It looks like we've taken two paths here. First, what contstitutes human? And second, what does killing have to do with the concept of being human? If I missed something, please add it in. In my eyes, or as far as this question is concern, biological processes are the least important factor. But, if you are looking at biology and discussing "human" ie homosapien, it's different from having a heartbeat and breathing. Let me preface this by saying I am not comparing Jacob to any animal mentioned beyond the differences in biology. In the strictest definition, Jacob is not human. Human refers to genus and species. Just as a a lion is different from house cat or a human is different from a gorilla. The are the same family, but different organism. He has a different chromosome count than we do (24 vs 23), separate biology (body temperature, healing ability, scent reactions etc), different abilities (agility, speed, strength again like a gorilla is much stronger and faster than a human). Strictly speaking, Jacob is not human.
Although, going on those factors, he and the pack are, in fact, closer to human than Edward and the vampires. The wolves would have an easier time blending into the human world, being able to stop their phasing, control that process. Also, there are fewer "tells" for lack of a better term (skin, eyes, cold body etc) Vampires have 25 chromosomal pairs and cannot alter their state at all. So, biologically speaking yes, Jacob and the wolves are far more human.
But, I've already said, as it relates to this question (and to me in general) biology has very little to do with it. I suppose what I truly meant was more humane, holding on to their humanity. So, consequently, killing and or your attitude towards it has a huge impact on how I see things. As Edward says, thou shalt not kill is commonly accepted as one of the rules we follow. And, do we not call the people who kill without just cause (ie direct threat to self or others) "inhuman"? Regardless of how the wolves view the vampires, regardless of their prejudices or biases, none of the Cullens ever posed a direct threat to Jacob, the pack or anyone else. Other than as a direct result of what they are (something which they have all proven then turn their back on), there is no reason for the pack to be threatened by them. Yes, I understand that Jacob perceived them as a threat to Bella's life. It's something we differ on, I'm sure. But, it was the fate she chose. When he threatens Edward, tells him he will kill him, there is no "threat", simply a choice with which he doesn't agree. When he intends to attack the Cullens, he believes her to be dead already. So what is he protecting? That would be vengence, not protection. Again, when he intends to kill both Edward & Renesmee, he believes Bella to be dead, knows that Edward intends to die anyway and knows absolutely nothing of Renessmee. Vengence, not protection. I do not fault Jacob for his feelings towards them. I can understand his pain. But, it is his intentions and actions that I look at. By those actions, he could be seen as less in touch with his humanity, less humane, less human.
The question of age and responsibility for one's actions, I think, is a little bit of an excuse. We expect children as young as a year old to understand the word no. We punish children as young as 2 or 3 for misbehavior. I would certainly expect a 17 year old young man to know that killing is wrong. It is easy to say they were young and didn't know what they were doing. But, think about Jacob's ride to the Cullens. He did exactly what he needed to do to avoid an order from Sam, even disabling his father's phone. He planned out the attack in detail, even determining who he would not fight, if it could be avoided. He knew exactly what he was doing.
“Directing 7 Cullens at once=herding cats" :ROTFLMAO:
C-Dubs is TwitterRoyalty
Turning Page is Gospel~Ashley=MiniMe~HHBS