I’d say that yes it was definitely at least partially politically motivated, since it was just as much an attack against the system as it was against the person, but hardly terrorism since there was no intent to scare the general public.
He probably did intend to scare insurance company executives. I can see calling it terrorism, even if I think he should get off.
I’ve dealt with back pain, and during the height of my battle with the insurer I absolutely would’ve been tempted to kill the fuckers given the chance.
So, I’ve heard he didn’t actually have UHC. There’s also no confirmation of a denied claim, just the fact that he had back pain. Luigi targeted Brian because UHC was the largest insurance provider in the country, not because he was personally denied a particular claim. The guy was doing long distance hiking and running months before the slaying.
TrueAnon podcast has a great deep dive into who Luigi was and what his potential motives were.
He’s got a background in Effective Altruism, he got into the Dark Enlightenment movement, and was involved with a number of Silicon Valley gurus with particularly extremist ideology.
Far from simply being an unhappy customer, it’s likely he’s a real life “Radical Centrist” who got pilled on far center neoliberal ideology.
….so? How many killers before him have written a manifesto? Are all these school shooters, attacking actual public schools, being charged with terrorism? They’re actually striking out at “the system.” How many white supremacists mass shootings have written manifestos and not been charged with terrorism?
Are all these school shooters, attacking actual public schools, being charged with terrorism?
There’s little need to up-charge school shooters. Many of them are killed on sight. Those that are captured (Dylan Roof, for instance) get life without parole or the death sentence.
But in NYC, a single murder without a terrorist motive only gets you to 2nd Degree Murder. That means you’ll be out in 15 years. The “terrorism” addendum is necessary for life without parole sentencing.
There is no objective measure of criminal conduct. It’s all malleable. Prosecutors and judges and juries ultimately make these decisions case-by-case. And the results can be heavily weighted by wealthy, socially influential private interests who want to see an example made of a particularly offensive or terrifying individual.
“The Law” is a complex often contradictory abstract rubric that has to be applied to individual circumstances based on incomplete information by imperfect people. That’s the whole reason we have both a prosecutor and defense, plus an (ostensibly) impartial judge to adjudicate procedure and a jury to determine guilt/innocence and sentence.
If you could just put data into a computer and have it spit out perfect verdicts, the entire judicial system would be unnecessary.
The military is political. It is literally policy when the military moves. Anything any military does is dictionary terrorism. But terrorism is a nasty word for it so we don’t call it that.
I mean I’d agree lol but I doubt this person equates Luigi and the average American soldier painting a bomb. That’s my point. Writing on a bullet case or writing a political statement doesn’t make one terrorist. It’s the violent acts and who they’re directed at any why that determine it.
sigh yes you’re the third or fourth person to make this joke. Yes I agree.
The point is that nobody calls them terrorists for doing that. Putting words or art on weapons and ammo is considered “normal” as twisted as that is. So Luigi’s doing it does not make him a terrorist.
Yeah I mean it’s obviously trumped-up bullshit in his case, they’re making a point of throwing the book at him any way they can because the owners got their jimmies rustled
But is it politically motivated?
He was pissed his claim was denied.
I’d say that yes it was definitely at least partially politically motivated, since it was just as much an attack against the system as it was against the person, but hardly terrorism since there was no intent to scare the general public.
He probably did intend to scare insurance company executives. I can see calling it terrorism, even if I think he should get off.
I’ve dealt with back pain, and during the height of my battle with the insurer I absolutely would’ve been tempted to kill the fuckers given the chance.
Yes but they are not civilians, the are enemy combatants so it is fair game.
Also Luigi if he did it, literally spared witness who is in fact a civilians.
Terrorism charge will hopefully back fire.
So, I’ve heard he didn’t actually have UHC. There’s also no confirmation of a denied claim, just the fact that he had back pain. Luigi targeted Brian because UHC was the largest insurance provider in the country, not because he was personally denied a particular claim. The guy was doing long distance hiking and running months before the slaying.
TrueAnon podcast has a great deep dive into who Luigi was and what his potential motives were.
He’s got a background in Effective Altruism, he got into the Dark Enlightenment movement, and was involved with a number of Silicon Valley gurus with particularly extremist ideology.
Far from simply being an unhappy customer, it’s likely he’s a real life “Radical Centrist” who got pilled on far center neoliberal ideology.
Wtf is far center?
It’s a bit like far-left or far-right, except it manages to get bipartisan approval.
z axis moment
Bad analysis since far center neo lib would be LARPing violence is never the answer lol
I mean he wrote words on bullets (or casings, I dunno) and a manifesto…
….so? How many killers before him have written a manifesto? Are all these school shooters, attacking actual public schools, being charged with terrorism? They’re actually striking out at “the system.” How many white supremacists mass shootings have written manifestos and not been charged with terrorism?
It happens occasionally:
https://apnews.com/article/shootings-michigan-4e1a14622ed8c5a6bcc7e8da88e3c33d
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/10/24/us/ethan-crumbley-plea-oxford-michigan-shooting-monday/index.html
There’s little need to up-charge school shooters. Many of them are killed on sight. Those that are captured (Dylan Roof, for instance) get life without parole or the death sentence.
But in NYC, a single murder without a terrorist motive only gets you to 2nd Degree Murder. That means you’ll be out in 15 years. The “terrorism” addendum is necessary for life without parole sentencing.
Yes, but the charges should fit the crime not be selected to ensure the desired outcome
There is no objective measure of criminal conduct. It’s all malleable. Prosecutors and judges and juries ultimately make these decisions case-by-case. And the results can be heavily weighted by wealthy, socially influential private interests who want to see an example made of a particularly offensive or terrifying individual.
I mean that’s what the law is supposed to do, maybe it doesn’t work like that in the US.
“The Law” is a complex often contradictory abstract rubric that has to be applied to individual circumstances based on incomplete information by imperfect people. That’s the whole reason we have both a prosecutor and defense, plus an (ostensibly) impartial judge to adjudicate procedure and a jury to determine guilt/innocence and sentence.
If you could just put data into a computer and have it spit out perfect verdicts, the entire judicial system would be unnecessary.
American soldiers regularly paint imagery and words on the ammunition and vehicles they use to kill people. Are they terrorists too?
The military is political. It is literally policy when the military moves. Anything any military does is dictionary terrorism. But terrorism is a nasty word for it so we don’t call it that.
Makes sense
I mean, yes. But folks here aren’t ready for that conversation
Don’t worry I agree lol
In some instances, absolutely.
I mean I’d agree lol but I doubt this person equates Luigi and the average American soldier painting a bomb. That’s my point. Writing on a bullet case or writing a political statement doesn’t make one terrorist. It’s the violent acts and who they’re directed at any why that determine it.
Yes
sigh yes you’re the third or fourth person to make this joke. Yes I agree.
The point is that nobody calls them terrorists for doing that. Putting words or art on weapons and ammo is considered “normal” as twisted as that is. So Luigi’s doing it does not make him a terrorist.
Yeah I mean it’s obviously trumped-up bullshit in his case, they’re making a point of throwing the book at him any way they can because the owners got their jimmies rustled