before we start?

If anyone would like to ask any additional questions about the event, I will answer them if I can without giving anything away.

[moda0306]

This is creepy and intriguing.  I'm gonna think about this...

[dragoncar]

I'm gonna go ahead and say take out a life insurance policy with my $500.  I already know someone will kill me, it's axiomatic in the problem statement.  Thus, I want to maximize well being of my loved ones.  If my loved ones are killing me, well hopefully the insurance company refuses to pay out.

That said, I'd be happy to verify your answer -- just PM me.

[MediumTex]

I'm gonna go ahead and say take out a life insurance policy with my $500.  I already know someone will kill me, it's axiomatic in the problem statement.  Thus, I want to maximize well being of my loved ones.  If my loved ones are killing me, well hopefully the insurance company refuses to pay out.

That said, I'd be happy to verify your answer -- just PM me.

With the proper defensive measures, your death can be prevented.

I will PM you with more information about the killer.

[Mountaineer]

MT,

I'm not sure I can "validate" your experiment but I'd be glad to see what you are doing in advance, and I won't spill the beans to anyone.  I will verify that you are playing by the rules you specified, to the best of my ability.

... Mountaineer

[Mountaineer]

MT,

In case you take me up on my offer above and before I know what your experiment is, here is my plan for the next five days to avoid being killed.  I will purchase and use a <=$500 ticket, anonomously and tell no one about it.  I will take a cruise or flight or bus trip or train trip for a week, then return; or alternately, I'll find a cheap flea bag motel not near me and tell no one what my plans are; I'll hang out there for the week.  If I go the bus/air/train/cruise route, I'm assuming since I have to eat regardless, my food funds will not go toward the $500 anti-death allotment. 

... Mountaineer

Edit:  my normal routine includes travel, sometimes alone, so I think my case fits the rules.  The anonymous part is shaky though.

[MediumTex]

MT,

In case you take me up on my offer above and before I know what your experiment is, here is my plan for the next five days to avoid being killed.  I will purchase and use a <=$500 ticket, anonomously and tell no one about it.  I will take a cruise or flight or bus trip or train trip for a week, then return; or alternately, I'll find a cheap flea bag motel not near me and tell no one what my plans are; I'll hang out there for the week.  If I go the bus/air/train/cruise route, I'm assuming since I have to eat regardless, my food funds will not go toward the $500 anti-death allotment. 

... Mountaineer

Edit:  my normal routine includes travel, sometimes alone, so I think my case fits the rules.  The anonymous part is shaky though.

That doesn't sound like your normal routine, but in any case it's the normal routine of the hypothetical person that matters, and he doesn't travel during the five days in question.  He stays close to home, but goes to work, does recreational activities, etc.  You are simply equipping him to survive the incident that would otherwise kill him.

[MediumTex]

MT,

I'm not sure I can "validate" your experiment but I'd be glad to see what you are doing in advance, and I won't spill the beans to anyone.  I will verify that you are playing by the rules you specified, to the best of my ability.

... Mountaineer

dragoncar is the referee.

[dualstow]

but their behavior will not be out of sync with things you read about in the paper all of the time.

I suppose this is the key to getting out of this. MT knows something statistically significant about how people are getting killed. Like, they didn't lock their windows or something.

Does spending $500 on plastic surgery to look like Johnny Carson or the Dalai Lama count as altering my routine if I still go about my business?

I'm sure the answer's got to be less obvious, but I'm sure I would stretch the $500 as far as I can toward a Glock and some light body armor, say a stab vest. I have no idea how much these things cost, though. Oh, and bear spray. Bear spray is just $30.

[Mountaineer]

MT,

In case you take me up on my offer above and before I know what your experiment is, here is my plan for the next five days to avoid being killed.  I will purchase and use a <=$500 ticket, anonomously and tell no one about it.  I will take a cruise or flight or bus trip or train trip for a week, then return; or alternately, I'll find a cheap flea bag motel not near me and tell no one what my plans are; I'll hang out there for the week.  If I go the bus/air/train/cruise route, I'm assuming since I have to eat regardless, my food funds will not go toward the $500 anti-death allotment. 

... Mountaineer

Edit:  my normal routine includes travel, sometimes alone, so I think my case fits the rules.  The anonymous part is shaky though.

That doesn't sound like your normal routine, but in any case it's the normal routine of the hypothetical person that matters, and he doesn't travel during the five days in question.  He stays close to home, but goes to work, does recreational activities, etc.  You are simply equipping him to survive the incident that would otherwise kill him.

You would not be changing the rules mid-stream would you?  LOL.  Can I use the bomb shelter in my home to escape to?  I - the one built during the cold war that we did a lot of trial runs in for > 5 days at a time?  Also, I had previously published in the local rag that I'd be away from home on a vacation, diversion tactic, on a slow boat to China - I am hoping to lure to assassin away on that slow boat - a double protection strategy. 

If you would like to play another thought experiment when this one has run its course, how many uses can you think of for a coat hanger? 

... Mountaineer

[MediumTex]

but their behavior will not be out of sync with things you read about in the paper all of the time.

I suppose this is the key to getting out of this. MT knows something statistically significant about how people are getting killed. Like, they didn't lock their windows or something.

Does spending $500 on plastic surgery to look like Johnny Carson or the Dalai Lama count as altering my routine if I still go about my business?

No disguises.  You are a sitting duck.  You must take defensive measures that will allow you to survive even though you are easily identified.

I'm sure the answer's got to be less obvious...

It might be more or less obvious, though I want to emphasize that the defensive measure(s) that would be effective are straightforward.  You just have to really think about what it is you're trying to do with your $500.

The answer also isn't to commit suicide before you get killed.

There are potentially many defensive measures that could work, but I just had a particular one in mind.  It isn't necessary to pick the same one I picked, but the defensive measure(s) you select must actually be effective in keeping you from getting killed.

[MediumTex]

The real purpose of the exercise is to reveal things about the way you think about risk that you might not be aware of (or maybe you are aware of them and your answer will demonstrate that).

In other words, this is not a pointless exercise with an answer that teaches us nothing.

BTW, I sent all of the information to dragoncar.  He can chime in if he believes that the scenario and defensive measure(s) are not realistic.  If he thinks the experiment needs to be modified, I will modify it.

[Mountaineer]

The real purpose of the exercise is to reveal things about the way you think about risk that you might not be aware of (or maybe you are aware of them and your answer will demonstrate that).

In other words, this is not a pointless exercise with an answer that teaches us nothing.

BTW, I sent all of the information to dragoncar.  He can chime in if he believes that the scenario and defensive measure(s) are not realistic.  If he thinks the experiment needs to be modified, I will modify it.

Works for me.  I am usually defensive in my approach to risk (i.e. investing choices - I'm in retirement so it is important to maintain or grow slowly what I have rather than go for that last incremental return with higher risk).  I also do not bungee jump or motocross race, nor do I have a desire to climb Mt. Everest.  I wear seat belts 100%.  I base my vehicle selections on reliability, durability and safety as well as other stuff.  I do not engage in activities that would cause my wife to get overly upset - I do want to keep her around.  I love my kids and show them in many ways that I do (not only is it the right thing to do, but they might have to change my diapers someday  ).  I have been a "manage risk, think of consequences AND probability" type person since my twenties (did a lot of hairy stuff prior to that for which I'm thankful I was not killed) after some maturity and wisdom kicked in.  I have found life to be way more fun and rewarding with all my body parts and marriage intact.  Thus, I chose a defensive method for my anti-assassin thought experiment.  It will be interesting to see how others approach the experiment.

... Mountaineer

[MediumTex]

You would not be changing the rules mid-stream would you?  LOL.  Can I use the bomb shelter in my home to escape to?  I - the one built during the cold war that we did a lot of trial runs in for > 5 days at a time?  Also, I had previously published in the local rag that I'd be away from home on a vacation, diversion tactic, on a slow boat to China - I am hoping to lure to assassin away on that slow boat - a double protection strategy. 

You're doing the "I want to know where I will die so that I can make sure never to go there" strategy.  You can't do that. 

You've got to just stick to exactly what you would otherwise do during those five days,  and you've got $500 to spend on defensive measures to protect you while you're following your normal routine.

[Mountaineer]

You would not be changing the rules mid-stream would you?  LOL.  Can I use the bomb shelter in my home to escape to?  I - the one built during the cold war that we did a lot of trial runs in for > 5 days at a time?  Also, I had previously published in the local rag that I'd be away from home on a vacation, diversion tactic, on a slow boat to China - I am hoping to lure to assassin away on that slow boat - a double protection strategy. 

You're doing the "I want to know where I will die so that I can make sure never to go there" strategy.  You can't do that. 

You've got to just stick to exactly what you would otherwise do during those five days,  and you've got $500 to spend on defensive measures to protect you while you're following your normal routine.

Letter of law or intent?  I NEVER do EXACTLY the same thing for any five day period of my life (that I remember), not even breath the same.

Please clarify.  I am taking it from the description of the experiment, you are making it black and white - zero grey area?  If not, please explain the boundaries more clearly.  And, I'm really not trying to be a butt.  I had a physical chemistry teacher that required four decimal place accuracy and no calculators allowed (the math had to be all long hand) - 4 very difficult questions on each of his tests and you either made 100%, 75%, 50%, 25% or 0% - no curve either.  I'm sensitive to exact instructions if that is what is being proclaimed for the rules.

... Mountaineer

[MediumTex]

Letter of law or intent?  I NEVER do EXACTLY the same thing for any five day period of my life (that I remember), not even breath the same.

Please clarify.  I am taking it from the description of the experiment, you are making it black and white - zero grey area?  If not, please explain the boundaries more clearly.  And, I'm really not trying to be a butt.  I had a physical chemistry teacher that required four decimal place accuracy and no calculators allowed (the math had to be all long hand) - 4 very difficult questions on each of his tests and you either made 100%, 75%, 50%, 25% or 0% - no curve either.  I'm sensitive to exact instructions if that is what is being proclaimed for the rules.

... Mountaineer

Just assume you are following a normal routine for the hypothetical person who you are trying to keep from being killed.  I told you what kind of person he is in the OP. 

He goes to work every day.  He goes to the store.  He might go to the movies or the mall.  He might go to a concert or a sporting event.  He drives his car most places.  He goes places alone and with his family.

He doesn't disappear for five days while hiding in a bomb shelter. 

Just visualize five days in the life of the person I described if he weren't about to get killed, and just stick with that routine.  If you have to make an extra trip to the store to spend part of your $500 that's fine, but you can't take a five day trip to India to get a $500 protection spell from a 125 year old yogi.

[Mountaineer]

Letter of law or intent?  I NEVER do EXACTLY the same thing for any five day period of my life (that I remember), not even breath the same.

Please clarify.  I am taking it from the description of the experiment, you are making it black and white - zero grey area?  If not, please explain the boundaries more clearly.  And, I'm really not trying to be a butt.  I had a physical chemistry teacher that required four decimal place accuracy and no calculators allowed (the math had to be all long hand) - 4 very difficult questions on each of his tests and you either made 100%, 75%, 50%, 25% or 0% - no curve either.  I'm sensitive to exact instructions if that is what is being proclaimed for the rules.

... Mountaineer

Just assume you are following a normal routine for the hypothetical person who you are trying to keep from being killed.  I told you what kind of person he is in the OP. 

He goes to work every day.  He goes to the store.  He might go to the movies or the mall.  He might go to a concert or a sporting event.  He drives his car most places.  He goes places alone and with his family.

He doesn't disappear for five days while hiding in a bomb shelter. 

Just visualize five days in the life of the person I described if he weren't about to get killed, and just stick with that routine.  If you have to make an extra trip to the store to spend part of your $500 that's fine, but you can't take a five day trip to India to get a $500 protection spell from a 125 year old yogi.

I think the part I'm struggling with revolves around the potential victim knowing he is going to have a killer come after him for 5 days.  That would COMPLETELY change his routine if he is sane or does not have a death wish for some strange reason, thus the boundary conditions are not realistic.  My opinion only.

... Mountaineer

[Cortopassi]

My first thought was buy a gun.  But I need to sleep and I can't stay up five days continuously, so there would be times I am vulnerable, not that I have Seal sharpshooting training anyway.  So a gun or other defensive weapon seems out.

My next thought was hire a bodyguard/protection firm to shadow me, however $500 may not cover that for 5 days, and I am unsure if that breaks the "routine" rule.

I originally thought any attempt would come at close range, knife/pistol/bat, etc. But I could also be under threat from a sharpshooter from half a mile away, which will be damn near impossible to protect from if my routine is normal. 

In the end, since I am not able to effectively protect myself 24 hours a day for 5 days without severely changing my routine or going insane from lack of sleep, I would hire some protection for 5 days.  Let me know if the $500 is not likely to cover that.

[WiseOne]

MT, I hope you'll soon reveal just what this little exercise is about, but ok I will play along in the meantime.  I assume that 1) once you get past the designated kill-me day, you're 100% safe again, 2) you aren't being closely monitored during the entire time period, and 3) the family is in no danger?

My reaction was similar to Mountaineer's:  I'd take a week off work and go disappear somewhere.  There are lots of ways to do this, but methods that are less traceable than others are preferred and happily they are likely to come in well under the $500 budget.  Bus or local train that enables you to pay in cash and travel without showing ID or putting your name on the ticket.  Take backpacking gear and disappear into some backcountry area that doesn't require a permit.

[iwealth]

Out of curiosity, are these $500 worth of supplies only useful to prevent your death if you KNOW the killer is coming for you? Or after this exercise is over and we learn what makes up the $500 worth of life saving supplies, should we all be going out and buying this stuff to have around for everyday protection?

Maybe the answer to the second question would give away too much info.

[Pointedstick]

Okay, given the conditions, I am probably in the age range of 25-44. According to the CDC, the biggest death risk by far for males in this age range is "unintentional injury." But a condition of this thought experiment is that it must be intentional. The most common intentional death for males in this age range is homicide by firearm. Most of these murder weapons are going to be handguns. The race of the potential victim isn't specified, and that matters. If I'm a black man, my risk of being killed in a gangland shooting--either as the intended target or a bystander--is much higher than if I am white or hispanic. But let's assume I'm a white man who lives in a pretty typical safe suburb who has no contact with gang members.

So I need to spend $500 to avoid being murdered by a person with a handgun, and I can't significantly alter my routine to prevent it.

So… defensive measures. I could easily buy a level IIIA bulletproof vest that will reliably stop all handgun bullets and be concealable beneath my normal clothes and wearable while I'm sleeping. But that seems too obvious, and it doesn't prevent me being shot in the head or the leg or something. Especially if the first shot to the torso is ineffective, any subsequent shots will undoubtedly be to unprotected areas. That won't work.

But most murders aren't totally random. Probably what happens is that I get mugged and killed while trying to resist because I panic or have a surge of adrenaline or something, and do something stupid that culminates in my death.

So here's what I'm going to to. I'm going to take $250 and keep it on me in cash. I'm going to use $20 to buy a prepaid cell phone, and load what remains ($230) onto a prepaid ATM card protected with a PIN of my choosing. If I get mugged, I will give the mugger the $250 and tell him that if he lets me live and walk away otherwise unharmed, he will get the ATM card and the cell phone, and in exactly one hour, I will call the cell phone and give him the PIN so he can withdraw the rest from any ATM. That gives him a strong incentive to leave me alive. I am $500 poorer but alive, and my life goes on.

[Pet Hog]

The key to solving this puzzle seems to be that the death will be so ordinary that it wouldn't get written up in the local paper.  So no death during a mugging or some shooting incident.  I'm thinking a car crash; we know this man drives everywhere.  MT says the thought experiment is about risk, so we can rethink the question to what could this fellow (or any of us) do relatively cheaply to minimize his chances of dying in the next five days even if he weren't about to be killed by an unknown assassin.  I'm going to say the potential victim should take his car for a tune-up (new brakes, tires, and wheel alignment -- something like that) and in the meantime take the bus to work for a few days if necessary (he lives near a big city so there should be public transportation, and bus travel is probably less risky than driving).

[Pointedstick]

It could get written up in the newspaper. From the original post: "What happens to you is sad, but it's not something that would get more than local news coverage (if it got any coverage at all)."

[Lowe]

The key to solving this puzzle seems to be that the death will be so ordinary that it wouldn't get written up in the local paper.  So no death during a mugging or some shooting incident.  I'm thinking a car crash; we know this man drives everywhere.  MT says the thought experiment is about risk, so we can rethink the question to what could this fellow (or any of us) do relatively cheaply to minimize his chances of dying in the next five days even if he weren't about to be killed by an unknown assassin.  I'm going to say the potential victim should take his car for a tune-up (new brakes, tires, and wheel alignment -- something like that) and in the meantime take the bus to work for a few days if necessary (he lives near a big city so there should be public transportation, and bus travel is probably less risky than driving).

How likely is it that someone intentionally wrecks into your car?  Risk is the product of probability and value.  Since the value is a constant (our life) we only care about probability.  What intended, violent death is most common for white males in the 25 to 44 demographic?  Murder by spouse gets my vote.

However, one can condition the probability with whatever events constitute your personality, lifestyle, and associations, which is probably what the scenario is meant to address.  Who do you think is most likely to kill you?

[Xan]

What I've learned from TV is that the most likely person to kill me is somebody who appeared early on but was never suspected, then five other people were suspected before things pointed back to this person.