For my part of the HoPC project I am researching the efficacy of systems in place to detect and prevent serial killers/killings. Also, I am looking at the broader impact of improvements to this controversy and why it matters to the general public. The research includes data analytics and government special forces that focus on specific serial killers. Whether they are effective or not is a key piece of this controversy because it lends itself to whether there should be more effort to properly identifying key factors that may lead to a serial killer or serial killings. The second part of my research has to do more with the analysis of the whole controversy. Why it is a public controversy, and what are the lasting implications of better serial killer identification and prevention programs. From the research one can conclude that the benefit of better systems in place not only will keep serial killers off of the streets but also provide better systems to identify abusive relationships and mental illness. A common theme that occurs among serial killers is some sort of mental illness or abusive relationship so better serial killer detection could lead to better mental health diagnoses. With mental illness affecting so many people better diagnosis could better the quality of life for many U.S citizens which can apply directly to the average person. The type of evidence that I would need are arguments for systems in place by the government working to catch serial killers and not working. This will present the idea that these systems are controversial and can be not effective. Some limitations that might arise when researching this material is the relevancy of it. When the arguments and research are crucial to this controversy because since most systems in place are based upon serial killer trends when the system is analyzed may lead to it being more accurate or not. Therefore a system from the early 2000’s may not be effective but that same system in 2019 could be because of the added data to the algorithms.