A Health Insurance company denies your medical claims threatening your health and your life = good business
A frustrated house wife who can't afford health care threatens a billion dollar corporation = jail
this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2024
600 points (99.0% liked)
News
23627 readers
2479 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Pretty obvious indicator of where our collective priorities are, isn't it?
Bullshit. Who has the power? Yes. But fuck no, that is not "collective priority". Until people learn to with together, collective priority is utterly meaningless.
This is the same shit billionaires use to justify their existence.
load more comments
(3 replies)
The judge set her bail at $100,000, citing "the status of our country at this point".
So the judge is holding this lady personally responsible for the nation's sentiment towards healthcare companies?
Activist fucking judge
Almost always Conservatives being snowflakes
Stop acknowledging facts or you'll be next.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Once again, don't fuck with rich people! They don't like it when you point out their scam.
Funny how fast and hard the state reacts if someone has something against the rich.
And this is supposed to make her less likely to want to kill them? Lol
I'd never take that kind of action against another person for any reason. Now that I've got that out of the way, this alone makes me feel that way. I don't think these rich people or their highly paid judges and politicians realize "setting an example" in the current climate isn't going to have the effect they think it will.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Suspected killer. Even the BBC is towing the line.
I’d argue that the word are unarguably the killer’s. After all, they were written on the bullet cases that were used to kill the guy.
Whether or not Luigi is the killer is still being decided by the courts. If they had said the words were Luigi’s, there would be an issue. But they didn’t say that; They said “CEO killer” instead, which simply attributes the words to whoever killed the dude.
Those are the killer's words... whether Mangione is the killer is another story. not that I think this woman should be in jail either; it's absolutely ridiculous that she is. The reporting is fairly objective though as far as I can tell.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Toeing the line? They're going well beyond that. Have you read the BBC's finger-wagging admonishment of the poors / puff piece for United Health?
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(7 replies)
Who did she threaten? A spefic person? A group? What makes the judge think this was a credible threat?
Just another way to squash any kind of continuance of an idea, whoch is very dystopian.
They get to make up rules whenever rich people are worried.
load more comments
(9 replies)
Hmm the company is violating her human rights and endangering her life, they are the ones who should be in front of the judge
And own state law, article 365.161(d)...
Making threats just tells them what the plans are. Move in silence, and do what needs to be done. You wouldn't tell (or imply to) a cop that you're planning on robbing a store, because they would expect it and act accordingly.
STFU Fridays!
It's better to learn anyways.
Let's all learn about jury nullification!
https://beyondcourts.org/sites/default/files/2022-07/Jury-Nullification-Toolkit-English_0.pdf
CGPGrey: The Law You Won't Be Told if you’re more of a watch-funny-YouTube guy than a read-50-page-PDF guy.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Doesn't sound like a threat. Sounds like a sincere warning.
Without knowing more, it is the “you people are next” that makes this a threat in particular. You should easily be able to say deny defend or depose or whatever, just don’t use threats
Hence why we have an actual standard for this...
A random housewife giving a vague threat at the end of an already heated call by referencing a recent event involving the company, really doesn't come close to the definition.
load more comments
(7 replies)
It's a threat. They just have no reason to belive she, in particular, should be believed. It's not a true threat, by legal standards. I'm not a lawyer, but I'm very confident of this. This is an obvious miscarriage of justice. Throwing a threat out in anger or frustration does not make a true threat.
Also she never said she would be the one to do it just that they would be next.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Pointing out that someone's behaviour matches that which caused something bad to happen to someone else when you are not the one who did that bad thing to someone else is not a fucking threat
load more comments
(22 replies)
and then when the cops came, she admitted to it, and continued on saying stuff like "they're evil" and "They deserve karma"
like. Okay. The insurance peeps are fucking evil. she's not wrong.
but maybe don't tell the cops that? maybe shut the fuck up and get a lawyer.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I have to agree with you, mostly.
The system gets to make the rules and even if she didn’t say, "you people are next" I think they’d still be doing this. Corpos control our justice system and they will not tolerate us glorifying Luigi Mangione (please jurors look up "nullification”)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Gotta tap down those unruly peons before the rest get uppity.
Rules for thee but not for me rule.
Does she have a GoFundMe? I'd like to buy her a green jacket
The very example of corporate power the shooter killed someone over. You are powerless, stay in your place “Coppertop.”
I googled the latest news on her (my mistake, right?).
There isn’t anything newer than 24 hours old. I guess they are making her sit in jail over the weekend?
Does anyone have any better info sources? I don’t think we should let this disappear.
The problem is that people up top don't even have a concept understanding of 'nothing to lose' because they always had something. Money, family, opportunities, reputation, they don't understand what it feels to truly have nothing but your body, and even then they want to take that away from you too. There's a difference between dying alone from untreated, unmedicated cancer in your cold apartment or making your voice be heard and being throw into jail. What are court fees other than a drop in a overflowing bucket of medical dept for a terminally ill person? Terminal not by nature but by denial of proper care. The US really needs a constitutional amendment that protects basic human rights of Nourishment, Shelter, Warmth, Sleep, Health and Social Interaction from capitalistic exploitation.
view more: next ›