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

71–80 of 311 posts

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#71

Post by dgfitz »

avalys wrote: post #60
aijdosaijd wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personal income, that which sustains someones family, is vastly different then the billions made by United off the backs of those suffering. What, are you some healthcare exec or something? This is not the own you think it is.

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…

It could have 65 million, I think it the immediate answer.

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#72

Post by silverquiet »

allturtles wrote: post #46
itsanaccount wrote: post #20

[flagged]

Even if we do accept that this executive was responsible for many deaths, you will need to find a law that lets you prosecute him or get one passed. There's a reason we don't just let people murder murderers, even if they have very good moral justification for it.

> you will need to find a law that lets you prosecute him or get one passed

When this proves impossible, and a gun is trivially easy to obtain, what do you think happens? The president-elect himself is alive today only because a bullet was off-trajectory by a centimeter or two.

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#73

Post by jonathanlb »

avalys wrote: post #60
aijdosaijd wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personal income, that which sustains someones family, is vastly different then the billions made by United off the backs of those suffering. What, are you some healthcare exec or something? This is not the own you think it is.

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…

Probably the part where people were denied care that they needed in order to provide profits and dividends to its shareholders.

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#74

Post by allturtles »

dtjb wrote: post #55
allturtles wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if we do accept that this executive was responsible for many deaths, you will need to find a law that lets you prosecute him or get one passed. There's a reason we don't just let people murder murderers, even if they have very good moral justification for it.

In the last 50 years, over 1600 murderers have been murdered by the state. It's a question of authority, not justification, and I think that's a much less meaningful distinction. The fact that there's so little sympathy for the death of a CEO who, in their view, callously discards human life tells us the authority is a much smaller dealbreaker than the justification.

> It's a question of authority, not justification, and i think that's a much less meaningful distinction.

On the contrary, it's the crucial distinction. Without process and authority we have mob violence, vengeance killing, and vigilantism. Lynching, clan blood feuds, gang violence, all proceed from this same theory that "getting back" is more important than following the rules. In that world, Brian Thompson's killer should expect to be shot by one of his children for taking away their father.

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#75

Post by kube-system »

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…

> But maybe in rural US nobody bats an eye, hard to say from across the pond.

In rural US, people can just shoot in their back yard or public land away from people entirely. At a range (rural or not) where other people are around, you'll get attention if you have anything unusual.

> But if I have to speculate (who doesn't love that) - could have been a disgruntled veteran. Most of them have some serious health issues, and imagining situation where he isn't treated anymore but feels he should have been isn't that hard for such bad public healthcare system as US has.

I'm guessing you're not super familiar with the US healthcare system. The person murdered isn't responsible for the healthcare that veterans or others in the public healthcare system receive. They were the CEO of the largest private insurer, which is the health insurance many of us would rely on through any non-government job. One of the common frustrations with private health insurers is that they deny care that people feel that they need, but the insurer doesn't agree. The public opinion here (and suggested by the words written on the cartridge casings) is that this is related to this.

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#76

Post by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF »

deadbabe wrote: post #35
dgfitz wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s the classic “hey personal assistant to whom I pay 200k/yr, I have a problem, can you handle it discretely?” Kind of thing.

Fast way to get blackmailed and end up in prison. You need to get connections by ensuring the person recommending you a pro-killer has incentive to ensure you are not discovered.

There's the classic strategy of being vauge-but-clear with one's orders ("Can you deal with this?" "Your Honor, I didn't tell him to kill anyone!") but, disregarding that, it doesn't seem in the employee's best interest. Where does the assistant's $200k/year come from after that? What if the blackmail attempt is rebuffed and the now-former assistant becomes a target for their former employer's new assistant?

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#77

Post by allturtles »

silverquiet wrote: post #72
allturtles wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if we do accept that this executive was responsible for many deaths, you will need to find a law that lets you prosecute him or get one passed. There's a reason we don't just let people murder murderers, even if they have very good moral justification for it.

> you will need to find a law that lets you prosecute him or get one passed When this proves impossible, and a gun is trivially easy to obtain, what do you think happens? The president-elect himself is alive today only because a bullet was off-trajectory by a centimeter or two.

Accepting that such things happen is different from condoning or celebrating them.

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#78

Post by cogman10 »

allturtles wrote: post #46
itsanaccount wrote: post #20

[flagged]

Even if we do accept that this executive was responsible for many deaths, you will need to find a law that lets you prosecute him or get one passed. There's a reason we don't just let people murder murderers, even if they have very good moral justification for it.

I agree with you. A law/regulation should be passed to stop this behavior. I also agree that I don't want people murdering CEOs.

But, I also understand why this happened and frankly don't feel to aggrieved by the death of this CEO.

The issue with US politics is that no law is forthcoming to address anything that happened. We won't see silencers banned or gun control laws enacted. We certainly won't see regulations on health industry to stop them from bleeding leukemia patients of every cent they own.

So, I'm apathetic. If some of these CEOs are going to die as a result of their greed and the lack of justice against the wealthy, so be it.

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#79

Post by JamesBarney »

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote: post #76
deadbabe wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fast way to get blackmailed and end up in prison. You need to get connections by ensuring the person recommending you a pro-killer has incentive to ensure you are not discovered.

There's the classic strategy of being vauge-but-clear with one's orders ("Can you deal with this?" "Your Honor, I didn't tell him to kill anyone!") but, disregarding that, it doesn't seem in the employee's best interest. Where does the assistant's $200k/year come from after that? What if the blackmail attempt is rebuffed and the now-former assistant becomes a target for their former employer's new assistant?

Most personal assistants are not going to go find an hire a contract killer for their 200k a year job.

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#80

Post by someothherguyy »

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.

Here is a video of someone shooting a suppressed pistol with a suppressor with a booster and without a booster:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/wOexPK63jx0?mute=1;autoplay=1

Post reply on HN