UHC CEO Gunned Down in Midtown Manhattan

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In case you are one of those who are morally confused:

Good guy: Daniel Penny
Bad Guy: Luigi Mangione

It's clear in black and white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is he going to be charged federally or by the state of NY?

Possibly both. Murder is not federal but gun charges can be.

The suppressor is absolutely a federal charge. Three charges would be: manufacturing an NFA item without prior approval and registration, possession of unregistered NFA item, and potentially interstate transport of an NFA item to a prohibited state (NY) by someone not licensed as a FFL/SOT II manufacturer of firearms.


The gun itself is not a federal charge. It’s only a state charge for possession of unregistered firearm and potentially a high capacity magazine, plus carrying without a permit.

The feds almost never charge standalone firearms charges in a case like this. I’d be shocked if that happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the two big contributors here are going to turn out to be weed (I bet he already used a lot in his frat in college, then it got worse with the back pain, and I’m sure there was free flowing weed in his commune in Hawaii) and playing first person shooter games. Weed absolutely precipitates psychotic illness in kids this age (see here for example: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33617756/). And growing up playing a lot of shooter games (it said several places that he was into them and at one point his goal was to develop his own) inured him to real life repercussions of shooting someone.

Completely agree. Drugs and first person shooter games. Once he had surfing accident and subsequent brain damage, it made this 10x worse. And he tried other illicit drugs for chronic pain.

Give me a freakin break.

I hope you are not a parent. If you are, please educate yourself. Drugs and first person shooter games have real consequences, and could absolutely be major precipitating factors here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In case you are one of those who are morally confused:

Good guy: Daniel Penny
Bad Guy: Luigi Mangione

Disagree. They’re simply divergent species of good guy.

Penny protected his fellow citizens on a micro level. Mangione did so on a macro level. Both saw something that needed doing, and stepped up.

Hard disagree. Penny didn't plan to kill anyone. In fact even in the moment I don't believe he was trying to kill Neely -- I think he used "excessive force" due to adrenaline and the intensity of the moment.

Mangione planned and executed an assassination. Thompson was a really terrible person but that's still murder with prior intent.

What if Mangione had taken his Ivy League degrees, money from his family, and passion regarding a broken healthcare system (including coming from a family that profited off that system) and become an advocate for changing the system? I think it would be as effective as what he's done but without murdering someone on a city street on a Tuesday morning.

You really think there’d be this much national discussion and dissection of UHC’s horrible practices and insanely overinflated CEO salaries because of some rich kid becoming and “advocate for change”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the two big contributors here are going to turn out to be weed (I bet he already used a lot in his frat in college, then it got worse with the back pain, and I’m sure there was free flowing weed in his commune in Hawaii) and playing first person shooter games. Weed absolutely precipitates psychotic illness in kids this age (see here for example: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33617756/). And growing up playing a lot of shooter games (it said several places that he was into them and at one point his goal was to develop his own) inured him to real life repercussions of shooting someone.

Yes, maybe to the weed, no to the video games. You probably don’t have college kids. They are frustrated with this country. People aren’t ready to kill, but there was so much attention on him because the environment is sh-t, there are people being needlessly killed across the globe, mental health isn’t funded (see UHC on this), and their quality of life will be worse than their parents (GenX). I’ve heard several kids say they don’t want to “bring kids into this world.” They didn’t want to vote (“feels pointless, it’s all theater”). Everything is so freaking expensive. We have a lot of problems in society that aren’t being addressed by either party because they’re so entrenched on drawing party lines. The millennials are about to have the biggest wealth transfer in history. GenZ is already, and knows they soon, bear the brunt of all of this.

On a micro level, this kid seemed to have a better quality of life than his parents. He lived in Hawaii, working remotely, surfing, and hanging with friends in this co-working/co-living community. He had the benefit of their wealth, no student debt despite a very expensive education. I don't really feel you can blame this on a generational frustration with income inequality or lack of opportunity because he is one of the lucky ones from his generation. Other Gen Zers definitely feel that way and rightfully so, but I don't see why he would.

I think this was more a case of someone with fragile mental health being radicalized online after a few IRL setbacks. He didn't lack for healthcare (had access to good care and the funds to pay for it), he wasn't struggling to buy a home (his parents bought him one), wasn't struggling finding stable work in the "gig economy" (had a good job in a solid field thanks to an expensive BS and MS from Penn, also paid for by his parents). He was very, very fortunate. Yet he became a killer. I think it was just buying into the online rage machine and perhaps being too disconnected from family, combined with underlying and untreated mental illness.

This will sound callous and I don't mean it that way because I feel for Thompson's family, but at least he just killed one guy. He'll go to prison for most of the rest of his life. Situations like this are often much, much worse.

You don’t have young adults in your life. Do you know a number of GenZ have given up inherited wealth? Also, the environmental destruction affects you whether you have money or not. An entire facet of this election was on people with more funds trying to help people with less. It’s bonkers you don’t think a kid from a well-to-do background isn’t going to want to help those around him. Have you forgotten your idealism of your 20s? This guy went about it the wrong way, but as I posted yesterday the news printed part of his manifesto and it talked about the US’s poor life expectancy, and the article had data showing just that. Do you think Mike Johnson is going to scrap ACA in January now? What about Medicare?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In case you are one of those who are morally confused:

Good guy: Daniel Penny
Bad Guy: Luigi Mangione

+1

There are lots of seriously twisted and perverted people out there. So much justification over an assassination. There are people comparing this to what the founding fathers did for political change and text pretzel logic to reach those conclusions.

I think there's a LOT of righteous anger in this country towards the insurance industry. Righteous.

Sure, some people try to game the system. Those individuals pale in comparison to how the insurance industry is gaming the system.

If you can't understand these simple facts, neither I nor anyone else can help you.

So far as the vast majority of people are concerned, the murder of a corrupt, crooked member of this perverted insurance scam industry was a *shrug* event.

You must work in the insurance industry if you can't appreciate the frustration and anger the average America feels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In case you are one of those who are morally confused:

Good guy: Daniel Penny
Bad Guy: Luigi Mangione

Disagree. They’re simply divergent species of good guy.

Penny protected his fellow citizens on a micro level. Mangione did so on a macro level. Both saw something that needed doing, and stepped up.

Hard disagree. Penny didn't plan to kill anyone. In fact even in the moment I don't believe he was trying to kill Neely -- I think he used "excessive force" due to adrenaline and the intensity of the moment.

Mangione planned and executed an assassination. Thompson was a really terrible person but that's still murder with prior intent.

What if Mangione had taken his Ivy League degrees, money from his family, and passion regarding a broken healthcare system (including coming from a family that profited off that system) and become an advocate for changing the system? I think it would be as effective as what he's done but without murdering someone on a city street on a Tuesday morning.

You really think there’d be this much national discussion and dissection of UHC’s horrible practices and insanely overinflated CEO salaries because of some rich kid becoming and “advocate for change”?

(1) I have zero faith the current conversation will last or result in any change. It's getting lots of attention now because of the murder and the manhunt but that's where the focus is -- on Mangione and his crime. I think in a month no one will be talking about UHC, they'll install a new CEO and claim they are going to investigate internal claims practices, and then no one will care.

(2) There are non-violent stunts that could have garnered as much attention, yes. Occupy Wall Street got a ton of attention and had a lasting impact on perceptions of how Wall Street handled the sub prime crisis and rising income inequality especially for young people. And that was without being particularly well organized or having a strong message -- OWS was kind of a mess. But Mangione was young, unattached, with money. If he'd used his brains to stage a series of protests, sit-ins, and disruptions at UHC events, yes, it could have had the same impact. He was a computer engineer -- hack the company or their shareholder meeting or whatever.

There are lots of ways to garner attention other than murder, and actually I think murder will turn out to be a poor catalyst for change because MANY people will disregard Mangione's "point" simply because he did something violent and heinous to make it. He's probably turned off people who would otherwise have been on his side just because a lot of people are never going to get on board with the idea that killing someone in cold blood is a good way to make a political point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In case you are one of those who are morally confused:

Good guy: Daniel Penny
Bad Guy: Luigi Mangione

Disagree. They’re simply divergent species of good guy.

Penny protected his fellow citizens on a micro level. Mangione did so on a macro level. Both saw something that needed doing, and stepped up.

Hard disagree. Penny didn't plan to kill anyone. In fact even in the moment I don't believe he was trying to kill Neely -- I think he used "excessive force" due to adrenaline and the intensity of the moment.

Mangione planned and executed an assassination. Thompson was a really terrible person but that's still murder with prior intent.

What if Mangione had taken his Ivy League degrees, money from his family, and passion regarding a broken healthcare system (including coming from a family that profited off that system) and become an advocate for changing the system? I think it would be as effective as what he's done but without murdering someone on a city street on a Tuesday morning.

If you read what he purportedly wrote on Substack, which someone linked to pages back, he said nonviolence was essentially complicity with the status quo. While many of us don’t agree, frustration is simmering while politicians bicker.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the two big contributors here are going to turn out to be weed (I bet he already used a lot in his frat in college, then it got worse with the back pain, and I’m sure there was free flowing weed in his commune in Hawaii) and playing first person shooter games. Weed absolutely precipitates psychotic illness in kids this age (see here for example: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33617756/). And growing up playing a lot of shooter games (it said several places that he was into them and at one point his goal was to develop his own) inured him to real life repercussions of shooting someone.

Yes, maybe to the weed, no to the video games. You probably don’t have college kids. They are frustrated with this country. People aren’t ready to kill, but there was so much attention on him because the environment is sh-t, there are people being needlessly killed across the globe, mental health isn’t funded (see UHC on this), and their quality of life will be worse than their parents (GenX). I’ve heard several kids say they don’t want to “bring kids into this world.” They didn’t want to vote (“feels pointless, it’s all theater”). Everything is so freaking expensive. We have a lot of problems in society that aren’t being addressed by either party because they’re so entrenched on drawing party lines. The millennials are about to have the biggest wealth transfer in history. GenZ is already, and knows they soon, bear the brunt of all of this.

On a micro level, this kid seemed to have a better quality of life than his parents. He lived in Hawaii, working remotely, surfing, and hanging with friends in this co-working/co-living community. He had the benefit of their wealth, no student debt despite a very expensive education. I don't really feel you can blame this on a generational frustration with income inequality or lack of opportunity because he is one of the lucky ones from his generation. Other Gen Zers definitely feel that way and rightfully so, but I don't see why he would.

I think this was more a case of someone with fragile mental health being radicalized online after a few IRL setbacks. He didn't lack for healthcare (had access to good care and the funds to pay for it), he wasn't struggling to buy a home (his parents bought him one), wasn't struggling finding stable work in the "gig economy" (had a good job in a solid field thanks to an expensive BS and MS from Penn, also paid for by his parents). He was very, very fortunate. Yet he became a killer. I think it was just buying into the online rage machine and perhaps being too disconnected from family, combined with underlying and untreated mental illness.

This will sound callous and I don't mean it that way because I feel for Thompson's family, but at least he just killed one guy. He'll go to prison for most of the rest of his life. Situations like this are often much, much worse.

You don’t have young adults in your life. Do you know a number of GenZ have given up inherited wealth? Also, the environmental destruction affects you whether you have money or not. An entire facet of this election was on people with more funds trying to help people with less. It’s bonkers you don’t think a kid from a well-to-do background isn’t going to want to help those around him. Have you forgotten your idealism of your 20s? This guy went about it the wrong way, but as I posted yesterday the news printed part of his manifesto and it talked about the US’s poor life expectancy, and the article had data showing just that. Do you think Mike Johnson is going to scrap ACA in January now? What about Medicare?

I know Gen Zers like you describe. My younger brother for instance. I just don't think Mangione is one of them. He also didn't give up his inherited wealth nor did he choose to highlight the way his own family profited off this system.

I think he is just mentally ill.

Johnson was never going to be able to "scrap ACA and Medicare" in January anyway because they are popular entitlement programs and the GOP has not suggested anything better to replace them. They are going to do what they always do and pass a tax cut that hikes up the debt and then leave that mess for a Dem to try and fix in the next administration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In case you are one of those who are morally confused:

Good guy: Daniel Penny
Bad Guy: Luigi Mangione

Disagree. They’re simply divergent species of good guy.

Penny protected his fellow citizens on a micro level. Mangione did so on a macro level. Both saw something that needed doing, and stepped up.

Hard disagree. Penny didn't plan to kill anyone. In fact even in the moment I don't believe he was trying to kill Neely -- I think he used "excessive force" due to adrenaline and the intensity of the moment.

Mangione planned and executed an assassination. Thompson was a really terrible person but that's still murder with prior intent.

What if Mangione had taken his Ivy League degrees, money from his family, and passion regarding a broken healthcare system (including coming from a family that profited off that system) and become an advocate for changing the system? I think it would be as effective as what he's done but without murdering someone on a city street on a Tuesday morning.

If you read what he purportedly wrote on Substack, which someone linked to pages back, he said nonviolence was essentially complicity with the status quo. While many of us don’t agree, frustration is simmering while politicians bicker.

Yeah, so it turns out this 26 year old murderer is incorrect about a lot of stuff. News at 11.

Find another folk hero. He ain't it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:His interactions with the insurance industry radicalized him. It does many people. The insurance companies completely f*** with American lives. Dude is a hero. F*** health insurance companies, they ruin many lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In case you are one of those who are morally confused:

Good guy: Daniel Penny
Bad Guy: Luigi Mangione

Disagree. They’re simply divergent species of good guy.

Penny protected his fellow citizens on a micro level. Mangione did so on a macro level. Both saw something that needed doing, and stepped up.

Hard disagree. Penny didn't plan to kill anyone. In fact even in the moment I don't believe he was trying to kill Neely -- I think he used "excessive force" due to adrenaline and the intensity of the moment.

Mangione planned and executed an assassination. Thompson was a really terrible person but that's still murder with prior intent.

What if Mangione had taken his Ivy League degrees, money from his family, and passion regarding a broken healthcare system (including coming from a family that profited off that system) and become an advocate for changing the system? I think it would be as effective as what he's done but without murdering someone on a city street on a Tuesday morning.

If you read what he purportedly wrote on Substack, which someone linked to pages back, he said nonviolence was essentially complicity with the status quo. While many of us don’t agree, frustration is simmering while politicians bicker.

Yeah, so it turns out this 26 year old murderer is incorrect about a lot of stuff. News at 11.

Find another folk hero. He ain't it.

I don’t think he’s a hero, but to ignore the issues he and GenZ are frustrated with is to our own detriment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In case you are one of those who are morally confused:

Good guy: Daniel Penny
Bad Guy: Luigi Mangione

+1

There are lots of seriously twisted and perverted people out there. So much justification over an assassination. There are people comparing this to what the founding fathers did for political change and text pretzel logic to reach those conclusions.

I think there's a LOT of righteous anger in this country towards the insurance industry. Righteous.

Sure, some people try to game the system. Those individuals pale in comparison to how the insurance industry is gaming the system.

If you can't understand these simple facts, neither I nor anyone else can help you.

So far as the vast majority of people are concerned, the murder of a corrupt, crooked member of this perverted insurance scam industry was a *shrug* event.

You must work in the insurance industry if you can't appreciate the frustration and anger the average America feels.

I’m surprised you find this hard to grasp. Just like I support the first amendment rights even of people whose views are abhorrent to me, I support the right not to get shot in the back even for those whose business practices are abhorrent to me.

I am someone with personal experience with insurance misery so if you are thinking everyone who doesn’t think this disturbed kid is a hero is an insurance shill you are absolutely mistaken.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the two big contributors here are going to turn out to be weed (I bet he already used a lot in his frat in college, then it got worse with the back pain, and I’m sure there was free flowing weed in his commune in Hawaii) and playing first person shooter games. Weed absolutely precipitates psychotic illness in kids this age (see here for example: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33617756/). And growing up playing a lot of shooter games (it said several places that he was into them and at one point his goal was to develop his own) inured him to real life repercussions of shooting someone.

Completely agree. Drugs and first person shooter games. Once he had surfing accident and subsequent brain damage, it made this 10x worse. And he tried other illicit drugs for chronic pain.

Give me a freakin break.

I hope you are not a parent. If you are, please educate yourself. Drugs and first person shooter games have real consequences, and could absolutely be major precipitating factors here.

+1 million

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In case you are one of those who are morally confused:

Good guy: Daniel Penny
Bad Guy: Luigi Mangione

Disagree. They’re simply divergent species of good guy.

Penny protected his fellow citizens on a micro level. Mangione did so on a macro level. Both saw something that needed doing, and stepped up.

Hard disagree. Penny didn't plan to kill anyone. In fact even in the moment I don't believe he was trying to kill Neely -- I think he used "excessive force" due to adrenaline and the intensity of the moment.

Mangione planned and executed an assassination. Thompson was a really terrible person but that's still murder with prior intent.

What if Mangione had taken his Ivy League degrees, money from his family, and passion regarding a broken healthcare system (including coming from a family that profited off that system) and become an advocate for changing the system? I think it would be as effective as what he's done but without murdering someone on a city street on a Tuesday morning.

You really think there’d be this much national discussion and dissection of UHC’s horrible practices and insanely overinflated CEO salaries because of some rich kid becoming and “advocate for change”?

(1) I have zero faith the current conversation will last or result in any change. It's getting lots of attention now because of the murder and the manhunt but that's where the focus is -- on Mangione and his crime. I think in a month no one will be talking about UHC, they'll install a new CEO and claim they are going to investigate internal claims practices, and then no one will care.

(2) There are non-violent stunts that could have garnered as much attention, yes. Occupy Wall Street got a ton of attention and had a lasting impact on perceptions of how Wall Street handled the sub prime crisis and rising income inequality especially for young people. And that was without being particularly well organized or having a strong message -- OWS was kind of a mess. But Mangione was young, unattached, with money. If he'd used his brains to stage a series of protests, sit-ins, and disruptions at UHC events, yes, it could have had the same impact. He was a computer engineer -- hack the company or their shareholder meeting or whatever.

There are lots of ways to garner attention other than murder, and actually I think murder will turn out to be a poor catalyst for change because MANY people will disregard Mangione's "point" simply because he did something violent and heinous to make it. He's probably turned off people who would otherwise have been on his side just because a lot of people are never going to get on board with the idea that killing someone in cold blood is a good way to make a political point.

One can disagree with murder yet agree with the criticism of for-profit healthcare.