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!
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.
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”
“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.
Sounds more like a setup imho
Briana Boston is her name
No, the executives, BoD and major investors do.
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
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.
not on lemmy.world evidently
No
Betteridge’s Law of Headlines. Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word “No.”
/thread
No need to scroll further, folks.
Of course not, but they’re going to make an example out of her to deter the rest of the proles.
Except that’s not how that works. She’s going to be a martyr instead.
I think Luigi Mangione is the martyr here.
There’s always room for another.
There is zero chance anyone in a power position in the US can grasp these terms and their real life ramifications.
Unfortunately that’s my conclusion as well. They’ll do this and congratulate themselves on teaching those poors a lesson. In better language I’m sure but that’s the core meaning. And while they’re doing that the “poors” are going to be making protest signs, at the very least.
This reminds me of Minority Report. Arrested by the pre-crime unit.
Guilty without the crime actually being committed.
If her crime is threatening then that actually is what she did, in the past.
The punishment of 15 years is just way over the top
That’s not what she did. There are legal standards for what constitutes a threat, and what she said isn’t one.
She absolutely does not deserve that. Isn’t America the home of free speech? I guess not for the plebs!
She was released and all charges dropped. This was a silly farce by the judge and prosecutors from the jump
I don’t think that’s right. She’s been released on bond to house arrest; the charges still stand.
I think she’s guilty (you can’t be making threats like that on the heels of someone actually committing an act of violence) but even that is too much time. IDEK if she deserves jail time at all. I’d rather see her get a fine and maybe a month or two of community service.
I don’t believe that “You people are next.” is a direct threat.
What’s the cool-down timer on the free speech special ability ?
Asking for a friend.
I don’t believe that “You people are next.” is a direct threat.
Sounds pretty direct to me, especially in the context of recent events. I don’t fault the CS rep at all for reporting it to her superiors and the police. Totally reasonable to be wary of copycat crimes or just similar acts of violence against healthcare insurers in general.
“you people are next” doesn’t sound direct to me because “next” for what? Next for a random vigilante to shoot, next to die in general, next to face bad PR?
My interpretation also leaves no room to imply I’ll be the one actioning whatever the “next” thing is. I’d use “you’re next” in the same use case as “karma will get you” or “the universe will balance out your luck” it’s more of a cosmic wish than a rise to action.
She made a direct reference to the slogan used by the guy who murdered an insurance company’s CEO, then said, “you people are next.” That absolutely can reasonably be construed as a direct threat of violence. Whether or not you think the person making the threat will actually do it is another question, but the context and grammar the direct threat interpretation totally logical.
I don’t believe that “You people are next.” is a direct threat.
I’m sure you don’t, but it’s a reasonable interpretation of what she said.
What’s the cool-down timer on the free speech special ability ?
What do you mean by “special ability”?
I don’t think she was actually making a threat, but she sure chose to sound like she was, which was fucking stupid on her part. Given how the rest of the evidence makes it clear the threat wasn’t serious, I don’t think she should be charged as such, but perhaps a lesser charge that affords her a fine or something. Can’t let people get away with that shit, but charging her like she’s making a serious threat of violence is a waste of taxpayer money.
Where is her free speech?
Free speech is for nazis, as far as I can tell
In the freezer, next to the peaches.
Ah, so basically next to the freeze peach; got it :)
They are going to argue it’s not protected under the true threat doctrine.
We should erect a giant bronze statue of Luigi. Put it in a road right near UHC’s headquarters in Minnesota. Make them all drive past it each and every day on the way to work.
deleted by creator
It worked for that bullgirl in NYC, didn’t it? Let’s make it happen.
