I thought this was a great piece, but this bit jumped out at me:

Jaime would have to throw Edmure’s child over the walls if Edmure failed to comply just to make a point, Stannis clearly wants the throne it’s not just a matter of duty, Arya fails to see the person behind the “bad” and Sandor might not be a hypocritical knight but that doesn’t make him a better person than his brother.

Jaime might have thrown Edmure's child over the wall, I'll grant you that, although I think he was very confident that the threat alone would break Edmure and so didn't really consider the possibility of Edmure refusing. But I don't think he had any more intention of doing it than Tyrion had of torturing and raping Tommen if Cersei harmed Alayaya. I agree regarding Stannis, although again the justification for his actions does have some weight: he is the rightful Baratheon monarch.

Arya and Sandor are the ones I most disagree with. Arya's early victims are plainly heinous - Chiswyck, Weese, Ser Amory - for example, reveal themselves to be murderers and sadists, or personally wrong Arya in a way that is understandably going to arouse her hatred (Ser Ilyn). It's not until Arya joins the Faceless Men that that link between her victims and their moral character is definitively severed, and its clear from her Braavos chapters that this bothers her to some degree.

Sandor is a brutal and amoral man, but he doesn't have Gregor's remorseless cruelty. We never see him rape, we never see him torture, he refuses to beat Sansa, and

I would argue that what separates Vic from the anti-heroes you mentioned is that Victarion's justifications are completely empty: he treats his wife like a broken toy, a thing, and murdered her simply so he wouldn't be embarrassed. IIRC, we never even find out her name. His entire problem is that Euron cuckolded him, not that he hurt someone he loved, because he didn't give a shit about her.