• sturger@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    10 hours ago

    So how many of the execs said, “This job isn’t worth risking my life for” and quit? How many of them said, “Maybe we should examine how we do business and change.”? How many of them said, “My God. We’re killing people. I’m out.”?

    • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Nah if literally murdering people for profit didn’t stop them then really nothing will. These people are sociopaths that only see the career ladder.

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      Exec: Hey Claude, are we killing people?

      ClaudeAI: Yes.

      Exec: Are you sure? I think were doing great things for them, i don’t see it as killing

      ClaudeAI: Of course you aren’t, you’re doing great things!

  • skisnow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    They’ll do anything to save themselves except for stop being evil.

    Sometimes I wonder if those second-tier execs are even more culpable than the CEOs. Like, we expect CEOs to be psychopaths. But those second-tier guys that got a seat further down the table, off the back of a good degree and a few decades of hard work? They know what they’re doing is wrong but choose to go along with it anyway because they’re just following orders.

  • FrChazzz@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    10 hours ago

    All these news reports saying that Luigi killed a guy or used a 3D printed gun. As far as I know, Luigi did none of those things and that that is for the courts to decide. Further, I’ve seen plenty of posts online of people saying that he was at the bar with them when the whole thing happened.

    • Therobohour@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I live in Belfast and I’m positive I seen him buying drinks in the red devil pub at that exact time. Right gerry?

    • Allonzee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      I know it’s uncooth to dehumanize anyone, but CEOs like Brian murdered (and the rest continuing to murder all day every day) more people than any serial killer in history because they oversaw automating the process of selling the confidence scheme and then murdering the marks when they threatened the profits of the confidence scheme when they got sick.

      People like Jack the Ripper and Ted kaczynski were pathetic, inept hobbyists at mass murder next to an American “healthcare” ceo, and it isn’t close.

      And we don’t hold them in even lower regard solely because they do it to get ever richer, which is the only practiced American religion.

      As humans go, Brian was somewhere between a serial killer and an even larger scale mass murderer like Adolf Hitler in terms of his practiced inhumanity, maybe he should be dehumanized a little.

      • El_guapazo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Maybe more like an Eichmann. He ran the Nazi trains on time and didn’t actually kill anyone. He facilitated the process and was happy to a part of the murderous system

      • derfunkatron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        Serial killers need patterns, process, and specific situations tailored to their individual neuroses. They are driven or compelled to kill to create or recreate certain events. That’s one thing that separates them from mass murderers or spree killers.

        This guy was just in it for money. Mass murderer, yes, but there have been mafia hitmen with more morals than this fuck.

        The scale of this, and the callousness of it, are far closer to Hitler and other genocidal maniacs because none of them wanted to get their hands dirty; they’d never kill anyone, personally. At least serial killers are into DIY and often are quite proud of their fucked up accomplishments.

        It really says something about this guy’s absolute depravity when a comparison to a serial killer makes someone say “you know, that’s offensive to serial killers.”

        I’m not disagreeing with what you said, I’m just frustrated because this guy was worse than serial killers and that is really something else.

  • Pacattack57@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    86
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 hours ago

    This post either needs to be removed or retitled. Luigi is not convicted and this perpetuates a huge problem in the US of assigning guilt to people through public opinion.

      • Match!!@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        48
        ·
        15 hours ago

        “after Luigi Mangione killed CEO Brian Thompson” is the problem - he allegedly killed that guy

        • jordanlund@lemmy.world
          shield
          M
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          31
          ·
          15 hours ago

          “DA says…” This is not the author making that assessment, it’s the DA. Naturally the DA is going to say he killed the guy, same as I do, or anyone making Luigi memes does.

          There’s no obligation for a reporter to insert “allegedly” where it was not stated.

          • Jax@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            25
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            14 hours ago

            And the DA is wrong for saying that, alongside the reporter for not correcting them.

            You sound like the type of person Brandolini’s Law is based on.

            • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              19
              ·
              14 hours ago

              If you ever created, shared, or upvoted a Luigi meme, then you agree with the sentiment.

                • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  11
                  ·
                  13 hours ago

                  Nope, I’m saying it’s been prevalent on Lemmy and that everyone who created, shared or upvoted that content has absolutely no basis for going “Presumed innocent!”

                  If you think Luigi’s a hero, you have no basis for saying he didn’t shoot and kill thr guy.

      • Bonskreeskreeskree@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        15 hours ago

        It’s saying he murdered the CEO, when he has not been proven/convicted of doing so. How are you a moderator making decisions like that?

        • jordanlund@lemmy.world
          shield
          M
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          49
          ·
          15 hours ago

          If nobody believes he killed the CEO then everyone needs to immediately retract all the Luigi memes.

          It’s clear he shot the guy, the only question is how justified it is.

            • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              13 hours ago

              There are two groups of people:

              1. People who think Luigi’s a criminal who needs to be imprisoned or executed.

              2. People who think Lugi’s a hero who was fully justified in his actions.

              Both groups agree he killed the guy. There is no argument outside tin-foil-hattery that he didn’t.

              The only question remaining is if it’s justified or not.

              • justineie_bobeanie@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                8 hours ago

                Mangione has not admitted to the act nor has he been convicted. He has a right to the presumption of innocence. The state must prove his guilt. Trial by public opinion in the media is not a replacement for a jury of his peers. That is an elementary democratic principle, not a conspiracy theory.

          • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            13 hours ago

            It’s clear he shot the guy,

            It’s really not…

            You cant say for sure it’s him in the video, and while cops say he had a bunch of evidence on him, they also say they didn’t find that evidence till after the chain of custody was violated. Nothing in his backpack is admissible.

            Like, this is America bro, corrupt cops isn’t anything new. They lie all the time, you can’t fault the majority of Americans for not caring what they say as a result.

            • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              10
              ·
              13 hours ago

              It’s not up to you or me to say what’s admissable or not. The gun in the video is the gun in the backpack. If you want to argue the cops planted it, then you have to explain how they got it.

              Occams Razor - Luigi failed to ditch the gun.

              https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/12/us/unitedhealthcare-ceo-shooting-suspect-thursday-hnk

              “Marked shell casings from the assassination scene match the gun found on the suspect. His fingerprints match some key items investigators found nearby. And he was arrested this week – after going silent from his mom and friends for months – with a fake ID and a handwritten “claim of responsibility” referencing the crime site.”

              • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                edit-2
                13 hours ago

                It’s not up to you or me to say what’s admissable or not

                https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/28/us/luigi-mangione-evidence-illegal-search

                It might be the gun.

                It might even have been in the backpack and Luigi just had it on him.

                But it doesn’t matter, the cops pulled a Mark Furhman. They’re not used to having to follow the law, so they fuck up high profile shit.

                Nothing in the backpack will be admissable. And all the evidence was from the backpack.

                • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  12 hours ago

                  Shell casings from the crime scene match the gun found in the backpack. It’s the same gun. See the cited article above.

          • essteeyou@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            21
            ·
            15 hours ago

            Innocent until some guy on Lemmy says otherwise?

            Oh wait, no, it still has to be proven.

            Unless you were present at the time, you’ve seen some videos. Perhaps it’s not likely, but videos can be faked, more easily now than ever before.

            Proof first.

            • jordanlund@lemmy.world
              shield
              M
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              25
              ·
              15 hours ago

              Lemmy isn’t a court of law, neither is the Internet. It’s pretty much universally accepted he killed the guy, if it wasn’t, we wouldn’t have the hero worship.

              What the court is going to decide is if he’s justified or not.

              • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                16
                ·
                13 hours ago

                Lemmy isn’t a court of law, neither is the Internet.

                Proceeds to cite general Internet opinion as proof of guilt.

                • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  9
                  ·
                  13 hours ago

                  Again, this isn’t about “guilt”. Guilt implies some level of wrongdoing, and the court is still out on that.

                  The question they will determine is “was he justified”, not “did he do it.”

              • bus_factor@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                14
                ·
                14 hours ago

                The court is also going to need to decide if the cops planted the evidence he conveniently carried with him several days later.

                • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  16
                  ·
                  14 hours ago

                  Any conspiracy theory is going to do some heavy lifting explaining how the highly custom pistol in the video is not the same highly custom pistol found on Luigi.

        • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          edit-2
          12 hours ago

          I should add too… nothing in the headline is saying Luigi “murdered” anyone. The word is “killed” and that’s not the crime.

          The act of homicide on it’s own isn’t a crime. The circumstances will determine if it’s murder, manslaughter, etc. etc.

          You don’t need a conviction to say someone killed someone else, that part is self evident.

          Was it justified? Was it murder? That’s what the courts will determine.

    • spirinolas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      12 hours ago

      He was dead the moment he got caught. Nevermind guilty. I don’t care how many technicalities or strategies his lawyer might have. There’s no way in hell the powers that be will let him have anything other than being made a harsh example for all of us plebs.

      This isn’t about him commiting the crime of murder. This about scaring us into submission so we don’t get any ideas. Even if he’s actually innocent because of they don’t catch the killer they can’t use it as an example, so they need someone.

      He’s not walking. Get ready for the inevitable. Even if the word of the law is on his side they’ll pull something last moment. It’s really naive to think they’d ever allow themselves being made a joke by us.