Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hit men aren't what you think

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 311 posts

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#161

Post by fsckboy »

itsanaccount wrote: post #20

[flagged]

>> Because he ran an insurance company, you would look at everything from individuals who have been turned down for insurance coverage and lost their spouse as a result of it. That would be one thing the police would look for.

> So I would think more likely it was somebody with a particular grudge that had access to inside information to know where to be and when to be there.

it's usually somebody close to you.

Need to look at the wife, they had recently separated, and she likely had access to the curious information about where he was and would be at specific times (wouldn't you expect him to stay in the hotel where the meeting was to be held? this plot was based on that not being the case.)

She stated to the press there were threats against him. When asked for specifics, she was suddenly too busy caring for her family to answer.

They lived in CT and for a time it seemed the gun had come from CT, despite the killer arriving from Atlanta; but I saw an item that said the CT gun had been accounted for, but I'm not sure the status of that. The bizarre messages on the bullets? to throw investigators off the scent.

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#162

Post by lazystar »

dole wrote: post #12
nirav72 wrote: post #7

The shooter used a rare weapon with an integrated suppressor (or "Silencer" as the article indicates). A British made station six 9. I wonder if that will be the focus of investigators, since its an highly unusual weapon.

News is saying he used a B&T Station Six, it doesn't look like he's twisting to operate a Welrod action in the video to me. It looks like he's racking a slide. He doesn't hesitate like he discovers it's jammed after the first shot, he already goes to rack it because the subsonic cartridges he's using won't cycle the action with the (edit:) suppressor on without a Neilsen device.

the news is wrong, per the gun type. surprising?

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#164

Post by lotsofpulp »

TinkersW wrote: post #143
avalys wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

United Healthcare is a publicly-traded company which makes a 6% profit margin and pays a dividend, which means that those profits ultimately benefit people's retirement accounts, pensions and middle-class investments. The person who was killed made $10M last year, while UHC provided care to 52 million patients. So, the CEO was paid approximately $0.20 per patient treated last year. What part of all this do you believ…

UHC does not provide care, they are a leach on society, as all health insurances companies are.

If UNH was approving all their claims, then people would complain about increased premiums/deductibles.

People just want to complain about not being able to afford something they want (American healthcare).

While UNH does some shameful things, even criminal things, the celebration of a public execution of a second in command guy is embarrassing for HN.

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#165

Post by kube-system »

runako wrote: post #156
kube-system wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to who? It changes the calculus for me. I pay my health insurance because it covers the services I need. I could absolutely opt out if I wanted to, but I don't.

> I pay my health insurance because it covers the services I need I think that, aside from the cost, this is probably the biggest issue most people have with health insurance in the US. UHC makes a lot of money specifically in part by not covering services you need, for example by having accountants override your doctors's orders. If it were as simple as getting the services you need in exchange for money, I don't th…

> If it were as simple as getting the services you need in exchange for money, I don't think as many people would hate the system as much.

That's exactly how simple it is to be uninsured. The problem is the risk is not something people can absorb.

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#166

Post by lotsofpulp »

cogman10 wrote: post #38
nickff wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This phrase: "responsible for so many deaths" is doing a lot of work in your post. What is your theory of responsibility? Is it legal or ethical, and if it is the latter (as I would suspect), what framework and criteria is it evaluated under? The answer is easy for a serial killer (obviously responsible for willful murder), a little more difficult for a soldier in war (directly responsible, but perhaps defending them…

> What is your theory of responsibility? Ethical: He was the CEO of the company and ultimately the buck stops with him on company policies. The company he lead has the highest number of insurance denials (double most other insurance agencies). That has almost certainly lead to death as people not being able to afford treatment is a great way to die. Consider, for example, if someone has cancer and insurance denies co…

> He was the CEO of the company and ultimately the buck stops with him on company policies

No, it didn’t. He had the title of CEO due to title inflation, but UNH’s real CEO is Andrew Witty. The buck stops with Witty (and the board that votes for Witty).

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#167

Post by kube-system »

wolrah wrote: post #155
kube-system wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most countries do have private health insurance, even if they also have more robust public options.

Private health insurance in a country that has a robust public option is an entirely different thing because that baseline level of care means that the private providers have to offer something substantial above and beyond the baseline to justify their continued existence. People with medical needs can choose to tell them all where to stick it and still live without going in to debt. Most insured individuals in Ameri…

I understand all of this, I was just refuting the suggestion that profit motivated private health insurers don't exist elsewhere, because they do.

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#168

Post by sakopov »

int_19h wrote: post #32

Growing up in Russia in the 90s, assassinations (usually of folk associated with various organized crime groups, but also the occasional journalist or politician) were fairly common. As I recall, usually the person would get shot with some common weapon - often milsurp TT - somewhere in their daily routine where there aren't people around, e.g. on the stairs in their apartment building. But sometimes you did get more…

Yep. Grew up in the 90s Russia. Every spring when the snow melted you had bodies show up in nearby forests. It was such a common thing people started calling them snowdrops (after the first flower of spring). Everyone tried to keep cash in USD and you often got better rates from the guys selling currency in the streets. These guys were dying like flies. I've lost count how many times we'd find dismembered hand or foot while at a family outing in nature. Nobody reported any of this stuff because the cops were often bought by these criminal organizations. It was truly a wild west.

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#169

Post by dghlsakjg »

jajko wrote: post #21
big-green-man wrote: post #4

This is an interview with someone presented as some type of expert that obviously is not an expert. 1) it is not hard to get a silencer. You can make one in under an hour with cheap parts from a hardware store and a drill. 2) the CEO was at a conference. It's not surprising that this person "knew he would be there", it's interesting that this interviewee stresses this point like it is some big one to be made. The CEO…

No need for speculations, literally any theory may be a valid one and we simply don't know. Agree re that silencers, they are trivial to make if one has some basic skills and equipment, the problem is usage - you can't use them anywhere where folks may ask questions. Don't mean for hits obviously but some training with silencers is required to wield them well. But maybe in rural US nobody bats an eye, hard to say fro…

FYI: In a huge majority of the land in the US, there is no restriction on shooting. Private land outside of cities is fair game, much of the parkland/government owned land is legal for target practice. It really isn't uncommon to hear gunshots, or see shooters out in the country. Shooting with a handgun out in the woods is what some people do when the weather is nice.
Post reply on HN