Our evolutionary past seems to have little precedent for the modern conception of society which is so sprawling as to resist our brains best efforts to apprehend it. Even now, people behave very differently within the confines of small, tribal units than they do in the context of vast, impersonal "society," a word whose modern definition has stretched to include all seven billion members or our species. If the "us" you describe is an inherent feature of human thinking, we must also admit that it implies a separate "them" that describes those who exist outside our known circle of friends and family.
Charles,
"The killed person was probably no better than the killer." is a bit of a stretch. I haven't read up on the circumstances of this murder but I find it hard to believe that the victim was no better than the perpetrator. This wasn't a battlefield where it is soldier vs. soldier but Portland (?), OR and an apparent bullet hole through a bedroom window.
On the other hand, you do have a point. Legendary film director, Alfred Hitchcock once remarked that it is very difficult to kill a human being. I believe he said that after making "Torn Curtain" (view the killing in that film and you get an idea of what he means). However, if trained humans can kill and kill effectively.
I've read Thomas "life is short, nasty & brutish" Hobbes. Not sure I agree. It is far too complicated to draw a conclusion here. There are plenty of decent and heroic soldiers, police officers etc. who loathe killing a human (American Generals Sherman & Grant HATED combat/battle/war). At the end of the day, I don't conclude that people that harm or kill effectively are necessarily malelovent or have "killer instincts".
So you are certain about the victim. Tell that to people who are hurt because they report crimes. The punks who drove through my neighborhood randomly shooting at houses were former neighbors who were pissed because the rest of us were fed up with their criminal activity. Shame on us for calling the cops.
But keep your myths that most people are unable to kill, if that makes it easier for you to sleep at night.
"The killed person was probably no better than the killer." is a bit of a stretch. I haven't read up on the circumstances of this murder but I find it hard to believe that the victim was no better than the perpetrator. This wasn't a battlefield where it is soldier vs. soldier but Portland (?), OR and an apparent bullet hole through a bedroom window.
On the other hand, you do have a point. Legendary film director, Alfred Hitchcock once remarked that it is very difficult to kill a human being. I believe he said that after making "Torn Curtain" (view the killing in that film and you get an idea of what he means). However, if trained humans can kill and kill effectively.
I've read Thomas "life is short, nasty & brutish" Hobbes. Not sure I agree. It is far too complicated to draw a conclusion here. There are plenty of decent and heroic soldiers, police officers etc. who loathe killing a human (American Generals Sherman & Grant HATED combat/battle/war). At the end of the day, I don't conclude that people that harm or kill effectively are necessarily malelovent or have "killer instincts".
The kid was killed in a gang shootout, which implies that he was involved with gangs in some way.
Killers aren't born, they're made.