To be or not to be?

Through Hamlet, Shakespeare may be showing what he thinks makes a killer by illustrating the Prince of Denmark as a killer's antipathy. We know Hamlet is an educated man, he has gone to school for awhile His wiliness shows with his witty execution of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. He clearly thinks things out from beginning to end, logically. It's his logic that allows him to second guess killing a person. He has ample opportunity to kill Claudius, but he hesitates. Hamlet would rather kill him when he's not praying. He finds a reason not to kill a person through reason. He even finds an excuse not to kill himself in his 'to be or not to be' soliloquy. He reasons that killing oneself is a great risk because he doesn't know what's coming afterward. He realizes the finality of death is too frightening to do it. The tragedy of Hamlet is the effects of his logic and reasoning causing him to hesitate. Each failed attempt at action has a natural consequence. Imagine if Hamlet would have dispatched Claudius during his phony prayer. Polonius probably would have lived; so would have Ophelia, Laertes, Gertrude and even Hamlet himself if he would have killed Claudius at that momemnt. Because of that hesitation to act, as many of us might have, there commences a terrible chain of events that costs many more lives than was necessary. It might be why we identify well with Hamlet. His hesitations are natural, but sometimes that hesitation comes with a steep price.