Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

xocetaceans

(4,019 posts)
6. Your emphatic response seems to indicate that you agree on the terrorism charge. Is that correct?
Tue Dec 17, 2024, 08:11 PM
Dec 17

That charge seems more like a spaghetti-against-the-wall attempt to make the health insurance CEOs happy and comfortable that the crime is being taken "super" seriously. (Why not charge him with (high) treason as well? Yes, obviously, that would also be ridiculous.)

An unusually wide-spread and expressed degree of public apathy about the lack of survival of the target of a crime does not make a terrorist out of the alleged perpetrator any more than it would make the alleged perpetrator a traitor. It just means that the victim was perceived to have had certain egregious ethical or moral flaws of which the public had made note (e.g. Osama bin Laden). So, it seems that the prosecutors are just overplaying their hand, and that overreach might not sit well with a jury unless they happen to seat exclusively a jury of CEOs or other corporate officers.

Regardless of the above, yes, murder is bad/wrong/etc. ad infinitum ... whether it is done by bullets to the back or by a lengthy denial of healthcare by actors shielded behind a corporate wall that acts to diffuse responsibility. So, the murder should never have happened, and for-profit health insurance companies need to be disbanded.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Cable News Clips»Luigi Mangione CHARGED wi...»Reply #6