• errer@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1351·
    2 years ago

    The fact this guy is still free and has a chance to see these memes must warm his heart

    • The_v@lemmy.world
      85·
      2 years ago

      He assassinated an immoral asshole who has profited on the needless pain, suffering, and death of millions.

      The reaction can’t be too surprising.

      • thermal_shock@lemmy.worldEnglish
        48·
        2 years ago

        I’m curious about his reasoning. I hope he gets away, just curious if he was denied claims, or if a loved one was, or just sending a message. or if he’s just looking for the other half of his Boondocks Saints duo.

        • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
          34·
          2 years ago

          That’s the beauty of it. Millions of people have worse lives because of this asshole, so by having an anonymous killer take him out, we all get to feel a little justice.

          • Draces@lemmy.world
            24·
            2 years ago

            And thousands(?) have no lives because of this asshole. Dude killed a serial killer as far as I’m concerned

            • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
              19·
              2 years ago

              The prior-authorization denial rate of United tripled under his leadership.

              I don’t like vigilante justice, but when “legitimate” paths to justice are denied, this is the inevitable result.

              A hungry crowd is an angry mob. Ignore the danger too long, and they’ll eventually feast on the flesh of those who oppress them.

            • BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works
              3·
              2 years ago

              No. He was not a “mass shooter”. Mass shooters shoot innocent civilians en masse. This guy was an assassin. One target, one goal.

              While I obviously agree that it can’t be described accurately as a mass shooting, I still wonder:

              Do the victims need to be innocent for it to be a mass shooting?

              From a philosophical POV there’s a issue of defining what an innocent person is (I mean some Christian societies will say that nobody’s innocent). Is innocence to be judged through the eyes of the shooter or society?

              Anyway, that wasn’t the point I set out to make, so let’s set that aside.

              Suppose one was to go to a convention of child molesters, war criminals, and nazi death camp guards, and you start shooting indiscriminately. I hope we can agree that members of the categories listed should be classified as “not innocents” by any contemporary standard. Even if only people guilty of the previously mentioned things got hit, wouldn’t it still be a mass shooting once a certain number had been shot?

          • Dragon Rider (drag)@lemmy.nzEnglish
            112·
            2 years ago

            Fairy tales do not tell children that monsters exist. Children already know that monsters exist. Fairy tales tell children that monsters can be killed.

          • GladiusB@lemmy.world
            4·
            2 years ago

            History is full of these. But we somehow think we are better than our pasts. And the rich are counting on us being the ethical ones.

            People are starting to realize that is a huge miscalculation.

  • stoy@lemmy.zip
    115·
    2 years ago

    Loading screen game hints:

    “If you are low on karma, try to murder a billionaire”

  • Allonzee@lemmy.world
    881·
    2 years ago

    “All murder is wrong! You’re all sick!”

    Oh, cool, so we agree, let’s decommission and dismantle our for profit military industrial complex, demilitarize the police, ban the death penalty, and remove all guns from civilian society immediately!

    • SoJB@lemmy.mlEnglish
      15·
      2 years ago

      The logically and ethically correct response, as usual, is the one drawn from leftist theory.

      Killing in self defense has been a cornerstone of human legal systems since human society has existed.

      Violence comes in many forms. This time it was a bullet. It could be a denied healthcare claim. It could be excessive copays and deductibles. It could be wage theft. It could be abuse of workplace power dynamics.

      Employers shouldn’t have started the violence if they didn’t want people to start defending themselves.

      • Allonzee@lemmy.world
        7·
        2 years ago

        Exactly. An important point to make is this was, is, and will be a murderous rampage by him and whoever they appoint to sit in the chair. That’s the job. To fuck over the customers who trusted them with their very lives and prepared for disease by paying them ahead of time in the name of private profit.

        This literally happened at a meeting about how to deny their claims more, and this event didn’t change that. They want to kill their customers when they become inconvenient. All for profit insurers do.

        And they’re allowed, LEGALLY, to casually discuss at a conference how they’re going to KILL these customers and those customers on this buried technicality and that legal loophole and that’s fine, but in most circles the people who’ve experienced their sociopathic, ice cold, emotionless rampage for private greed, will be silenced for so much as expressing approval of what happened a few days ago.

        Profit belongs in making widgets, not in sectors people need to survive. I’ve been screaming that for years, and they called me madman.

        Im so defeated that I’m literally telling myself not to trust any hope.

  • noscere@lemmy.world
    20·
    2 years ago

    It’s been 3 days now and Robin Hood is still at large. It makes me wonder what medical insurance plan the NYPD offers. Wouldn’t it be a tragedy if the investigating officers were on UHC plans? Just tragic…

    Also, ACAB. Just in case someone takes this as supporting police.

      • werefreeatlast@lemmy.worldBanned
        1·
        2 years ago

        It was a good enough movie! I watched it on my projector and it was awesome-like. My favorite part was when the truck is falling into the river and the bad guy is still wondering what’s going to happen.