pcgeek11
Lifer
- Jun 12, 2005
- 22,340
- 4,973
- 136
1) Parents regularly trot out "two wrongs don't make a right", but in response to their children engaging in tit-for-tat unpleasantness. However, if one kid take the other's toy and the other kid responds by breaking their brother's nose, it's not an appropriate time to trot out that trite line because the kid with the broken nose would feel like their crime has been entirely blown out of proportion along with their punishment, coupled with implied victim-blaming that if they hadn't done the crime in the first place, then that punishment wouldn't have occurred. Therefore by using such a trite line yourself amongst adults, you *will* be perceived as equating the two events in question. The whole point of the saying is that it needs no further explanation, nor did you accompany it with one, now you're trying to "who, me?" your way out of it.
2) It's true, vigilante justice is a slippery slope, as there are no checks and balances in the process of vigilantism. However, as you predictably miss the point I shall make it once again: A fair and just system leaves no opening for vigilantism and therefore no-one will feel sympathy for their cause; they will have committed a crime like any other and should be punished accordingly. Many people feel sympathy for Luigi's cause precisely because of the points I've previously raised in that the CEO and many like him have thrived in a system that should have punished him but instead reveres him.
3) It would help if you actually read the news. He did not pick a person at random, because if he did, he wouldn't have written "delay," "deny" and "depose" on bullets left at the scene, would he?
1.) IMO that logic doesn't correspond to this particular subject which is about a company doing immoral things causing deaths. AND an individual intentionally shooting a man in the back in a response to said immoral acts and causing his death.
2.) I disagree. Both Luigi and the offending parties of said companies should be punished, but not by a vigilante.
3.) I do and did read the news. I didn't say he picked a Person at Random. He picked this United Healthcare CEO even though there were no ties between Luigi and United Healthcare or Luigi's family. It was suggested that he picked him due to opportunity and it is the largest health care provider in the US.
"It was indicated that Three words etched on the killer’s ammunition—“delay”, “deny”, and “depose”—are reminiscent of delay, deny and defend: three words long associated with the private insurance companies’. *https://www.deshawlaw.com/blog/what-does-delay-deny-defend-mean."

Luigi Mangione began plotting to ‘wack’ Brian Thompson as early as August, investigators say
In an entry in the notebook dated Aug. 15, Mangione allegedly wrote he “was glad” that he procrastinated in his preparations because it “allowed him to learn more” about UHC.

“The target is insurance,” he allegedly wrote, adding that UnitedHealthcare “checks every box.”
In October 22, he allegedly wrote “This investor conference is a true windfall,” apparently in reference to the company’s annual Investor Day conference at the Hilton in Midtown — outside of which he would allegedly later gun down Thompson, a 50-year-old married father of two.
He allegedly wrote of his intention to “wack” [sic] the CEO of one of the health insurance companies in attendance.
Brian Thomson's was CEO at United Healthcare for only 2 years and 8 months. Apr 2021 through Dec 2024. Did he really deserve to die? Should this put a target on the back of all Healthcare Providers Executives and / or Employees?
I believe they should be held legally responsible for their actions IAW the laws of the United States, Not murdered on the streets by Vigilantes.