OT: Hurricanes Lounge XLVI: Really, It's All About Beer and Bojangles

[Svechhammer]

That's not correct, it is black and white. Murder, legally defined, is ALWAYS wrong. "Justifiable Homicide" isn't considered "Murder". One is considered lawful and one unlawful.

Murder has a legal definition of unlawfully killing someone with malice aforethought. That can either be premeditated (1st degree) or in the heat of the moment (2nd degree). This was clearly 1st degree (presuming he did it, doesn't have an insanity plea, and is convicted).

Justifiable Homicide is killing of a person with no criminal intent or blame, and is considered a non-criminal act, such as self defense or to stop a violent crime, etc...

It's fair to say killing a human being isn't always wrong, but Murder is always wrong.

Through their practices UHC has killed more people than the Taliban did, and I don't think anyone is advocating that killing Bin Laden wasn't justified.

When the social contract is broken and those in charge are exploiting the health and lives of the populace for their own personal financial gain, eventually it will lead to people getting murdered. Back a dog into a corner and its eventually going to fight back. And what we're seeing right now is the beginnings of the American populace fighting back.

Wouldn't surprise me at all if, after the popularity and notoriety this event created, we see a rising frequency of violence toward corporate executives going forward, just like we saw school shootings take off after Columbine.

 

[WreckingCrew]

Through their practices UHC has killed more people than the Taliban did, and I don't think anyone is advocating that killing Bin Laden wasn't justified.

When the social contract is broken and those in charge are exploiting the health and lives of the populace for their own personal financial gain, eventually it will lead to people getting murdered. Back a dog into a corner and its eventually going to fight back. And what we're seeing right now is the beginnings of the American populace fighting back.

Wouldn't surprise me at all if, after the popularity and notoriety this event created, we see a rising frequency of violence toward corporate executives going forward, just like we saw school shootings take off after Columbine.

Insurance companies and medical providers should not be allowed to have f***ing stocks and shareholders. Just like companies, which can't accurately speak for ALL of their employees, shouldn't be able to make political contributions.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Through their practices UHC has killed more people than the Taliban did, and I don't think anyone is advocating that killing Bin Laden wasn't justified.

That's an absurd comparison and you know it.

Murder in the US is illegal and wrong and has very clear legal definitions, plain and simple. If you don't want to live in the US, you live by the stated laws. If you start saying it's "justified" for whatever reason, then I guarantee you, there would be all sorts of loopholes and justifications by others. It would be anarchy.

For example, I think it's crazy when I hear the following: "I don't like how this politician allowed illegal immigrants and fentanyl into the country causing many murders, therefore, he/she should be tried for treason and executed!"

It's a slippery slope.

No question corporations have wrongly caused many deaths over the years and there should be more severe punishments for those actions, and I have no love for the UHC guy and I have disdain for medical insurance companies, but it doesn't and never will jjustify murder.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

It’s interesting the route the mainstream media is taking on this guy. You’d think they’d focus on the fact that both his mother and grandparents were basically buried in medical debt or on his own health issues. But nope, let’s go with old reliable:

Suspect in UnitedHealthcare CEO slaying played video game killer, friend recalls

A man who attended college with Luigi Mangione and was a member of the same Discord group said he was shocked when news broke on social media that Mangione had been taken into police custody.

www.nbcnews.com

He played Among Us and was a killer, so clearly, video games played a part.

 

[Unhinged Finn]

It’s interesting the route the mainstream media is taking on this guy. You’d think they’d focus on the fact that both his mother and grandparents were basically buried in medical debt or on his own health issues. But nope, let’s go with old reliable:

Suspect in UnitedHealthcare CEO slaying played video game killer, friend recalls

A man who attended college with Luigi Mangione and was a member of the same Discord group said he was shocked when news broke on social media that Mangione had been taken into police custody.

www.nbcnews.com

He played Among Us and was a killer, so clearly, video games played a part.

GTFO MSM

Sometimes I think they have a game who comes up with the most ridiculous point of view. It's like doing parody about yourself.

 

[Svechhammer]

It’s interesting the route the mainstream media is taking on this guy. You’d think they’d focus on the fact that both his mother and grandparents were basically buried in medical debt or on his own health issues. But nope, let’s go with old reliable:

Suspect in UnitedHealthcare CEO slaying played video game killer, friend recalls

A man who attended college with Luigi Mangione and was a member of the same Discord group said he was shocked when news broke on social media that Mangione had been taken into police custody.

www.nbcnews.com

He played Among Us and was a killer, so clearly, video games played a part.

If you think its bad now, just wait for the first publicly violent act that happens after GTA6 is released next year. The pearl clutching will be so over the top it'll make the puritans blush

 

[Blueline Bomber]

GTFO MSM

Sometimes I think they have a game who comes up with the most ridiculous point of view. It's like doing parody about yourself.

Add in the fact that EVERYONE played Among Us back during the Covid quarantine. It was either that and/or Animal Crossing. Which I’m sure if he had played Animal Crossing instead, they would have said something about how he was indoctrinated by paying debt to a polygon raccoon.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

Apparently because the tipster called 911 and not the crimestoppers hotline, he might not be eligible. Also, he might not be eligible because they simply don’t want to give him money:

The tip-off from the employee is apparently crucial in the case, but the question remains if the worker will be able to cash in on the $60k reward at all.The rules are complicated, as they stipulate tipsters in with a chance of the FBI portion of the reward cannot nominate themselves. This means the McDonald's worker will have to be put forward by an investigating agency, such as the Department of Defense or the FBI, which is then reviewed by an interagency committee. If approved, the suggestion is passed on to the Secretary of State, who signs off on the final decision.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

No question corporations have wrongly caused many deaths over the years and there should be more severe punishments for those actions, and I have no love for the UHC guy and I have disdain for medical insurance companies, but it doesn't and never will justify murder

Doesn't it?

If there is "no question" that companies have "wrongly caused many deaths", and if the law is fundamentally incapable of holding those companies responsible, then what recourse does any victim have, ever?

It's a funny thing about laws: they are enforced through the presumption that the consequences for breaking the law will be worse than the consequences of following the law. That presumption isn't always valid. A lot of criminals have perfectly sensible motivations for their crimes -- even moral motivations.

Usually it's easy to write off a murderer as "evil". But what if it's the system of laws that's evil?

This is not a not-for-profit healthcare system that is making honest mistakes in an attempt to provide the best care for everyone. It's a healthcare system that makes a lot of people very rich by f***ing poor people out of the healthcare they've allegedly paid for, and then dares them to do something about it.

Anyway. The question of whether UHC's brutal policies justified their CEO's murder is no longer a rhetorical question; it's a question that will soon be in the hands of a flesh-and-blood jury. I think it will be a very instructive trial.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

Doesn't it?

If there is "no question" that companies have "wrongly caused many deaths", and if the law is fundamentally incapable of holding those companies responsible, then what recourse does any victim have, ever?

It's a funny thing about laws: they are enforced through the presumption that the consequences for breaking the law will be worse than the consequences of following the law. That presumption isn't always valid. A lot of criminals have perfectly sensible motivations for their crimes -- even moral motivations.

Usually it's easy to write off a murderer as "evil". But what if it's the system of laws that's evil?

This is not a not-for-profit healthcare system that is making honest mistakes in an attempt to provide the best care for everyone. It's a healthcare system that makes a lot of people very rich by f***ing poor people out of the healthcare they've allegedly paid for, and then dares them to do something about it.

Anyway. The question of whether UHC's brutal policies justified their CEO's murder is no longer a rhetorical question; it's a question that will soon be in the hands of a flesh-and-blood jury. I think it will be a very instructive trial.

As much as I’d love for it to happen, I don’t think this is going to trial. I’m sure Luigi would love for it to happen (the guy’s got a manifesto after all), but by the time a trial might happen, it’ll be 18+ months down the line and everyone will have moved onto the next thing that grabs our short attention span. And a trial would bring this story (and the issues surrounding it) back to the forefront of the news cycle, which is bad news for the powers that be.

If Luigi makes it that long (and I’m still not ruling out that he gets Epstein’d), I imagine a plea deal will be taken to keep coverage to a minimum.

But hey, if it does go to trial, good luck trying to find an impartial juror.

 

[Lempo]

That's not correct, it is black and white. Murder, legally defined, is ALWAYS wrong. "Justifiable Homicide" isn't considered "Murder". One is considered lawful and one unlawful.

Murder has a legal definition of unlawfully killing someone with malice aforethought. That can either be premeditated (1st degree) or in the heat of the moment (2nd degree). This was clearly 1st degree (presuming he did it, doesn't have an insanity plea, and is convicted).

Justifiable Homicide is killing of a person with no criminal intent or blame, and is considered a non-criminal act, such as self defense or to stop a violent crime, etc...

It's fair to say killing a human being isn't always wrong, but Murder is always wrong.

Marie Antoinette was murdered. No ifs and buts.

 

[cptjeff]

As much as I’d love for it to happen, I don’t think this is going to trial. I’m sure Luigi would love for it to happen (the guy’s got a manifesto after all), but by the time a trial might happen, it’ll be 18+ months down the line and everyone will have moved onto the next thing that grabs our short attention span. And a trial would bring this story (and the issues surrounding it) back to the forefront of the news cycle, which is bad news for the powers that be.

If Luigi makes it that long (and I’m still not ruling out that he gets Epstein’d), I imagine a plea deal will be taken to keep coverage to a minimum.

But hey, if it does go to trial, good luck trying to find an impartial juror.

Plea deal requires both sides to agree. This guy is going to take it to trial to grandstand. He knows he's gonna do life, they're not going to offer a plea deal with a short enough sentence to change that calculus.

And he'll fade from the news, but the anger is deep and real, and I don't think it will go away just because the case fades from view for a few months. This *really* hit a nerve with the American public.

 

[Unsustainable]

Last 2 hours of 3rd shift are the worst

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Doesn't it?

If there is "no question" that companies have "wrongly caused many deaths", and if the law is fundamentally incapable of holding those companies responsible, then what recourse does any victim have, ever?

It's a funny thing about laws: they are enforced through the presumption that the consequences for breaking the law will be worse than the consequences of following the law. That presumption isn't always valid. A lot of criminals have perfectly sensible motivations for their crimes -- even moral motivations.

Usually it's easy to write off a murderer as "evil". But what if it's the system of laws that's evil?

I don't disagree with any of this, but the question is where do you draw the line? Is it ok to kill a CEO because his company is bad? What about a VP in that company? What about a mid level manager? What about the low level employee actually doing the rejecting?

Or the example I gave earlier, which is a something I've heard countless times, people stating that so and so politician has allowed immigrants and fentanyl to flow into this country and thus deserve to be executed. It's a slippery slope.

You are right, the system of laws are 100% stacked in favor of the rich because the rich make the laws and are inherently unfair in their favor. It was that way back in the 1800s, the 1900s and today. My only point is that until/unless those laws change, they are the laws that govern our society.

This is not a not-for-profit healthcare system that is making honest mistakes in an attempt to provide the best care for everyone. It's a healthcare system that makes a lot of people very rich by f***ing poor people out of the healthcare they've allegedly paid for, and then dares them to do something about it.

Oh, I'm in complete agreement with this. The system is corrupt and broken and I've never argued otherwise. I just don't think it justifies cold blooded murder. If others do, that's fine, I just don't.

Anyway. The question of whether UHC's brutal policies justified their CEO's murder is no longer a rhetorical question; it's a question that will soon be in the hands of a flesh-and-blood jury. I think it will be a very instructive trial.

It's probably going to be the most watched trial since OJ.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

Leaked video shows UnitedHealth CEO saying insurer will continue practices that combat 'unnecessary' care

UnitedHealth Group CEO Andrew Witty said in a leaked internal video that the insurance company plays an important role in guarding against "unnecessary" and "unsafe" care.

www.foxbusiness.com

“Combating ‘unnecessary’ care” is a horrible phrase. Are these people so deep in the weeds they don’t see the issue with that line of thinking? Or do they see the issue and the just no longer care?

 

[Derailed75]

Add in the fact that EVERYONE played Among Us back during the Covid quarantine. It was either that and/or Animal Crossing. Which I’m sure if he had played Animal Crossing instead, they would have said something about how he was indoctrinated by paying debt to a polygon raccoon.

Nah Animal Crossi g lead to the rise in furries

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

It was that way back in the 1800s, the 1900s and today.

My favorite radio station plays hits from this era.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

Leaked video shows UnitedHealth CEO saying insurer will continue practices that combat 'unnecessary' care

UnitedHealth Group CEO Andrew Witty said in a leaked internal video that the insurance company plays an important role in guarding against "unnecessary" and "unsafe" care.

www.foxbusiness.com

“Combating ‘unnecessary’ care” is a horrible phrase. Are these people so deep in the weeds they don’t see the issue with that line of thinking? Or do they see the issue and the just no longer care?

This is one of the fundamental problems with rationing any scarce resource. The problem is not the rationing, but the motivations and the mechanisms.

Does everyone remember the "death panels"? It was a very compelling political point, because it had a kernel of truth. In any collectivized healthcare system with finite resources, someone has to decide who gets care and who doesn't.

The current problem is that the death panels are now in the hands of a private industry with perverse incentives.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

Nah Animal Crossi g lead to the rise in furries

I hate to break it to you, but furries have been around long before Animal Crossing. Even long before the original Animal Crossing on the GameCube. You can blame Disney for that, for the most part.

 

[hblueridgegal]

Is any of this reaction really surprising given the shift in the mores in our society? Look at what's ok now and deemed acceptable..i.e. storming the capitol, criminals in higher office, stand your ground for perceived danger, etc. It's the wild, wild west. Couple that with the vast wealth gap and here we are.

 

[SlavinAway]

I say we kill everyone. I have good reason to believe the world would be a better place without homo sapiens.

 

[MinJaBen]

I say we kill everyone. I have good reason to believe the world would be a better place without homo sapiens.

f*** that. I've seen squirrels and chimps, and neither is going to make things better.


I don't get me started with cats or dolphins...

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

f*** that. I've seen squirrels and chimps, and neither is going to make things better.


I don't get me started with cats or dolphins...

Cats would be bored to death not having a human to jump on top of and meow at 4 in the morning.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

I say we kill everyone. I have good reason to believe the world would be a better place without homo sapiens.

Yep, we've had our time to rule and have f***ed up the planet in the process. Time to let another species have a shot.

 

[HisIceness]

Cats would be bored to death not having a human to jump on top of and meow at 4 in the morning.

You forgot using legs as a scratching post