Are there any ethicians who portray murder as essentially a victimless crime?
Non-existence is per definition harmless since there is no one to be harmed.
Of course there are certain circumstances in which murder can bring harm. Suffering family members being the main the thing. But murder in itself harms no one. If you walk up to a hermit who doesn't know anyone in his sleep and you shoot him in the head there is no victim.
i like how op chose a pic that emphasizes diversity so all peoples and identities feel welcome, sort of like when a college brochure has a picture of an engineering lab there's always a smiling negro and a chick in a hijab instead of some white nerd and bunch of hindu stinklords like it actually do be
idk abt murda but piracy a victimless crime, now who got that new rihanna?
Death is always painful, and there is much harm to be done there.
Being shot is the most common, but a painless shoot through the head is rare, and people usually remain conscious for painful seconds (or minutes in rare cases) after being shot in the head, even a lifetime if they're "lucky". They only case of a possible painless death is with a very precise shoot, or with a lot of drugs in the hospital.
If you slip someone into a barbiturate coma and then add muscle relaxant to halt respiration they don't even notice.
Your objections are valid in a lot of situations though, but they aren't a criticism of murder itself so much as suboptimal methods.