3 upvotes, 2 direct replies (showing 2)
View submission: The UnitedHealthcare Gunman Understands the Surveillance State
I think once you start granting people some level of impunity for killing people, you start to go down a very slippery slope, so I think the notion of vigilante justice is really really scary, because what you do is you stop agreeing to settle political problems politically you have decided political problems will be solved with violence. That sword cuts both ways. That being said, I don't think the current state of the US medical system is one that won't start producing more of these outcomes. The reason you condemn things like this is because you quickly arrive at a point where you're also giving people you disagree with the right to kill people they find morally reprehensible. Whether or not I agree with it or even support it is less important than my willingness to adhere to a social contract where we don't kill each other. However, I do find the argument that these healthcare companies have directly been responsible for the deaths of many people in the name of profit to be compelling. I don't think the US healthcare will look the same way in 20 years, and I don't think that change is going to come easily.
Comment by [deleted] at 07/12/2024 at 02:23 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
One thing to consider is that these executives and companies are already committing violence on us all the time, it's just not as blatant as shooting someone. Their policies and decisions kill people all the time, but we've been conditioned to accept that as normal and sometimes even a good or smart course of action.
Comment by gakule at 06/12/2024 at 23:23 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Don't get me wrong, I totally agree and I don't want to encourage rampant vigilante justice because everyone would be a target of someone.
I do not feel an ounce of sympathy or care for someone who has been snuffed out, though, that has been a purveyor of so much human suffering.