3 ms·

I don't think the shooter could get a fair trial in the US because I'm not sure they could find a jury to convict them. I don't think I've seen a shooting that'

I don't think the shooter could get a fair trial in the US because I'm not sure they could find a jury to convict them. I don't think I've seen a shooting that's been so devoid of any sympathy for the victim. Looking inward, though, I find myself more intrigued at the reaction than horrified by the killing.

wongarsu 2y ago
If the shooter is ever caught he will probably die while "resisting arrest". A trial gives him a platform, and as you say a jury of his peers is unlikely to convict him.
- scarfaceneo 2y ago
  Stakes will be too high for that. The risk of that backfiring will be immense. Well, there’s always the chance of claiming the shooter got away, and be lying in a ditch somewhere
skepticATX 2y ago
The loudest opinions surface. I wouldn’t take lack of public sympathy to mean that the average American condones this type of behavior. I am no more sympathetic than I am towards the many people killed each day in the US, but I think the assassination and the subsequent justification of it because he was a small cog in the system is abhorrent. And I hope that the majority of the country feels the same way.
- harimau777 2y ago
  Whether or not the assassination is justified, I don't think it makes sense to call him a small cog. He's the leader of one of the largest health insurance companies in America.
  - cadamsau 2y ago
    As much as I hate to point it out, it’s not so simple. He had a legally enforceable mandate to maximize shareholder value. There’s some wiggle room in how that’s accomplished, but not as much as it seems from the outside. That does make him, much as I hate to say it, a small cog.
    - throw0101d 2y ago
      > He had a legally enforceable mandate to maximize shareholder value. [citation needed] There is no legal basis for this: * https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2012/06/26/the-shareholder-value-myth/ https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2012/06/26/the-shareholder-v... * https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/09/09/how-the-cult-of-shareholder-value-wrecked-american-business/?wprss=rss_ezra-klein&clsrd=&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/09/09/how-t... * https://evonomics.com/maximizing-shareholder-value-dumbest-idea/ https://evonomics.com/maximizing-shareholder-value-dumbest-i... It is simply one view that just happened to become popular during the Reagan years and has continued on: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedman_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedman_doctrine And while we're at it, shareholders are not the owners of a corporation: * https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2021/12/who-actually-owns-corporations-anyway https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2021/12/who-actually-own...
    - revscat 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - cadamsau 2y ago
        Justice is subjective. What is a crime is subjective. Hence we have laws - an eternal, never perfect project to find an agreed definition of justice. Abandoning centuries of precedent of law happens in some places from time to time and they’re not places you’d live by choice.
        revscat 2y ago
        [dead]
  - rrrrrrrrrrrryan 2y ago
    Literally one of the biggest cogs in this machine.
  - smitty1e 2y ago
    What assassination would be "justified"? This tragedy in the same city that could potentially throw the book at a Daniel Penny...
    - cocacola1 2y ago
      > What assassination would be "justified"? I think it depends where ones sympathies lay.
      - smitty1e 2y ago
        Assassination assumes some premeditation. I can at least grasp killing in some sort of immediate self-defense situation. However, assassination seems a slippery slope to some anarchy that is unlikely to please anyone this side of Hell.
- cocacola1 2y ago
  > The loudest opinions surface. I wouldn’t take lack of public sympathy to mean that the average American condones this type of behavior. I'm not sure I agree with you there. The indifference in some quarters, celebration in others, across either side of the political divide insofar as I've seen, leads me to believe that in some cases, the well of sympathy is running dry – or, worse, has run dry.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- bufferoverflow 2y ago
  For the jury to convict you need all jurors to agree. From what I've seen, 99% of feedback is of "scumbag deserved it" flavor.
smitty1e 2y ago
> not sure they could find a jury to convict them A trial should be about setting forth the law and the facts and letting the jury handle any relevant "leaky abstractions". It's fairly clear that the act was illegal. If the facts conclusively show that J. Random Somebody pulled the trigger, then conviction should be the non-leaky return from the jury() function. But, then, IANAL, and our legal system has seemed less than water-tight of late, so we'll see.
- mostlysimilar 2y ago
  Humans aren't computers.
- sumeno 2y ago
  Jury nullification exists
hintymad 2y ago
This sentiment reminds me of the movie Law Abiding Citizen. Gerald Butler's role Clyde Shelton could've single-handedly avenged his family from the get-go, yet he chose to also take his vengeance on the justice system as well. Yet somehow many viewers still think that Clyde was righteous and it was a pity that Jamie Foxx's role Nick Rice didn't get punished enough.

wongarsu 2y ago

If the shooter is ever caught he will probably die while "resisting arrest". A trial gives him a platform, and as you say a jury of his peers is unlikely to convict him.

scarfaceneo 2y ago
Stakes will be too high for that. The risk of that backfiring will be immense. Well, there’s always the chance of claiming the shooter got away, and be lying in a ditch somewhere

skepticATX 2y ago

The loudest opinions surface. I wouldn’t take lack of public sympathy to mean that the average American condones this type of behavior. I am no more sympathetic than I am towards the many people killed each day in the US, but I think the assassination and the subsequent justification of it because he was a small cog in the system is abhorrent. And I hope that the majority of the country feels the same way.

harimau777 2y ago
Whether or not the assassination is justified, I don't think it makes sense to call him a small cog. He's the leader of one of the largest health insurance companies in America.
- cadamsau 2y ago
  As much as I hate to point it out, it’s not so simple. He had a legally enforceable mandate to maximize shareholder value. There’s some wiggle room in how that’s accomplished, but not as much as it seems from the outside. That does make him, much as I hate to say it, a small cog.
  - throw0101d 2y ago
    > He had a legally enforceable mandate to maximize shareholder value. [citation needed] There is no legal basis for this: * https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2012/06/26/the-shareholder-value-myth/ https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2012/06/26/the-shareholder-v... * https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/09/09/how-the-cult-of-shareholder-value-wrecked-american-business/?wprss=rss_ezra-klein&clsrd=&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/09/09/how-t... * https://evonomics.com/maximizing-shareholder-value-dumbest-idea/ https://evonomics.com/maximizing-shareholder-value-dumbest-i... It is simply one view that just happened to become popular during the Reagan years and has continued on: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedman_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedman_doctrine And while we're at it, shareholders are not the owners of a corporation: * https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2021/12/who-actually-owns-corporations-anyway https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2021/12/who-actually-own...
  - revscat 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - cadamsau 2y ago
      Justice is subjective. What is a crime is subjective. Hence we have laws - an eternal, never perfect project to find an agreed definition of justice. Abandoning centuries of precedent of law happens in some places from time to time and they’re not places you’d live by choice.
      - revscat 2y ago
        [dead]
- rrrrrrrrrrrryan 2y ago
  Literally one of the biggest cogs in this machine.
- smitty1e 2y ago
  What assassination would be "justified"? This tragedy in the same city that could potentially throw the book at a Daniel Penny...
  - cocacola1 2y ago
    > What assassination would be "justified"? I think it depends where ones sympathies lay.
    - smitty1e 2y ago
      Assassination assumes some premeditation. I can at least grasp killing in some sort of immediate self-defense situation. However, assassination seems a slippery slope to some anarchy that is unlikely to please anyone this side of Hell.
cocacola1 2y ago
> The loudest opinions surface. I wouldn’t take lack of public sympathy to mean that the average American condones this type of behavior. I'm not sure I agree with you there. The indifference in some quarters, celebration in others, across either side of the political divide insofar as I've seen, leads me to believe that in some cases, the well of sympathy is running dry – or, worse, has run dry.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
bufferoverflow 2y ago
For the jury to convict you need all jurors to agree. From what I've seen, 99% of feedback is of "scumbag deserved it" flavor.

smitty1e 2y ago

> not sure they could find a jury to convict them A trial should be about setting forth the law and the facts and letting the jury handle any relevant "leaky abstractions". It's fairly clear that the act was illegal. If the facts conclusively show that J. Random Somebody pulled the trigger, then conviction should be the non-leaky return from the jury() function. But, then, IANAL, and our legal system has seemed less than water-tight of late, so we'll see.

mostlysimilar 2y ago
Humans aren't computers.
sumeno 2y ago
Jury nullification exists

hintymad 2y ago

This sentiment reminds me of the movie Law Abiding Citizen. Gerald Butler's role Clyde Shelton could've single-handedly avenged his family from the get-go, yet he chose to also take his vengeance on the justice system as well. Yet somehow many viewers still think that Clyde was righteous and it was a pity that Jamie Foxx's role Nick Rice didn't get punished enough.