What we know about CEO shooting suspect

Post by ceejayoz » Tue, Dec 10, 2024, 4:08 PM UTC

mordymoop wrote: post #735

llm_nerd wrote: post #623

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>media really over-estimated this persons competence It is a bit of psychological blindness where we convince ourselves that random murders aren't as easy as they really are. The truth is that almost anyone -- including people with lots of security theater -- can be nullified by random people. This is quadruply true in the era of drones.

We came within a literal inch of witnessing the assassination of a presidential candidate earlier this year, by a kid with no particular skills and an easily obtained rifle. We are lucky that people are mostly nonviolent.

Post by Sindisil » Tue, Dec 10, 2024, 4:08 PM UTC

MisterTea wrote: post #775

xyst wrote: post #491

A couple of theories: - person clearly had meticulously planned the execution of the hit and exfiltration. Even leaving red herrings on his way out of the city (backpack full of Monopoly money). Yet clumsily keeps _all_ of the evidence that would implicate himself in this murder. Not to mention he is wandering about in public while a multi-state manhunt is underway with the full weight of alphabet soup agencies, and…

> Probably fail to do so, then eventually get convicted on all charges and end up in a supermax penitentiary for life. Where he will finally get decent health care for free.

Post by fastball » Tue, Dec 10, 2024, 4:08 PM UTC

asdafasad wrote: post #784

jkrom3 wrote: post #741

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This statement is so far outside of the bounds of reality it's laughable. What about those people that are using United Health Care and getting the support they need? They account for nothing?

Ahaha, yeah, right? It's just ridiculous. What a laughable debate, this whole insurance thing is. It's just the free market working to optimize outcomes. By the way, can you help me understand what a 'pre-existing condition' is? Literally nobody outside of America has experience with this term.

Post by uoaei » Tue, Dec 10, 2024, 4:10 PM UTC

thegrimmest wrote: post #737

LetsGetTechnicl wrote: post #728

Murder is only justified when it's your business model and behind numbers and profit margins in an Excel sheet are the real people you are sentencing to a lifetime of suffering and/or death.

Refusing to pay for medical care is hardly murder. It’s a standard monetary dispute, and we have a due process for these. If you think that so many claims are being unreasonably denied, why not start a company offering bridge loans, and funding legal challenges? Maybe the courts are too inefficient to handle these disputes, but that’s an argument for reforming the courts, not for shooting executives.

Post by IncreasePosts » Tue, Dec 10, 2024, 4:11 PM UTC

LetsGetTechnicl wrote: post #750

jkrom3 wrote: post #741

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This statement is so far outside of the bounds of reality it's laughable. What about those people that are using United Health Care and getting the support they need? They account for nothing?

UHC has one of the highest rates of claim denials. Sure, there are some people getting the support they need but there are a lot of people who are not. What justification is there for that? The only justification is "profit", and that is not something that should ever be involved in healthcare.