this post was submitted on 06 Jan 2025
80 points (100.0% liked)

Luigi Mangione

2046 readers
2680 users here now

A community to post anything related to Luigi Mangione.

This is not a pro-murder community. Please respect Lemmy.world ToS.

founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
 
all 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 78 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm sure it will be a fair and detailed examination of his character and background culminating in an in depth assesment of the events that lead to him doing what he did.

Or maybe they will just draw devil horns on a picture of him and wave it around screaming hystericaly.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

i wish that americans would use the same media literacy that they apply to luigi's coverage and fox news to all forms of media to include trusted sources like nbc, cbs, abc, pbs, npr, etc.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 months ago

If they did that they'd have to admit they probably have no concept of any other country, especially China.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 4 months ago

It's ambiguous: the "killer" being referred to is actually United Health.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 4 months ago

"Mind of a badass"

[–] [email protected] 19 points 4 months ago

Fake News is still having a melt down about a man who did nothing wrong lol

These regime whores are pathetic

[–] [email protected] 17 points 4 months ago

“All of us serve the same masters, all of us nothin’ but slaves. Never forget in the story of Jesus, the hero was killed by the state”

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago (8 children)

What's wrong with the title? Whether you agree with his motives or not he still murdered a guy, thus making him a "killer"

[–] [email protected] 66 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The terms, "innocent until proven guilty," "trial by media," and "jury biases" come to mind.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

Could he sue them? I think that would be great.

[–] [email protected] 46 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Well considering he's fighting the claims, until he's convicted, it should only be alleged or suspected. This title implies guilt.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 4 months ago

There is no evidence that Luigi killed anyone. His trial hasn't even started yet, but everyone's assuming he did it.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 4 months ago

Did he confess and we missed it?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 months ago

that is an assumption

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Being a CEO at this point in history should be considered suicidal ideation.

This was an assisted suicide.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I agree that the healthcare system has become an evil terrible thing and drastic change is needed, but once we start justifying people getting gunned down in the street in broad daylight then it becomes open season for everyone to murder anyone they want if they feel they had a good enough reason to do so. I personally have no desire to see society regress back to the wild west.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Slippery slope fallacy. Acquitting Mangione sets no harmful precedence.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It sets the precedent that you can gun someone down in cold blood and get away with it if they were "a really bad person". That is practically a textbook example of a slippery slope

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

That is practically a textbook example of a slippery slope fallacy.

FTFY: you missed the most important word in that sentence. You don't seem to comprehend that "slippery slope" is a fallacy.

The general public is capable of evaluating circumstances on a case-by-case basis. That does not change just because Mangione is acquitted. We are perfectly capable of recognizing this case is a rare exception, and not a general rule. Previous rare exceptions have not resulted in rampant vigilantism; there is no reason to believe that this case would be different.

The aphorism you should be considering is "following a line of reasoning straight off a cliff". We don't have to do that. The first three words of the Constitution tell us we don't actually have to apply a law if we really don't want to.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

We’re being slaughtered by the billionaire shareholders anyway

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 months ago

The guy did the equivalent of taking down an active school shooter.