The rise in lethal violence in the Republic has taken place against a backdrop of declining crime but studies show that such relentlessly rising violence is not an inevitable part of the modern condition, writes Ian O'Donnell.
In an interesting book published 20 years ago, the US criminologist Freda Adler described Ireland as a "nation not obsessed with crime". Other countries which received this plaudit included Switzerland, Costa Rica and Japan.
Low-crime countries shared a number of characteristics. Their criminal justice systems were popular and seen as legitimate. A strong network of social controls was in place, revolving around the family and religion. These were seen to maintain, generate and transmit shared values. There was powerful pressure to conform.
The theory was that loosening the ties which bind in family, community and church created an environment where the brakes on crime were released. Prof Adler would hardly recognise Ireland if she visited today.
The news media are saturated with crime stories. Expenditure on law enforcement and punishment has swollen to an unprecedented level. The public is convulsed by periodic bouts of anxiety and anger.
It could perhaps be said that Ireland has developed a crime complex, but has the country really become a more brutal place?
The shocking fact is that 2002 was the bloodiest year since the Garda Síochána's annual report on crime first appeared in 1947. There were 62 killings in 2002 compared with 27 in 1982 and 12 in 1962.
To get a true picture of the level of lethal criminal activity, we must add to this death toll the number killed on the roads by drunk, speeding or careless drivers and the workplace deaths which result from employers' negligence.
The level of homicide surged in the mid- 1990s and has remained high since.
When detailed comparative data become available for 2002, they are likely to reveal that Dublin has become a more deadly city than London and that the national rate has crept closer to the EU average.
What do we know about those who lost their lives through homicide last year? While a comprehensive analysis has not been published, it is possible to glean some useful details from an examination of newspaper reports. We learn, for example, that killings were spread evenly over the year. There was no discernible monthly or seasonal variation.
Victims were predominantly male (over 85 per cent) and young (average age 34). Stabbing was the most common method. Around half a dozen of the dead were non-nationals. Racial motivation was suspected in two of these cases. A typical incident involved a young man stabbing another young man after an alcohol-fuelled row or a criminal gang exacting retribution by bullet.
Women, children and the elderly were at low risk.
Death has a distinctive geography. There was a strong urban bias, with almost 60 per cent of homicides taking place in Dublin. This is more than would be expected on the basis of population alone. There were significant clusters in Cork and Limerick. Elsewhere killings were rare and most counties will end the year homicide-free.
The rise in lethal violence has taken place against a backdrop of declining crime. The number of serious offences recorded by An Garda Síochána fell for five years in succession beginning in 1996. This was largely because of a reduction in the high volume offences of theft and burglary.
This trend has been related to the improved economic climate, the wider availability of methadone in Dublin and the slowing down of the prison's revolving door. Heroin addicts can be prolific, if petty, offenders when left untreated and at liberty.
The overall reduction in crime appears to have been halted last year, although a change in the way the figures are presented makes it difficult to interpret recent developments.
The rise in lethal violence has occurred despite the largest prison-building programme in the history of the State. This calls into question the strength of the relationship between imprisonment and violent crime and should prompt us to think seriously about just and cost-effective ways to create a safer society.
To conclude, it is worth offering a historical footnote. There can be little doubt that life was much cheaper in the distant past. The homicide rate today, although the highest for several generations, is lower than at any time in the 19th century. Taking account of population differences, the rate was almost three times as high 150 years ago.
Some historians of the Victorian period write of a culture of "recreational violence". Trials of strength were one of the few ways for the increasing proportion of single men to achieve status in their communities.
Contemporary studies emphasise the extent to which violence ensues when marginalised young men believe that they are being shown disrespect.
It is possible that the pursuit of status - perhaps through involvement in the drug trade - and the desire to establish a reputation for toughness have contributed to the development of a code of violence in some of our urban areas.
On a more positive note, the current upswing in killing may be a temporary deviation from a long-term trend towards pacification in our relations with each other.
There has been a spectacular decline in homicide in the US over the past 20 years. In 2000 there were 15,500 homicides compared with 23,000 in 1980. This shows that relentlessly rising violence is not an inevitable part of the modern condition.
Dr Ian O'Donnell is deputy director of the Institute of Criminology at the law faculty, University College Dublin.