Thots 'n pears

The NPR article right now on this guy is disgusting

Comment’s still up after an hour, yup, looks like the mods here are pretty good. I like this place. Over in /c/news the modlog is insane, looks like it’d be easier to just remove themselves from the Fediverse rather than try and remove all the comments that might hint at “celebrating violence”.

Propaganda of the Deed is coming back baby

I think callus indifference is apropos

Not having sympathy for the death of another/Saying karma but them in the ass != Wishing for another’s dearh

You’ve never wished for the death of serial killers? Rapists? Pedophiles? Dictators? Animal abusers? The odd mime?

Somehow, I don’t believe you. But, on the off chance that you’re telling the truth… this is for you:

I never wished for the death of another human being

Neat. I’ll bet Brian didn’t either.

The policies under his leadership caused the deaths of many human beings, and prolonged the suffering of many more. Not because he hated them or wished them death, he’d have to care enough to know their names first, but because denying their valid claims on buried technicalities as a matter of policy made him and his profiteer shareholders moar profit.

Capitalists don’t kill out of hate, their victims are just nameless speed bumps to glorious profit. They kill with a shrug, in volume.

And who are you that we should give any shits about your call-out?

But those who think that they are virtuous have no problem celebrating this guy being killed calling it karma. And this comment will be totally downvoted because how dare someone point out their hypocrisy.

“Virtue” is a relative thing. What is virtuous to one person might not be virtuous to another. You, for example, seem to believe that celebrating the death of someone is unvirtuous, even if that person was a monster. This is pure speculation on my part, but I’m also guessing that you hold the belief that nobody deserves to die.

These beliefs are not universal. While you would be a hypocrite for violating your own strongly held beliefs, it would not be accurate to apply that label to someone who doesn’t hold those beliefs. For example, I believe that death is the worst punishment you can give to a person. I also believe that some people absolutely deserve it. I would not find it virtuous to falsely pretend otherwise. I have no moral qualms with celebrating the death of someone who I think deserves it. Similarly, I have no qualms about celebrating good things that happen to a person who I think deserves them. In both cases, I consider those things to be the universe working out as it should.

Well aren’t you pious

I’m ready to go out and celebrate with some drinks over this fucking asshole getting what he deserved. How many millions have him and his ilk killed by denying them healthcare?

Fuck him and fuck all his bootlickers.

Celebrating someone death does not mean you cant be virtuous. Even killing someone can be considered virtuous in many different cases. Killing out of mercy, to protect others, or to change things for the better can be considered virtuous in many way. Revenge, jealousy and hatred are bad, but a murder comitted over revenge doesnt mean it cannot be celebrated as an opportunity for change or awareness… Victim murder may be wrong even if he was a shitstain for the society, but from his murder maybe good things may happen, maybe its successor may think twice on deciding on the balance between profit and client wellness…

The small number of comments like yours with extreme downvote counts against the absolute deluge of celebratory posts has me feeling pretty fucked about the entire Lemmy community. I understand people’s poor opinions of the health insurance industry, but this mass endorsement of murdering their executives is not a good turn for this community.

It doesn’t even serve our causes. It doesn’t get us any closer to universal healthcare, or price caps on lifesaving care, or healthcare ethics reforms, or any of the other things that actually need to happen.

With a second Trump term starting next month, if the accelerationist lunatics begging for more dead CEOs gets their way, you’re going to see some of the most horrific state violence imaginable as our new fascist kakistocracy zeros in on their “enemy within” boogyman.

On the note of actually giving a shit about healthcare outcomes, nobody on Lemmy seems to be organizing against the status quo. There are no communities here about unfair health insurance decisions, and medical bankruptcy. Generally speaking, Lemmy has a progressive view on healthcare, but very little interest in organizing about it materially.

But when a CEO gets murdered, the Tankies come out en masse to tell us that shooting and killing a father of 2 is actually heroism or something.

It’s just pure violent hatred, and while I understand where people’s anger comes from, I don’t think I’m going to stick around this place much longer if this kind of rhetoric is going to be treated as normal. If this is how the general userbase of Lemmy actually thinks, I’ll show myself the door and find people who aren’t pieces of shit.

Just wanted you to know, despite the downvotes you’re getting, you are completely fucking right and everyone else who has decided that this is the time to cause a scene can hopefully get banned.

Yeah nah. As long as money is in our politics, insurance companies will continue to lobby for keeping the system how it is. They’ll never change it because it’s a racket. Who the hell thought healthcare should be publicly held and done for profit is the closest thing to pure evil I can imagine.

Hopefully at least this will cause some positive change to happen.

Maybe if at least 10 more were to be assassinated, in very rapid succession so they don’t have time to catch on to the plot. And throw in some anti-healthcare politicians too.

I doubt that will ever happen. Tbh, I’m an observer anyway. But one who thinks the country has potential to be so much better, given all the things it’s already great at.

It’s unfortunate that in Canada they have a handgun freeze that means all current handgun owners in Canada cannot get new guns, and if you get a firearms permit, even a restricted one, you can no longer buy new handguns.

There are alternatives… but I am not talking.

Doesn’t look like anything to me.

Jury nullification, also known in the United Kingdom as jury equity, or a perverse verdict, is when the jury in a criminal trial gives a verdict of not guilty even though they think a defendant has broken the law. The jury’s reasons may include the belief that the law itself is unjust, that the prosecutor has misapplied the law in the defendant’s case, that the punishment for breaking the law is too harsh, or general frustrations with the criminal justice system. Some juries have also refused to convict due to their own prejudices in favor of the defendant. Such verdicts are possible because a jury has an absolute right to return any verdict it chooses. Nullification is not an official part of criminal procedure but is the logical consequence of two rules governing the systems in which it exists:

1. Jurors cannot be punished for passing an incorrect verdict.

2. In many jurisdictions, a defendant who is acquitted cannot be tried a second time for the same offense.

A jury verdict that is contrary to the letter of the law pertains only to the particular case before it; however, if a pattern of acquittals develops in response to repeated attempts to prosecute a particular offence, this can have the de facto effect of invalidating the law. Such a pattern may indicate public opposition to an unwanted legislative enactment. It may also happen that a jury convicts a defendant even if no law was broken, although such a conviction may be overturned on appeal. Nullification can also occur in civil trials; unlike in criminal trials, if the jury renders a not liable verdict that is clearly at odds with the evidence, the judge can issue a judgment notwithstanding the verdict or order a new trial.

Hey, he looks like my friend, John Doe

NOTHING will make them give up their guns

I’ll take “Things that won’t happen” for 100, Alex.

In reality it is probably just a guy whose wife’s cancer treatment was denied.

Reminds one part of this video(5:10).

Pick any rural county, and you can find a bus load of people who’ve been screwed over or denied care by health insurance. And for those who do not have a specific, personal grudge, healthcare options in the sticks are increasingly geographic monopolies run by a single provider, with a Byzantine network of in/out network insurers.

Someone driving their mother four hours for biweekly dialysis or cancer care because the local provider is not covered is going to be pissed. A parent buying their child because the local provider ‘streamlined’ care while slashing nursing headcount is going to be a lot more than pissed.