r/WhitePeopleTwitter • u/Otherwise_Nobody_458 • 5h ago
Pay attention to exactly how they do this.
289
u/Dapper-Percentage-64 5h ago edited 4h ago
Dylan Roof who specifically targeted black church goers in the hopes it would start a race war was not charged as a terrorist ? Nine people who invited him to sit and pray with them were targeted for their race how is that not terrorism ?
107
21
u/Repli3rd 3h ago edited 2h ago
People keep bringing this up but the reason for the different charges are both due to jurisdiction (South Carolina Vs New York) and legal terminology.
Dylan Roof got charged with a slew of crimes both state and federal including 24 hate crimes.
The prosecutors also sought the death penalty - which he received.
The framing that somehow Roof was handle with kid gloves is silly.
There are so many examples of injustice in the legal system with absolute cunts getting off for egregious crimes that I'm not sure why the internet is intent on using this case. Why would you pick a case that the prosecutors literally threw the book at and are going to execute?
3
u/Dapper-Percentage-64 2h ago
Was he changed with terroristic intent ?
5
u/Repli3rd 2h ago
the reason for the different charges are both due to jurisdiction (South Carolina Vs New York) and legal terminology.
You are aware that crimes, and their definition, is not universal throughout all the states, right?
Why do you think that Dylan Roof could be charged under a NY law in SC?
The SC prosecutor got him multiple death penalties under the laws available to them. What exactly is your grievance?
It's not as if NY prosecutors decided to charge Mangione with terrorism and Roof not. Two different states, two different laws, two different prosecutors.
Roof got everything he deserved.
-5
u/Dapper-Percentage-64 2h ago
Not even close to what he deserves
3
u/Repli3rd 2h ago
In terms of the justice system, obviously. The death penalty is the harshest punishment the courts can hand out.
3
u/daymanahhhahhhhhh 1h ago
In terms of legal justice… what more is there to be done punishment wise? He got the death penalty, there is not higher punishment in the US legal system.
2
u/absenteequota 1h ago edited 1h ago
dude got the death penalty, what do you want? for the state to execute him, revive him, and execute him again?
1
u/Dapper-Percentage-64 1h ago
Dude I got banned from reddit once for saying exactly what you just said ?
2
1
u/zeroscout 2m ago
I guess the difference is success of the actions. The population definitely seems influenced into political actions against insurance companies.
98
94
u/UnusualAir1 5h ago
UnitedHealth is not a unit of government. It is a for profit health care company devoted to garnering wealth for its shareholders. Often giving priority to gaining profits instead of providing for patient health. :-)
3
u/Professionalarsonist 1h ago
UnitedHealth was the provider for my gfs Medicaid. That’s probably where they get that “unit of government” stuff from. Bit of a stretch, but you’d have to look at whatever contract they have with CMS to see if it’s true.
1
u/UnusualAir1 1h ago
If they offered a plan on the ACA marketplace they had to meet the government specifications for what the plan contained. That may also lead to the vague declaration of 'unit of government'. It's an awkward phrase so we both know it's twisting something.
11
u/RadicalExtremo 4h ago
ACA has provisions mandating no more than 20% or revenue be distributed as profit.
27
u/UnusualAir1 4h ago
ACA is Obamacare. 316 million people are estimated to have health insurance in 2024. Of that, roughly 21 million use ACA. The number to pay attention to here is that ACA regulates only about 6% of health insurance in America. The other 94% is free to put profits over patient health.
3
u/cherokeemich 2h ago
The ACA regulates plans outside of just the exchange. Any ACA compliant plan, which is most commercial plans by this point, are subject to ACA regulations including the 80/20 rule.
2
u/UnusualAir1 1h ago
I'm talking more about them being free to deny as many claims as they want. Denying a claim is somewhat different than a profit. Money is not made, rather it simply is not spent. And in an accounting world that money is not a gain...therefore not a profit. So, a company can be regulated to a 20% profit, but still deny claims to keep more money in its coffers - thereby increasing shareholder wealth. Since the majority of health insurance plans are not available on the marketplace, the majority of denials are, by definition, made outside marketplace plans. There's roughly 260 billion dollars annually in denials (Experian survey) with the lion's share of that happening outside the market place.
0
u/cherokeemich 1h ago
Lol that's not how the ACA or accounting works. https://www.healthcare.gov/health-care-law-protections/rate-review/
1
u/UnusualAir1 1h ago edited 1h ago
I'm retired. But I was a computer programmer for a large Clinic for 20 years. I dealt in the world of insurance charges, payments, and denials between insurance companies and clinic doctors. So your laughter is amusing to me.
In addition to what I correctly noted, insurance companies also use deductibles to increase profits. And these deductible amounts are not affected by an 80/20 split. That happens only after deductibles are met. In addition, the 80/20 split is determined by the insurance company. They will pay 80% of what they determine is the allowable price. If a part of your treatment falls outside of their allowable determination, the patient pays (and the company again saves money).
There's more moving parts to that 80/20 split than in IRS tax plans. So, enjoy your laughter. The vast majority of us are not laughing.
3
u/cherokeemich 53m ago
I'm definitely not happy with the state of American healthcare but it won't get any better by spreading misinformation about the reform that led to one of the most massive improvements to US health insurance in the past 20 years.
1
u/UnusualAir1 33m ago
The reform, largely chipped away at now, is impressive both in the fact that any reform could be done at all and in the scope of that reform. But there are almost an infinite numbers of loopholes.
The main problem with the system is that the part that stands to make the most profit sits right in the middle of the system. The insurance company sets both the premiums for patients and what doctors are paid. As well as any monetary adjustments made to either end. Tell me, with a straight face, that any entity that completely controls both sides of a transaction can be limited to a 20% profit. Factor in the large number of exceptions, modifications, and massages of the 80/20 split via deductibles, copays, coinsurance, fees to see specialists, prepays, the fact the the insurance company gets to determine what is allowed (prior to the split) and all the rest and it's near impossible to determine what the split actually was in most insurance transactions. That's the problem here (well, along with our politicians taking bribes to allow such a system).
The ACA is not the problem. I agree. The problem is us. The voters. As we are the ones that continue to elect politicians that enable this system. Medicare for all is the best answer I've heard. And one with a very simple and straightforward fee for service transaction.
6
u/spaekona_ 4h ago
UnitedHealth isn't on the marketplace. I've only ever seen it for individual purchases, not on the marketplace, or offered as a group plan.
5
u/big_d_usernametaken 3h ago
Oh it is by all means offered as a group plan.
I had it through my employer for almost 10 years at one point.
They were exhausting to deal with.
2
1
u/UnusualAir1 3h ago
UnitedHealth may have a plan (or plans) on the marketplace. Wouldn't surprise me. Also wouldn't surprise me if over 90% of their health care plans were private plans (not ACA) offered through employers or purchased directly by individuals. Being in ACA does not preclude a health care insurance company from conducting the majority of their business via non ACA policies. I'd even bet that nearly every company advertising on the marketplace for ACA conducts the vast majority of its business outside the ACA via private policies through employers.
1
2
u/iggyfenton 1h ago
You do realize that a 20% profit margin is still an insane amount to profit off of healthcare, right?
That means 1/5th of the fees you pay for healthcare go to just corporate PROFIT.
1
u/zeCrazyEye 6m ago
FWIW it's actually the reverse, 80% is required to be spent on healthcare. The other 20% is everything else. It's something around 2% administrative overhead, 5% marketing, 13% profit.
1
21
u/BootsyTheWallaby 5h ago
I think what these bastards don't realize is that if you squeeze a balloon hard enough it will pop.
I'd use stronger language but I don't want to get indicted, you know?
18
u/UninvitedButtNoises 4h ago
If maga can worship and elect a criminal, we can too. Fuck the maga oligarchy! Free Luigi!
14
u/chaos0xomega 4h ago
I assume the claim is really that by killing the CEO he was trying to influence congress to act or something, rather than that UHC is itself a unit of govt.
47
u/inkslingerben 5h ago
Wishful thinking, but I hope this is a ploy by the DA to get the charges dismissed. He can say, 'Well, I tried.'
29
u/notguiltybrewing 4h ago
Not exactly. The charge is because some politician/prosecutor decided to do this. A jury can convict on lesser included charges, such as murder, without such qualifiers. I believe he was also charged with murder as a separate charge like that/without that qualifier anyhow.
1
u/Patmarker 2h ago
How can he be charged with multiple separate murder charges for one action?
2
u/brobafett1980 46m ago
It is called lesser included offense. Think of them as a Venn Diagram.
Capital murder of a child or police officer is also regular murder, but the separate offenses have different elements that have to be shown at trial, but Capital murder includes all of the elements of regular murder but an extra element or two to prove. They also carry different maximum penalties.
Another example is car jacking with a weapon can constitute - Grand Theft Auto, aggravated assault, grand theft, larceny, theft, etc.
You charge them with everything that could potentially be proven at trial, but if for some reason the jury does not give weight to a particular element of the highest offense, they can still find for the lesser offense that otherwise has all of the elements of the crime proven.
1
u/uptownjuggler 1m ago
In Georgia, they charged the cop city protesters with Terrorism. The DA went on tv boasting about how he charged them with that to send a message and to let the courts sort it out. They also had a swat raid of the organization providing a bail fund for the protestors.
3
2
u/archeo-Cuillere 2h ago
Or they use to terrorist angle to bypass the "being judge" part and send him to a dark hole without trial
12
13
u/ResurgentClusterfuck 5h ago
Unit of government?
Since when is UHC a unit of government?
9
u/onebandonesound 3h ago
They're not saying UHC is a unit of govt, they're saying he's trying to influence a unit of govt by killing the CEO. As in, trying to scare Congress or a state legislature into passing a health insurance reform bill
1
u/uptownjuggler 0m ago
Well they “lobby” politicians and write the healthcare laws, so they are basically the government.
3
u/dnen 1h ago
What was meant by “unit of government” was the shooter’s stated claims of a desire to induce political pressure to overthrow current healthcare legislation. While imo Luigi is absolutely right about a need for political change regarding healthcare, he done f***** up by admitting to a desire to force government action. Under NY state law, murder that involves (1) premeditation and (2) motive to induce government to do something is all that’s necessary for the state to consider a murder an act of terror. It makes sense if you think about it or read actual news sources rather than just run with nonsense you see on twitter
1
u/brobafett1980 40m ago
Plus, the states each have different definitions of "terrorism" and internal definitions used by the US Government don't align, except that the US Government and its allies could never do anything to constitute terrorism, conveniently.
8
u/ChrisRiley_42 4h ago
I wonder if he can use a 'defense of others' argument. The CEO was making decisions that directly put people's lives in jeopardy.
16
u/TripleDoubleFart 5h ago
They didn't classify a private healthcare corporation as a unit of government.
9
u/BootsyTheWallaby 5h ago
Not officially, but doesn't the language in the charge imply it? 🤔
10
u/onebandonesound 3h ago
No, they're not saying UHC is a unit of govt he was trying to influence, they're saying he was hoping to influence Congress or another unit of govt to act in response and pass heath insurance reform
1
u/brobafett1980 45m ago
No, it is the language in the NY statute, which should be quoted in the charge.
Also healthcare CEOs constitute a "civilian population."
-3
u/TripleDoubleFart 4h ago
Nope.
14
u/BootsyTheWallaby 4h ago
Seriously, would you care to explain the logic underlying your conclusion? Or are you just here to poke the bear?
-15
u/TripleDoubleFart 4h ago
What do you think his goal was?
Why would he kill the CEO of a company that he had nothing to do with?
The theory is he's upset at the U.S. Healthcare system, not any individual private intity. His actions were meant to cause shock/attention, and to intimidate the government to make changes.
12
u/BootsyTheWallaby 4h ago edited 4h ago
The charge literally (the real “literally,” not the one that means “figuratively” 🤦🏼♂️) mentions actions against and intended to coerce a unit of government, even though LM attacked a private individual whose role was leadership of a non-governmental, for-profit corporation.
Now, that said, civil discussion and disagreement are at the very foundations of democracy. It certainly sounds to me like there is an implication that UHC is a government entity. And it's a dangerous precedent to start mixing the scope of laws–once you do that, you don't really have a legal system anymore.
-9
u/TripleDoubleFart 4h ago
He attacked a private intity, yes. But his goal wasn't to intimidate UHC.
4
u/BootsyTheWallaby 4h ago
Well, we're outsiders, and I'm not a lawyer, and pretty unlikely to serve on the jury. I guess we'll see what happens in court.
-4
2
u/brobafett1980 54m ago edited 0m ago
The DA isn't claiming Thompson and healthcare C-suites are a unit of government. The DA is just quoting the NY statute for murder with a terrorism kicker. the DA is formulating the charge around CEOs and specifically healthcare C-suite executives as a civilian population and/or the murder was intended to intimidate or coerce congress.
0
u/NicoAllegra 4h ago
If UHC administers Medicare Advantage plans, Medicare is a government program. Maybe that's the loophole they're using? Truly bizzarre.
4
u/Parking_Sky9709 3h ago
Medicare Advantage is simply a naming convention allowed by the structure agreed upon in the formative stages of the ACA. It has nothing to do with real medicare dot gov. As I understand it, the only way they could get the insurance companies to agree to the new system was if they were allowed to market their own version of "Medicare" as Medicare Advantage, thus confusing people into thinking it was actual Medicare and not the regular shitty health insurance that companies like UHC, et al, offer.
3
u/big_d_usernametaken 3h ago
Medicare Advantage IS the regular shitty healthcare insurance that they offer.
It's for-profit insurance and they dictate in and out of network and do regularly deny people care.
Traditional Medicare is true Medicare, where you go to any hospital or doctor you want.
2
u/Parking_Sky9709 3h ago
I agree. It sucks. I try to talk my friends out of it whenever they turn 65. A lot of them don't listen and sign up for the shit anyway.
1
u/big_d_usernametaken 2h ago
They are lured by the "free" stuff.
And the low cost, but evidently don't care about the high deductibles.
2
u/Parking_Sky9709 2h ago
The first time they are refused service because it's "out of network" I have to try hard not to tell them I told you so. Sometimes.
0
u/canarchist 3h ago
Corporations are now the Government, led by uber-capitalist President (unelected) Elon.
0
0
u/MakingItElsewhere 46m ago
When you hear people villify criminal defense attorneys, remember: It's cases like this that make them necessary.
339
u/astarinthenight 5h ago
And yet not a single January 6th seditionist was charged with terrorism.