Researchers in leisure studies know this better than most, possibly. Street fighting, or brawling at football matches, has been described as pleasurable by some of the participants. My own view is that large numbers of ordinary people find violence pleasurable too, even if it is watching the violence of others, or scoring some sort of points over rivals. There is a whole semi-secret area here which is badly in need of research. More generally, there has been a great deal of interest in the social causes or distribution of violence.
Personal violence seems to be associated with young urban males, for example.
You can often here or read debates about the relative weights to be attached to social conditions, and individual responsibilities in these cases. Yet, despite the doubts of experts and analysts about these influences, the police and judiciary, the main organs of the State in these matters still seem to operate with a straightforward view that violent action arises from some individual moral flaw. Among the many ironies, of course, the vigilantes were enthusiastically recommending and pleasurably imagining personal, sometimes sadistic, violence against people who had themselves committed such violence against children. This is another popular area for debate, of course, and people tend to have strong views for and against. I want to argue that this issue is more complicated than it looks again.