Trying to rejoice a bit, but… You know that even if the killer gets away completely, they’ll still catch someone they can convince us is the killer. Coerced confession and all.
At this point it’s no longer punitive as much as deterrent. Their highest priority is gonna be “make an example,” they are not gonna care who the example is
okay, another reason I’m not exactly rejoicing
or, at least, not actively enthusiastic about more assassinations happening
is that I’ve seen what online discourse does to the concept of “this type of person should be killed”
and, while I would like to think that “billionaire CEO” is a pretty clearly defined category of person that won’t get fuzzy around the edges…
…I used to see people say the same about “rapist” and “pedophile”
and then people started applying their feelings about those things to “people who wear leather in public when not everyone around them consented to see them wear leather,” or “people who write a fictional story in which two teenagers make out”
so I am not exactly gonna say I 100% trust the internet to handle billionaire-assassinations responsibly
like.
probably at least this may be a good time to think about where and how and if you can draw a clear line on “how much decision-making power must one have within the hierarchy of an unethical corporation, before one stops being Poor Exploited Worker and becomes Death-Deserving Despot”
just a thing to think about.
Basically. As a pharmacy technician who often serves as the customer-facing part of the healthcare system, and occasionally faces customers who are distressed enough to lash out as if I’m the reason something isn’t covered….
…well, I truly hope I can trust people to make this distinction.
Because I can do a bunch of things to try to resolve an insurance rejection, but if they fail, I can’t do anything except I guess…. just hand you the pills without doing any of the paperwork for them? I could do that once, maybe twice if I could convince the manager it was an accident. I couldn’t keep doing it and still have a job.
But then, that’s just the Nuremberg defense, isn’t it?
Which is an ethical problem faced by…. everyone whose job is actually necessary.
Because all of those jobs involve requiring money in exchange for necessities, and things like that are going to come up.
I don’t know. As someone in a sorta medical profession – and really, more just as a person in a civilization – I try to live by “first do no harm.”
And the part of me that’s a fucking Program keeps interpreting that in an Asimov’s First Law sorta way, where “allowing harm through inaction” counts as harm.
…and I feel like that’s probably mostly even the right way to do it.
Just not usually a possible way.