Abacus

could be capably managed when the need arose. A top military general and a high ranking federal police officer headed the group. Each decade the charter for the Civil Disturbance Group changed on a needs basis to address the challenges of a rapidly growing population. In the late eighties the group became more focused on preparing Americans for the challenges of the future. All forecasts pointed to an escalation in civil unrest and crimes of violence as the rapidly increasing population put resources including oil, food and water under severe pressure.
    On the twenty-ninth of April, nineteen ninety- two, the Los Angeles riots ripped through the city, following the not guilty verdicts of the police who were alleged to have beaten Rodney King. Both the CDG and National Guard were activated to quell the five days of rioting. In the aftermath of the melee, fifty people had been killed, four thousand injured, twelve thousand arrested, and the damage bill was estimated beyond a billion dollars. It was evident that authorities had become incapable of stopping the violence as innocent people were assaulted, killed and robbed.
    As a direct result of t he LA riots, the following year in nineteen ninety-three, the Civil Disturbance Group was reduced to a smaller cell, still headed by a military general and police chief. The reduction in size of the CDG allowed them to covertly undertake a highly secretive assignment. The CDG were tasked to secretly “cleanse” society of violent individuals in order to reduce the impact of incidents of anarchy and unrest in the future. America’s inability to control these individuals during times of unrest made it a necessity. The CDG operated under total immunity from prosecution, had an unlimited budget, limitless powers, unrestricted access to information, and were answerable to no one. In order to achieve their mission, it had to be this way.
    The CDG were provided with their own intelligence team known as the Abacus. The Abacus consisted of analysts with both financial and intelligence backgrounds. The Abacus devised the formulae used to identify the targets for CDG to terminate.
    The formulae sel ected targets were based on their pre-disposition for violence. Violence was chosen as the baseline as it was a common trait that all rioters and serious offenders shared. Violence also came at a huge cost in terms of financial burden to the community. These costs included court costs, criminal compensation, and costs associated with the rehabilitation of victims. Once the offender was incarcerated there were huge costs associated with jail upkeep. As the target continued to offend, the cost to the community escalates.
    The Abacus determined tha t on the balance of probability the offender had a reliance on drugs or alcohol, meaning they had an above average reliance on the public health system. Their dependence meant that many were unemployed so also relied heavily on government benefits for income.

    The Abacus found that it was highly probable the offender would breed. It is also likely that the offspring would be raised in a less than favourable environment, being regularly exposed to violence and dysfunctional behaviour. Combining these environmental factors with the DNA strand from the father the Abacus concluded that there was a very strong likelihood that the trend towards violence and offending would become cyclic, meaning the burden to society would continue from generation to generation.
    On ce the Abacus had identified a target it was the role of the CDG to terminate the individual. The CDG were so successful in their mission that there was a marked decrease in serious crime involving violence with public order issues becoming more manageable. The CDG were now positively influencing the make-up of future generations by culling violent individuals who stood to stifle advancement.
    America’s closest allies , who shared similar lifestyles and values, included the United Kingdom, Israel, Australia and New Zealand. During secret top-level meetings all of these countries were invited to join the Civil Disturbance Group initiative. Seeing the overwhelming benefits of the program, they embraced what it had to offer and were all included on one condition. The condition being that they accepted CDG’s non-negotiable oversighting role, effectively bypassing government intervention.
    Australia op erated under the assumed name, Deliver Live, and like the USA model were headed by a