This is a genuine question.

I have a hard time with this. My righteous side wants him to face an appropriate sentence, but my pessimistic side thinks this might have set a great example for CEOs to always maintain a level of humanity or face unforseen consequences.

P.S. this topic is highly controversial and I want actual opinions so let’s be civil.

And if you’re a mod, delete this if the post is inappropriate or if it gets too heated.

  • @TommySoda@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    2045 months ago

    If he gets caught, then I’d say yes. Murder should be treated as murder regardless of what the reason is. Making exceptions is never a good idea.

    I just hope he doesn’t get caught.

    • nocturne
      link
      fedilink
      1525 months ago

      Then all of the healthcare companies that allow people to die because they will not cover them need to be prosecuted, every executive, every decision maker.

      • @friend_of_satan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        29
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid “dens of crime” that Dickens loved to paint. It is not done even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried, and minuted) in clean, carpeted, warmed, and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voice.

        CS Lewis - Screwtape Letters (preface)

    • TerkErJerbs
      link
      fedilink
      91
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Brian Thompson and his co-workers murder hundreds of thousands of people with systemic neglect, spreadsheets, and lawyers. They murder in broad daylight, during business hours. And yet they’re comfortable, well paid, successful people who will never see a day in jail. What they’re doing isn’t even considered a crime.

      I hope he doesn’t get caught, also. Because the same laws that protect those fucking ghouls will crush him for bringing attention to the grift.

    • @Tinidril@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      405 months ago

      Making exceptions is never a good idea.

      Why not? The whole reason we have judicial discretion is that every crime departs from the platonic ideal in one way or another.

      The working class has been losing a class war for decades without ever properly noticing that it was happening. Working Americans have been dying in that war, and now someone struck back.

      I’ll be sold on the “no exceptions” ideal when we haul in the corporate murderers alongside the people who fought back.

      Jury nullification is the other acceptable option.

      • @TommySoda@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        125 months ago

        Yeah, that’s kinda my point. The system is fucked beyond repair specifically because these people running the companies get exceptions. These people have basically let thousands of people die for the sake of money. So like I said before, murder is murder and should be treated as such.

        • comfy
          link
          fedilink
          75 months ago

          Given the perspective you described, I would consider the actions of the company to be systematic mass murder who the legal system fails to stop, and the actions of the shooter to be community defense against a mass murderer. They’re certainly not equivalent, and I don’t see what the benefit is of treating that defense equally to even one callous for-profit murder.

          The problem isn’t that exceptions are made and therefore all crimes should be treated in an ignorant vacuum. The problem is that the idealist legal system doesn’t even consider indirect suffering as the violence it is, because the legal system is ultimately beholden to the power of capital (money buys politicians and the media power to make them win, politicians write laws).

    • @Nollij@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      85 months ago

      I’m confident that someone will get caught and be made into an example.

      Whether they were the one that actually did it is immaterial.

    • @octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      35 months ago

      2 or so years ago I’d have agreed with you.

      But it’s become clear that the wealthy and powerful are beyond the reach of our justice system. coughdementedfeloninthewhitehousecough

      So fuck 'em.

      I understand why they will prosecute him if they catch him, but I wish for him to never get caught, and I feel really confident (given the other signs of planning) that the phone, water bottle, and very public appearance at Starbucks in recognizable clothing are nothing but a red herring.

    • @Vespair@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      15 months ago

      I hear and understand your point, and I can’t say that I disagree with it.

      That being said, I sure as hell wouldn’t convict the guy.

    • @14th_cylon@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      05 months ago

      I just hope he doesn’t get caught.

      he will get caught. they already have his photo, he is not professional hitman, he can only evade for so long when there is the whole country’s law enforcement after him.

      • @TommySoda@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        15 months ago

        Except the photo they have of him with his face visible isn’t even the same guy. Doesn’t even have the same clothes or backpack. So unless this dude is proficient at changing his clothes and ditching a backpack all while riding an electric scooter down the street in New York, then they have the wrong guy in that photo.

                • @14th_cylon@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  05 months ago

                  you do understand that these photos are from different place and different time, right?

                  the black backpack seems more like some shoulder duffel bag to me i assume it is from the hostel checkin. people don’t travel around the city with the same luggage they used for inter-city travel.

                  people also can have different clothes for different occasion, like putting on some light rain or wind-proof jacket. it can also be shitty compression from some shitty camera.

                  it is the same person ffs, look at his face, that nose could have passport of its own.

    • @NatakuNox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      65 months ago

      Even if he’s caught. Dudes going to get off if he demands a Jury trial. Not a single middle class or poor individual in America has a positive relationship with health insurance. Hell how does a prosecutor even screen jurors for this type of trial?

  • @originalfrozenbanana@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    1335 months ago

    This is a good question from the wrong angle. This event is cathartic for many people because the ultra rich who ruin countless lives never get punished. When they see “consequences” it’s a golden parachute. This event is frustrating because the media, legal, and security apparatuses expect us to treat this assassination as a grave act, but actively normalize the acts of harm Thompson and other leaders like him commit every day.

    This event is revealing in stark terms the divide between the elite and the average person. Should murderers be prosecuted? Sure - in a world where justice and the rule of law matter for everyone equally. Doesn’t feel like we live in that world.

  • Chainweasel
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1115 months ago

    Do you want to see the people who killed Osama Bin Laden prosecuted?
    Because the United Heath CEO killed far more people, including many more children, than Bin Laden did on 9/11.

  • GooglyBoobs
    link
    fedilink
    English
    905 months ago

    Why is violence legal when the government does it but not for regular people who have exhausted their peaceful options? Escalation of force gets justified all the time for cops and waging wars.

    • @PostingInPublic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      205 months ago

      The monopoly on the use of force is quite the important part of having a state at all. If a state doesn’t have that, it descends into anarchy (the bad kind, with warlords and gangs). The US is very exceptional in this case as it has in its constitution the provision that such gangs (militia) are allowed, even desirable.

      • Lightor
        link
        fedilink
        3
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Yes, and if they use that monopoly of power to suppress and harm people then they will quickly lose that monopoly. A state is run by the people, if that changes the people will attempt to take control back.

        • @PostingInPublic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          145 months ago

          It’s basic state theory, I believe we had that in middle school, along with the division of power. I mentioned the US exception because if you went to school there, your basic state theory might have been different from mine.

    • @Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      65 months ago

      In the USA violence can be legal for anyone under certain circumstances, otherwise I don’t know what’s expected from the second amendment…

  • @Bytemeister@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    545 months ago

    Yes, hell yes.

    Get this man in a court room. Let the prosecutors spend weeks trying to find a jury where no one (or any of their relatives and friends) has been fucked over for life because of shitty insurance.

    Let them talk about how unstoppable, determined, and committed the defendant was.

    And then have the jury nullify the case.

    It would be a good day to be alive.

    • @EvilZ@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      45 months ago

      Agreed, murder is murder. Even if the guy is part of a system of monsters, it does not matter. He is still allowed to due process as part of the American judicial system.

  • @Railcar8095@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    425 months ago

    Yes. I want the story of how United screwed them and their loves ones. I want thousands of families screwed by United to go as witness and tell their stories.

    And hopefully the jury will find any evidence inconclusive.

      • @Pringles@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        35 months ago

        If this goes to trial, and it probably will at one point provided he gets arrested, there is a decent chance of jury nullification.

    • @AllHailTheSheep@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      7
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      that’s not how our justice system tends to work unfortunately. if the shooter is caught, they will end up in prison, no doubt about it.

      plus, from a purely socialogical standpoint, having a nameless person with an unknown story allows people to put whatever story they want on them, which makes them a way more compelling figure cause they can appeal to pretty much everyone

  • @leadore@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    425 months ago

    Jury selection question to weed out biased jurors: “Have you ever had a claim that was unfairly denied?”

    Weeks later: “We have been unable to find enough jurors to try the case.”

  • @inv3r510n@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    39
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Absofuckinglutely not. I want him to never be found and continue to off health insurance CEOs one by one until we get universal healthcare like the rest of the developed world. And after he’s through with them there’s a whole list of other rich assholes that the world would be better off without, starting with the defense contractors.

  • Venia Silente
    link
    fedilink
    English
    385 months ago

    Theoretically: no.

    In practice, in the world we’re living in? Hell no.

    Any attempt to prosecute the killer would simply add to the advantage the ruling class already have, and be basically an injustice by definition no matter how “by the book” could it have been approached in the otherwise wondrful and illusory world of theory.

  • @Hadriscus@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    38
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I’d like the CEO prosecuted post-mortem, and any charges transmitted equally to any and all other policy-makers at UHC.

  • @dgmib@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    355 months ago

    I want to see a trial.

    I also want to start a go fund me for his or her legal defence find.

    I’d love to see a well funded law firm make the argument that the shooter acted in defence of self and others and drag all of UHC bullshit under a very large and uncomfortable deposition microscope to prove the CEO was responsible for letting people die.

    Maybe we could even start putting these health insurance CEOs on trial for all the wrongful deaths they’re causing without needing someone to take justice into their own hands first.

    • 𞋴𝛂𝛋𝛆
      link
      fedilink
      English
      175 months ago

      Absolutely no chance for justice in this system for this person. Musk bought a president that staged a coup 4 years ago. The potato supreme has a member that flew the flag of that coup, they are openly corrupt and have no checks or balances. That is the entire foundation of the legislative system and government. This guy was We the People and far closer to a real justice system than anything from this shit government.

    • @TachyonTele@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      5
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      All I know is if I’m somehow selected for jury duty on this one, I ain’t never heard of either man or what happened in my life.

    • @pivot_root@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      4
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      I don’t think he would make it to trial. The wealthy don’t appreciate those who unite the public against them, and they certainly wouldn’t want him to send another message by having the chance to explain his motives.

    • @Scubus@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      15 months ago

      Id love to see him go to trial, and funds raised through gofundme are used to buy off the jurors and judge. It only makes sense that if the rich can use money to make their problems go away, the poor should be able to do so as well. And that is still within our “legal framwork”