+1

I was once flipping through TV channels and paused at a scene from an old western movie in which one man was close to kill another. I felt some comfort in how the reaction of another guy, supported the normal and very basic sense of justice I keep wondering why people strayed  away from. He told the first if you do it I would see that you get hanged for it, or something like that.

He did not tell him I will check and see if you premeditated the killing I will hang you for it. Look how much this feels closer to the self . So where did all those second degree murder laws come from? At least some old arguments suggesting inequality in human blood based on benefit to society and the like, while abhorrent to the senses, had on the face some logical basis for their support. Here, on the other hand, there is nothing except for favoring whoever commits the killing first. I don't understand what kind of sense of justice allows the carrying of the burden of for example somebody's becoming suddenly angry to shoot someone else to death on the victim? Who would have thought that from the old time where the less privileged needed to be seen equal in humanity one day one's need to defend that equality would extend to merely being the victim?