3 ms·

Probably a class action lawsuit in the future, if one does not already exist. Jail time? Probably not, we let health insurance companies get away with taking a

by xyst 2y ago

Probably a class action lawsuit in the future, if one does not already exist. Jail time? Probably not, we let health insurance companies get away with taking away critical needs from patients and delaying care in the name of delivering shareholder value. The best they get is a slap on the wrist from the government, let alone jail time.

soco 2y ago
Health insurance abuses got a quite different slap recently.
- Tostino 2y ago
  And they are calling it 'terrorism'. What a joke our country is.
  - diggan 2y ago
    I mean, it is. Just because you agree with it doesn't mean the label changes. And I don't necessarily hate what happened either, nor would I probably personally prosecute the guy. But lets not mince words, if you (try to) use violence against civilians for political/ideological/religious motives, that's pretty much the agree-upon definition of "terrorism".
    - epgui 2y ago
      It was a targeted murder, it was not terrorism.
      - diggan 2y ago
        Could you provide what definition you use for "terrorism"? Otherwise your comment might as well just say "No" and it contributes the same amount to the discussion. Besides, I'd say it's both. There is no denying it was a murder, nor that it was targeted and based on what I understand "terrorism" to be, it seems like that too.
        potato3732842 2y ago
        One of the key components of terrorism is random or at least very loose targeting and some degree of disregard for collateral damage. The United Healthcare murder was basically a reverse Eric garner. Instead of the government killing someone over something petty to keep the peasants in line a crazy peasant killed a member of the ruling class to send the same message in the other direction. Politically both of these are more like a good ol' fashioned lynching than terrorism though obviously the line between the two becomes a bit blurry. Most targeted political violence is not terrorism (though of course the statues are so broad that if you crop dust an elevator in a government building you're probably open to prosecution).
        diggan 2y ago
        > One of the key components of terrorism is random or at least very loose targeting and some degree of disregard for collateral damage. Thanks, learned something new about the US today :) In the jurisdictions I'm familiar with, the goals/objectives behind the actions seem to take a more important role than how you seem to consider it in the US.
        blacklion 2y ago
        > One of the key components of terrorism is random or at least very loose targeting and some degree of disregard for collateral damage. It is very modern meaning of the word. It is almost re-labeled, like "piracy" for copyright infringement.
        potato3732842 2y ago
        >It is very modern meaning of the word. It is almost re-labeled, like "piracy" for copyright infringement. And people who called themselves anarchists used to be ideologically communist-adjacent. That was well over a century ago. Words change over time. The definition has been what is has since at least the 1970s, probably longer depending on where you measure. It is not "very modern".
        toast0 2y ago
  - potato3732842 2y ago
    Terrorism is simpoly what the government/establishment calls any politically motivated public action that includes crime or violence when anyone other than them does it. 4chan/anon was screwing with websites -> terrorism Neo-nazis finding unsecured online printers at colleges and printing their propaganda -> terrorism Shoot a public figure because you think they've done a tone of wrong -> terrorism. Go on a bulldozer rampage against people who have wronged you -> terrorism
  - blacklion 2y ago
    To be honest, it IS terrorism, by the very first definition. First terrorists (named so) was revolutionaries (not bolsheviks, but other parties) in Russian Empire, who go to Government official's office and shot them in the face with Nagant revolver. Look up Vera Zasulich, Dmitry Karakozov, Narodnaya Volya (organization), etc. It is TRUE terrorism, not bombing Christmas parade or marathon.

by xyst 2y ago

soco 2y ago

Health insurance abuses got a quite different slap recently.

Tostino 2y ago
And they are calling it 'terrorism'. What a joke our country is.
- diggan 2y ago
  I mean, it is. Just because you agree with it doesn't mean the label changes. And I don't necessarily hate what happened either, nor would I probably personally prosecute the guy. But lets not mince words, if you (try to) use violence against civilians for political/ideological/religious motives, that's pretty much the agree-upon definition of "terrorism".
  - epgui 2y ago
    It was a targeted murder, it was not terrorism.
    - diggan 2y ago
      Could you provide what definition you use for "terrorism"? Otherwise your comment might as well just say "No" and it contributes the same amount to the discussion. Besides, I'd say it's both. There is no denying it was a murder, nor that it was targeted and based on what I understand "terrorism" to be, it seems like that too.
      - potato3732842 2y ago
        One of the key components of terrorism is random or at least very loose targeting and some degree of disregard for collateral damage. The United Healthcare murder was basically a reverse Eric garner. Instead of the government killing someone over something petty to keep the peasants in line a crazy peasant killed a member of the ruling class to send the same message in the other direction. Politically both of these are more like a good ol' fashioned lynching than terrorism though obviously the line between the two becomes a bit blurry. Most targeted political violence is not terrorism (though of course the statues are so broad that if you crop dust an elevator in a government building you're probably open to prosecution).
        diggan 2y ago
        > One of the key components of terrorism is random or at least very loose targeting and some degree of disregard for collateral damage. Thanks, learned something new about the US today :) In the jurisdictions I'm familiar with, the goals/objectives behind the actions seem to take a more important role than how you seem to consider it in the US.
        blacklion 2y ago
        > One of the key components of terrorism is random or at least very loose targeting and some degree of disregard for collateral damage. It is very modern meaning of the word. It is almost re-labeled, like "piracy" for copyright infringement.
        potato3732842 2y ago
        >It is very modern meaning of the word. It is almost re-labeled, like "piracy" for copyright infringement. And people who called themselves anarchists used to be ideologically communist-adjacent. That was well over a century ago. Words change over time. The definition has been what is has since at least the 1970s, probably longer depending on where you measure. It is not "very modern".
        toast0 2y ago
- potato3732842 2y ago
  Terrorism is simpoly what the government/establishment calls any politically motivated public action that includes crime or violence when anyone other than them does it. 4chan/anon was screwing with websites -> terrorism Neo-nazis finding unsecured online printers at colleges and printing their propaganda -> terrorism Shoot a public figure because you think they've done a tone of wrong -> terrorism. Go on a bulldozer rampage against people who have wronged you -> terrorism
- blacklion 2y ago
  To be honest, it IS terrorism, by the very first definition. First terrorists (named so) was revolutionaries (not bolsheviks, but other parties) in Russian Empire, who go to Government official's office and shot them in the face with Nagant revolver. Look up Vera Zasulich, Dmitry Karakozov, Narodnaya Volya (organization), etc. It is TRUE terrorism, not bombing Christmas parade or marathon.