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.
this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2024
651 points (98.9% liked)
News
23627 readers
1978 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
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
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.
load more comments
(2 replies)
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?
load more comments
(34 replies)
view more: next ›