←back to thread

167 points ceejayoz | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
CoastalCoder ◴[] No.43665090[source]
Responding to a now-deleted comment that seemed to suggest a violent response:

What would be the point, honestly?

Calling for his assassination would, rightly in my opinion, be prosecutable.

I'm too demoralized at the moment to hope for what I'd consider an appropriate response by state or federal governments / courts.

The third most likely solution, revolution / civil war, would probably cause far more suffering than any fixes it might enable.

I'm curious if America will soon reach a tipping point where a sizeable portion of its population actually makes an effort to emigrate, rather than just talking about it.

replies(5): >>43665113 #>>43665146 #>>43665147 #>>43665596 #>>43673548 #
like_any_other ◴[] No.43665113[source]
> What would be the point, honestly?

Changing insurer's incentive landscape.

replies(2): >>43665185 #>>43665199 #
haswell ◴[] No.43665199[source]
I’ve seen people use this argument, but I think it fails to consider the complexity of the situation.

The moment a company capitulates as the result of murder, they’ve now incentivized more murder.

Such attacks on the people running these companies can only impede change I think by forcing companies to become more entrenched in their existing practices.

replies(3): >>43665260 #>>43665512 #>>43665669 #
1. NooneAtAll3 ◴[] No.43665260{3}[source]
> The moment a company capitulates as the result of murder, they’ve now incentivized more murder.

ooor they're incentivized to force some legal resolution to make crowd "believe in system working" instead of "despair in neither system nor murder working"