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.
Nope.
If Trump can get alway with almost all of his bullshit, if the Supreme Court can just hurr durr away a hundred + years of legal precedent, then this whole system is bullshit.
Anybody that is charge of or oversees the systemic application of violence toward great numbers of people, who is legally allowed to do so, in a system where the common person has 0 chance of ever altering this system to police itself and actually enact justice by preventing said person from doing that and prosecuting them for their crimes against the people…
Anyone in such a position should be afraid, should keep suffering consequences until theyfinally figure out that they need to acquiesce to a reformation of the system, need to stop fucking over millions for the grotesque enrichment of thousands.
When the game is rigged against you, play by your own rules, otherwise you guarantee your own defeat.
Yes, I do.
I want the state to make it crystal clear that this guy was the shooter. That he did it. That he had no legal justification to do it. That his actions were undeniably criminal, and that his crime was clearly premeditated.
And then I want a jury of his peers to return a “not guilty” verdict, and every scumbag business executive across the country suddenly deciding to take an early retirement.
His jury can’t return that not guilty verdict if he isn’t prosecuted.
No. I hope he’s never found. I hope it destroys the careers of all the cops and politicians blowing shitloads of resources looking for him while they barely look at crimes against normal people. I hope all these insurance executives wake up in a cold sweat every night worrying that they’ll be next. That’s what’s best for the world.
yes, of course. and found not guilty, to send a message.
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.”
I want the executives, boards, and shareholders that effectively murder millions every year to be prosecuted.
Do you want the murderer of the UnitHealthcare CEO prosecuted?
Nope. Killing a billionaire parasite doesn’t make one a murderer - it merely makes one a credit to the human race.
P.S. this topic is highly controversial
Not really.
Hear me out before you rage:
In theory? I believe that killings warrant investigation, prosecution and trial, no matter their intention, though the intention should factor into the result of the process. I want him to be prosecuted with the same intensity as any other killing would be, and if found, given a fair trial, convicted for whatever charge applies, as would be proper for a functioning judicial system. But then I’d want to see him pardoned as political expression of his popular support (and the fact that his victim was part of a deeply inhuman complex of exploitation).
In practice? I hope they never find him. Appropriate intensity of investigation? Orderly arrest? Fair treatment as prisoner? Fair trial? Fair charges? Fair conviction? Fat chance. Pardoned? Not even a chance.
I want him to go without punishment more than I want to hope for a fair process, and I couldn’t believe in the latter in any case.
No, because I don’t see any point to it. If they manage to catch him, they may as well just kill him on the spot when they get him, as I have no faith that his trial would be anything more than a farce to try and present some sense of following process and norms, while guaranteeing he gets some insane sentence, only to be found mysteriously to have hung himself. I’m sure that, somehow, a jury of his peers will be comprised solely of the 12 most ghoulish residents of NYC one could find, and they’ll probably try to shop around for the worst judge they can to hear the whole thing.
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.
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.
ITT: Nobody understands the difference between being prosecuted and convicted.
He should absolutely be prosecuted, he murdered someone. Should he be convicted of this murder? Fuck no, and I actually think a jury might agree with me.
No. If murdering cops can get away with it, so should someone who killed a guy who has indirectly killed millions through the racket that is health insurance.
You gotta weigh the decision, on one hand he shot and killed one person, on the other hand the dude he killed was allowing sick people to die unnecessary deaths so he could get his bonus.
So it’s a big old fat no from me, that’s a greater good scenario.
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.
