The victim protests that it is not fair when it is her own fate that is at stake, not when another person might be selected. The character's in Jackson's town are named, and have more distinguishing characteristics than the vague protagonists of Omelas. But because they are so utterly unaware of the moral consequences of their actions, the reader does not feel much compassion towards them, unlike the residents of Omelas who understand that their basis of happiness is morally corrupt. The residents of Omelas are all forced, by the laws of their society, to acknowledge the horror, and some even go back willingly to see the suffering and ignored child, to remind themselves of the basis of their happiness.

Jackson's residents are also more recognizably American, and like the reader's own neighbors, which make the story more terrifying, but also makes the central contention of the town seem more outrageous and unjust. The mob mentality is clearly misguided, and nothing will come of the woman's murder. The never-never land scenario of Omelas convinces the reader...

But because she says it is not fair, clearly what she means is that someone else should die, not that everyone should live and the lottery should cease. The basis of Omelas relies on an anonymous, unknown person's suffering, which makes the fact the community allows such suffering easier to understand -- for it seems to more perfectly mirror our own tolerance of suffering in a contemporary context.
Works Cited

Jackson, Shirley. "The Lottery." 26 Feb 2007. http://www.americanliterature.com/SS/SS16.htmL

Le Guin, Ursula. "The Ones that Walk Away from Omelas. http://www.cbe.wwu.edu/dunn/rprnts.omelas.pdf