Most murders are done in the heat of the moment where fear of punishment is immaterial. Another swing and a miss.<quoted text>Being able to follow orders of intentionality is crucial to surviving abduction and/or rape for a victim.
" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intentionality&q... ;
I'm sure the Ohio trio are proof of that ability existing in one or all of them.
FYI, "willing" and "able" are two different things. All humans are capable of murder, emotionally, but fear the possibility of being caught and punished.
And, you are wrong that all humans are capable of murder, emotionally.
Extensive studies have been done on this.
Hope on the Battlefield
By Lt. Col. Dave Grossman
Military leaders know a secret: The vast majority of people are overwhelmingly reluctant to take a human life.
During World War II, U.S. Army Brigadier General S.L.A. Marshall asked average soldiers how they conducted themselves in battle. Before that, it had always been assumed that the average soldier would kill in combat simply because his country and his leaders had told him to do so, and because it might be essential to defend his own life and the lives of his friends.
Marshalls singularly unexpected discovery was that, of every hundred men along the line of fire during the combat period, an average of only 15 to 20 would take any part with their weapons. This was consistently true,whether the action was spread over a day, or two days, or three.
Marshall was a U.S. Army historian in the Pacific theater during World War II and later became the official U.S. historian of the European theater of operations. He had a team of historians working for him, and they based their findings on individual and mass interviews with thousands of soldiers in more than 400 infantry companies immediately after they had been in close combat with German or Japanese troops. The results were consistently the same: Only 15 to 20 percent of the American riflemen in combat during World War II would fire at the enemy. Those who would not fire did not run or hidein many cases they were willing to risk greater danger to rescue comrades, get ammunition, or run messages. They simply would not fire their weapons at the enemy, even when faced with repeated waves of banzai charges.
Why did these men fail to fire? As a historian, psychologist, and soldier, I examined this question and studied the process of killing in combat. I have realized that there was one major factor missing from the common understanding of this process, a factor that answers this question and more: the simple and demonstrable fact that there is, within most men and women, an intense resistance to killing other people. A resistance so strong that, in many circumstances, soldiers on the battlefield will die before they can overcome it.
So far, you haven't been right yet. Tomorrow, figure out what time zones are then try Opposite Day.