People do evil things, but they argue they do them for reasons they believe are justified, or because they believe, they are doing good, not evil.
How about the NRA? Some gun-owners think they do good, because they defend their right (constitutional or delusional) to hunt coyotes with an AK-47; "it's so much fun!"
But do the NRA lobbyists do good, when they try to protect human rights abusers in other countries, by lobbying to block the Arms Trade Treaty now before Congress? NRA lobbyists call it a "UN gun grab," and try to scare
Congressmen, claiming it will enable the UN to confiscate weapons from US citizens. It won't; it's an international treaty to prevent weapons sales to rogue groups and countries, not individuals within nations; it's meant to regulate arms traders between countries, especially the ones selling to terrorists, torturers and tyrants. The NRA just wants to sell guns.
What about the oil companies lobbying to complete the Keystone XL pipeline, or to expand drilling operations, or to prevent regulation of fracking? Do they, or their lobbyists really believe that there is no such thing as global warming, no impact from burning more and more oil and no environmental damage? In the film, Promised Land, the Land Manager acted by Matt Damon, sells farmers on the chance they'll make a financial killing by signing on to his gas company's fracking project. Then he has second thoughts: fracking can do permanent damage to the water supply, as well as causing air pollution. The film confronts the issue of consequences, and whether it's ethical for companies to ignore them in pursuit of profit. Matt's co-worker continues selling gas-drilling leases, saying, "It's only a job."
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission proposes selling off scrap metals with low levels of radioactivity, assuring the public it's safe. Yet, the UN has recently concluded: because background radiation has increased world-wide--from weapons tests, nuclear accidents, etc.--no added level of radiation is safe. Yet, the NRC, and its clients, the nuclear power industry, have a problem: millions of tons of waste cost millions to store, but could earn millions to sell. So, NRC regulators say 'it's safe.'
What these, and other possible examples, demonstrate is an inability of corporate or government decision-makers to distinguish between corporate economic interest (profits) and public wellbeing: the latter concept has become almost antique.
Meanwhile, cancer rates skyrocket, storms increase their destructiveness, guns kill thousands, cheap food kills more through obesity, and the US is only exceptional in all of these ills.
No, it's exceptional also for killing more outside its borders than anyone else. World civilization is murderous, especially from corporate obsession with profit.
Repeal of Citizens United is only a first step. Either corporations are tamed, or they and their owners, will drive world civilization to extinction.
Afternote: the connection between killing and corporations are the profits they earn from wars, any wars, and any guns, anywhere.
As for the NRC: it's a government agency, but it, like most other government institutions, is in thrall to the corporations it is supposed to be overseeing.
Corporate power/influence is why we make no progress on global warming, and little on disarming, or gun control, or any of a host of other problems that provide profits for some well-placed corporations: they defend their interests, regardless of morality.