You know what? Everyone deserves freedom of speech, and threatening healthcare CEOs is not, in my opinion, a breach of it. There is a huge difference between threatening vulnerable minorities and threatening invulnerable minorities.
Doesn’t a threat have to be credible? As in you can make a threat if you’d like to but it has to actually be a legitimate threat. This isn’t that.
Realistically unless someone says this phrase and has google searches of the CEOs home address, this isn’t a credible threat at all.
You have to make sure you make threats so outlandish that you couldn’t possibly execute them, like “I’m going to grab Trump by the ankle and spin around really fast, and then let go, launching him directly into the sun”
Maybe if we start a rumor that’s there’s billions of exploitable people on Pluto all the rich CEO’s will race each other there, die like the ones in that shitty submarine and leave us the fuck alone.
Happy ending.
“Freedom of speech” in US Law means that the government cannot suppress ideas, expressions, or beliefs so long as those ideas or beliefs do not harm specific peoples, nor negatively impact public health and morals, nor negatively impact national security. In some cases, it isn’t allowed to promote harm of protected classes including race, religion, skin color, gender, or disability, but in the USA that often becomes a civil matter.
If I had my way we’d be even more strict about it: hate speech would be an actual crime and sexual orientations would also be protected classes.
So a woman quoting a murderer who assassinated an insurance company CEO, directly sending that quote to the insurance company that denied her claim, is not and will never be covered by freedom of speech.
Shit like this is going to happen until us poors remember our place.
Lol no
Jury Nullification is my right.
The thing about Jury Nullification is that you have to make it through the majority of a trial. 97-98% of criminal cases (in the U.S.) end in a plea deal without ever going to trial.
Sure, but that’s on them. Taking a deal is always in the hands of the defendant. But if it looks like public opinion is on their side and the concept of jury Nullification has become common knowledge, that might be enough to substantially swing what’s offered in those plea deals. Prosecutor might be generous to avoid the jury letting them off Scott free.
not on lemmy.world evidently
Did she say she was running for the presidency? Because in that case, she could take someone out on main street and she could grab them by the pussy too and nobody would say anything.
She should have tried to purchase a president or maybe purchase the presidency itself for a self pardon.
Joe should pardon her wtf Joe!
Sounds more like a setup imho
This is so sad
Briana Boston is her name
That’s for the court to decide.
For us, the people, to decide. You dropped your clown wig.
When the court decides that IS the people deciding, judges are a public office and the jury is literally just a group of people who have to make a unanimous decision. You dropped your red star.
Not a communist or whatever, dummy. The people decide, dummy. The court is an arranged meeting place for those people to inform the judge of their consensus opinion, dummy.
You dropped your clown wig, dummy.
lmao
I think she’s guilty (you can’t be making threats like that on the heels of someone actually committing an act of violence) but even that is too much time. IDEK if she deserves jail time at all. I’d rather see her get a fine and maybe a month or two of community service.
I don’t believe that “You people are next.” is a direct threat.
What’s the cool-down timer on the free speech special ability ?
Asking for a friend.
I don’t believe that “You people are next.” is a direct threat.
Sounds pretty direct to me, especially in the context of recent events. I don’t fault the CS rep at all for reporting it to her superiors and the police. Totally reasonable to be wary of copycat crimes or just similar acts of violence against healthcare insurers in general.
“you people are next” doesn’t sound direct to me because “next” for what? Next for a random vigilante to shoot, next to die in general, next to face bad PR?
My interpretation also leaves no room to imply I’ll be the one actioning whatever the “next” thing is. I’d use “you’re next” in the same use case as “karma will get you” or “the universe will balance out your luck” it’s more of a cosmic wish than a rise to action.
She made a direct reference to the slogan used by the guy who murdered an insurance company’s CEO, then said, “you people are next.” That absolutely can reasonably be construed as a direct threat of violence. Whether or not you think the person making the threat will actually do it is another question, but the context and grammar the direct threat interpretation totally logical.
I can see how it’s directly linked to “people are out there shooting CEOs for this, you’re next” is threatening, but I dont see how the language of the threat implies that the person saying the threat has any intention to also be the shooter, and not just that they wish and believe that a shooter is out there with this CEO on their hit list.
I don’t believe that “You people are next.” is a direct threat.
I’m sure you don’t, but it’s a reasonable interpretation of what she said.
What’s the cool-down timer on the free speech special ability ?
What do you mean by “special ability”?
I don’t think she was actually making a threat, but she sure chose to sound like she was, which was fucking stupid on her part. Given how the rest of the evidence makes it clear the threat wasn’t serious, I don’t think she should be charged as such, but perhaps a lesser charge that affords her a fine or something. Can’t let people get away with that shit, but charging her like she’s making a serious threat of violence is a waste of taxpayer money.
trump stole 500 million dollars from the state of ny… rapists spend less than a decade
this is a warning to poor people
She hasn’t been sentenced and the maximum for rape is
-
For Aggravated sexual abuse with children: Life imprisonment without parole or any term not less than 30 years
-
For all other Federal Sexual Abuse cases: Life without parole or any other term
Unpopular opinion: When the minimum prison sentence for child abuse is higher than that for murder, every child abuser has a strong incentive to kill their victim, getting rid of the most dangerous witness with no further risk to themselves.
Crimes aren’t mutually exclusive, you would be charged for both.
Yes, and getting charged 30+ years no matter what makes any additional punishment completely irrelevant.
No criminal is ever deterred from crime by the thought that it could get worse than 30 years in prison.Right but there is absolutely no incentive to kill the victim as you previously claimed.
-
Reminds me of the case way back in the day with someone who pirated music getting insane fines and how it was juxtaposed with the relatively small settlement an airline had to pay when its negligence actually killed people.
It seems I remember Kim Dotcom
listinglosing his extradition case, as well.
I hope this case gets some attention too. This is some ginned up bullshit. We can’t let them stomp us into silence.
I’m not celebrating a murder, this is some fucked up shit in many dimensions and I would prefer a different timeline.
But remember we are not children who need to bow our heads and take our scolding.
For-profit insurance companies are liable for the deaths they cause. Full stop.
How’s that for moral clarity?
This is some ginned up bullshit.
The “you’re next” after referencing a high profile murder is what actually did it.
Like, that’s a credible threat. 15 years is fucking insane, and context is going to matter a lot. Did she just get denied cancer treatment for her 2 year old? Or told it’s not insurance’s fault doctors won’t prescribe opioids? Or any of a million things in between.
That’s why we have trials, to find out all that stuff. And if it’s a jury trial I feel juries would be sympathetic.
The 100k is the real bullshit, but not owning guns doesn’t mean much. It’s insanely easy to buy a gun without a background check thru private seller loopholes.
But our bond system is insane, because the it causes judges to inflate the amount 10x. If you can afford to put it up, you get it all back later. A bondsman you pay 10%, they put up 90%, and they get the whole 100% back. Your 10% is their profit. If a bondsman thinks that’s a good risk, why does the court consistently over estimate the risk?
Bonds only exist so poor people are punished more than rich people.
credible
able to be believed; convincing
Did anyone really think she was coming after them after that? No. She got heated on the phone and said something she shouldn’t have.
It’s not nothing. What she did was wrong, and it’s reasonable for it to be a crime. We don’t want to always have to investigate or deal with constant threats. However, she was neither credible nor specific, which are two major criteria. (Keep that in mind when you’re posting here, by the way.) She committed a crime, but not one that should be very serious.
The way they’ve framed her is obscene.
No. It was not a threat. It was not wrong. It was not a crime.
The way they’ve framed her is obscene.
You’re factoring in what you already know about this woman and letting that influence if it was credible.
The people she was on the phone likely know nothing about her besides what was discussed on the call and the threat. That should be reported, and should be investigated.
The bigger issue about framing is the media running headlines that it was just the “deny, defend, despise” that resulted in charges.
A cynic would say that was by order of the owners hoping to discourage a movement, even tho any idiot could have told them it would have the opposite and inflame people.
Which it obviously has.
I like to think at some point people realized this would backfire, and just held their tongue. But I’m an optimist when I can be.
That should be reported, and should be investigated.
Yes. Certainly.
But the bigger issue is that the punishment doesn’t fit the crime. It’s going to cost some resources from law enforcement, and that needs to be punished because we don’t want people like this regularly draining our tax dollars. But any punishment more than probation and/or community service is obscene.
They’ve framed her as a terrorist, and she’s clearly not.
But the bigger issue is that the punishment doesn’t fit the crime
Yes, that’s why the rest of my comment was essentially what you wrote, just more in depth…
The people she was on the phone likely know nothing about her besides what was discussed on the call and the threat.
Likewise, she knew nothing about them. A threat against some random customer service agent in a company so huge you have no idea even what country the call center is in is categorically not credible!
Thanks for the insight on the typical terms of bonds. Good info.
So eyes peeled on this one too I guess. They are making an example of her, I mean the judge plainly said so. We can’t let them get away with these excessive charges.
I didn’t kill anyone and I never will. But I will be damned if I let this moment fade into the next news cycle.
As a society, we are having the conversation about for-profit healthcare NOW!
They are making an example of her,
Yep, which is opening them up to civil suits, but is an open secret about our justice system.
As a society, we are having the conversation about for-profit healthcare NOW!
Think of it like the fediverse. Last year a big event made a lot of us ditch reddit, but some had already been here, and for the majority it wasn’t enough for them to change behavior.
I don’t think Luigi is the big event that causes permanent change, there’s been a lot of people who have been pushing for healthcare reform, 20 years isn’t rare, some for decades longer.
The first presidential candidate who had universal healthcare as a part of the party platform was Teddy Roosevelt in 1920…
It’s a century long fight against the healthcare industry, and it’s not going to be as easy as what just happened to change shit as long as all of our options in general elections have already been bought off.
We reference dogs who catch a car everytime Republicans win majorities and the presidency, but on 1/7/2020 Joe Biden didn’t leap into action, he “looked into” things for so long we lost the House and had an excuse not to do anything. “Winning” by electing a moderate only depresses turnout in midterms and the next presidential cycle.
We have to grow up and admit that or absolutely nothing will really change. The first step is understanding the root cause or we’ll never stop fighting symptoms.
What are you talking about? You just sort of wandered off in the middle there. If I sus your point, we just have to accept it? Or that it will be a gradual erosion?
You can sit there and be all wise. I’m going to keep shitting on insurance executives and encouraging others to do the same.
If I sus your point, we just have to accept it? Or that it will be a gradual erosion?
Nope, it’s that Joe Biden wouldn’t fix it, and neither would Kamala, hell, the biggest recipient of UHC donations was Kamala
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/unitedhealth-group/summary?id=D000000348
I’m going to keep shitting on insurance executives and encouraging others to do the same.
No one’s saying you shouldn’t.
I’m just saying we also need to shit on the investors.
And the politicians from both parties they bought to prevent us from fixing anything.
We won’t win this thru the courts, they said with the money.
We won’t win this with politicians who took the money either, we can only win if we first win in the Dem primary. Lose there and we’ll keep losing.
I want to actually fix the problem, and am talking about how
You want to fix a symptom, and it’s a major symptom, but we’ll be fighting the problem at the same time so why not fix the problem so fixing this (and other) symptoms is easy?
You can sit there and be all wise
In general you do t insult people because you don’t understand, but I provided clarification anyways because this is important. Others won’t.
“The car on the other side of the zipper merge is going now. You’re next.”
It doesn’t mean I intend to do anything, I’m just observing society.
Work any phone helpdesk job and you will be threatened six ways to Sunday by people who are upset over the most minor things.
Yes this incident came after very prominent consequences for an insurer in the US, but I would be hard pressed to believe that someone who works for a company that denies people lifesaving healthcare hasn’t heard worse.
I did for a couple years, we’d have reported this too.
Anyone would…
And they did, I was threatened multiple times at a Sprint call center and reported it.
We all did, cops never even take a report, weird that the health insurance people get special treatment.
I’m not celebrating a murder
You can though, no one will stop you.
This specific murder It isn’t morally wrong. It isn’t hypocritical. It isn’t compromising some foundational pillar of being a human.
Those who stand at the top of a capitistic, private healthcare industry made a choice to create, perpetuate, secure, and promote a system which resulted in deaths of millions for the benefit of shareholders and themselves.
You don’t have to qualify your indifference or quiet your support. There is no moral quandary here.
This has literally helped people already. Anthem undid an anesthesia policy reform which would have not covered it in procedures after a certain amount of minutes
She would have never been able to be charged before the patriot act. No weapons, no capacity to act on them, vague and unspecific. Its crazy how our freedoms have been eroded and how many folks seem to think thats just fine and dandy.
I’ll never understand how people are ok with limiting other people’s freedom based on “what if”.
Indeed, when George unleashed that shit, Patriot Act, I told everyone we are one step closer to forming the SS or NKVD. Once again, we have Mango Mussolini with his merry band of racist thugs.
I have not liked it since the get go and fought it. Ugh I have these emails to a dem senator with have who came out of the military who is pretty good but to entrenched in the mindset. Still I never really felt it till this arrest. Chilling as fuck.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
I saw someone else say this, but I hope they start rounding up the incels on Twitter saying “your body, my choice” as credible rape threats if what this woman said is going to be litigated with such fervor.
Rape doesn’t take money from the rich and is therefore not a crime.
So we should start raping the rich?
Eww I was gonna eat that.
👏👏👏
5 second rule?
Rape is too good for them.
That’s a pretty ignorant thing to say.
Clearly you don’t understand it then.
What exactly is it I’m not understanding about the false claim that “rape is not a crime”?
The rich aren’t losing money because of rape, so the cops don’t care to investigate it. It was a tongue in cheek joke implying cops only exist to protect the rich when their money is at risk. Another comment in this thread pointed out that women are regularly told “there’s nothing we can do” when they go to the police because an abusive boyfriend threatened to hurt them. They’re pointing out the special privilege cops give to the rich
Which is complete bullshit. Men are getting arrested daily on the basis of mere accusation of rape having happened. It’s illegal and it’s one of the most strongly enforced laws there is. This was the case before me-too and especially is the case since.
Exhibit A: P. Diddy.
Unfortunately in way too many cases judges tend to side with the rapist because they’re relatable… See rapist Brock Allen Turner. That happens A LOT. that’s just the one that was publicized.
I personally know two people this happened to. The person who raped them got a slap on the wrist. One victim was a man, the other a woman. Ask around and I’m sure there are innumerable similar stories just like healthcare denials.
I’m saying rich people done get charged with rape.
Two wrongs don’t make a right. She could have said DDD without “you people are next.”
Having said that, if we’re really judging people, and corporations are people, why isn’t the denial of health care seen as manslaughter? 70 people pass every day due to the lack of medical care in America. We have worse outcomes, shorter average life than other civilized countries.
When is a corporation sued for murder & sent to jail? I know it sounds crazy, but that’s the point. These systems aren’t making sense. They lack humanity. This is a bad, morally bankrupt system. Older Americans loves their Medicare: that’s socialism.
I’m so sick of this shit.
why isn’t the denial of health care seen as manslaughter?
Because they make money when they deny something.
Thank you for answering the rhetorical question, homie. ✌️Money is the root of all evil.
Money can do wonderful things. The love of (gildlust) money is the root of all evil.
Tru dat
Give me yours then so you’ll be a better person?
Two wrongs don’t make a right.
They lack humanity.
If they lack humanity, why doesn’t it make a right?
Nonhumans deserve rights too
True.
Demons don’t.
Hurt people hurt people. I don’t know how to fix things. But if we go around destroying one another, what will be left?
I think the system is immoral. It should be abolished. An absurd takeaway from that would be “health insurance workers should be jailed.”
I find it challenging to say our humanity is through being inhuman to one another. Wouldn’t our humanity need to come from humane action?
I’m as upset as everyone else about these machinations. Everyone is a child of someone. If we don’t remember that, all is lost.
Front line worker: “I have no moral culpability, I’m just doing what my manager tells me to.”
Manager: “I have no moral culpability, I just do what the executives tell me to.”
Executives: “I have no moral culpability, I just maximize shareholder value.”
Shareholders: “All I did was buy an index fund in my 401k. Why you trying to pin this on me?”
186 people murdered by the health insurance companies every day, yet somehow not a single human being involved has any moral culpability.
This is why Luigi did nothing wrong. If there is one person who has moral culpability, it’s the CEO. They justify their obscene salaries by taking credit for a company’s performance. They can accept the moral culpability as well.
It didn’t fly at Nuremberg, yet it flies in capitalistic societies who demanded retribution at Nuremberg. Go figure.
We are limited by our material conditions.
It sure would be nice if all hurt people could be safely rehabilitated and reeducated so they stop hurting people. That’s not feasible at the moment, though.
The next best thing is just making sure they can never hurt anyone ever again, until we can build that society where no one ever gets hurt ever again.
Two wrongs don’t make a right
There was only the one wrong here, she didn’t do anything wrong
