I think the word this person is looking for is “tragic”
Murica gonna Murica, what else can I say?
Like it’s unique to America lol
See sinking of Bayesian yacht recently in Italy for example
Don’t kid yourself in to thinking the same thing doesn’t apply wherever it is you are in the world.
Is your username a reference to rick and morty ahahha
No, it’s Shakespeare.
Does poop not come put of your butthole?
theres a character called poopybutthole in rick and morty
Might as well be called Mr. Humanman
Are people really acting like an assassination is the same thing as your everyday, meat-and-potatoes murder?
Legally indistinct
Feel free to explain how this is different than a poor person murdering another poor person for revenge
Do you really not understand the difference between assassination and murder, or are you just pretending to have a point?
Feel free to explain how this was an assassination and not a murder
It’s an assassination because the dead person had way more social|political|economic power than the killer.
It’s an assassination because the dead person had way more social|political|economic power than the killer.
So… only bad power seeking people that cross those they have tangible power over to the point of vengeance.
Fuck, in this hellscape of corruption and captured governments world? I’m sold. You should sell the concept of assassination more often. You’re good.
Yeah, I’m not sure why the downvotes on my previous comment. “Assassination” is the “privilege” of the powerful.
Assassinations are typically politically motivated. We don’t know what his motivation was yet, so calling it an assassination is jumping to conclusions.
We’re REALLY like you to explain the difference you see. Even if we think there is one, no one has any idea what you are talking about.
The difference is this wasn’t random, it likely wasn’t directly personal, he attacked by surprise, and the victim held social/political power and was otherwise noteworthy.
Why is half this thread acting like they’re incapable of opening a dictionary?
The difference is this wasn’t random, it likely wasn’t directly personal, he attacked by surprise, and the victim held social/political power and was otherwise noteworthy.
Why should any of those determine the level of police response? Not why does it, we all know that. Why SHOULD it?
Why are you acting like there is a MEANINGFUL difference? The differences that you state are arbitrary. Who cares if it was personal or not? Murders are almost NEVER random, so what?
Clearly in your mind the difference between assassination and murder is not only obvious, but it is super important and relevant in some way that no one else here is getting. Assassination IS murder. SO what is your point, exactly?! Why are you so het up about what is really nothing more than a question of pedantry?? To the point that you are insulting the intelligence of everyone who doesn’t see things your way. It sounds like you have some kind of emotional issue with this.
I think you need to make a point about how this is more than “just” a murder, but possibly an attempt to influence the behaviour of other CEOs, or something like that.
Why would we have the word “assassination” if it’s just murder? The word was invented to fill a linguistic need.
While the practical event is the exact same, its implications to the currently living are distinct. Saying this is an assassination communicates that this murder is unique, and should be thought of in a different context than most murders.
If my neighbor pisses me off and I decide to kill him, is it murder or assassination?
Depends who your neighbor is.
How so?
Is your neighbor a public figure or somebody who holds significant power? Are there political or ideological motivations behind killing him?
Personally I prefer assassinations over random killings. Cause no one cares enough to assasinate me.
One is politically motivated? Or what is the “official” difference? One happens in public? But why should one be investigated with more resources than the other?
But why should one be investigated with more resources than the other?
Because there’s likely reason to believe that this CEO may not have been the only target. One usually doesn’t write a message on their bullets unless somebody is planned to still be left alive to get the message.
I mean, the assassin did leave over 99% of CEOs still alive, and hopefully the message will make its way there.
Nah, the message is on the casing, not the bullet. Though when youre as badass as this, I wouldnt be surprised if he could kill someone with a casing
Pretty gross thing to say. It’s like you got the point and said “yes this despicable moral failing is justified because it exists. Can’t argue against that. Checkmate!”
On here? Yes. Lemmy is very anti-capitalist, anti-rich, anti-buisness. So in their eyes a possible hired assassination of a CEO should be considered a good thing. Which is kind of ironic considering I hear a lot of folks on here say how CEO’s don’t do anything but collect money which in that case targeting them does no good since they didn’t do anything.
everyday, meat-and-potatoes murder
bruh
This is what living in America does to the brain
Because the police protect capital above all.
If CEOs are dying there’s a potential negative financial impact, whereas unhoused people dying makes their job easier.
Holup. I am certain this is going to be very good for the finances of everyone, including police.
I’m pretty sure this is the only way for Reaganomics to actually work.
As wealthy people die, the wealth gets spread out and taxed (a little), so more people have access to spend it. Now we just need them to be more like musk and spawn a horde of children to increase this effectiveness.
trickle down is when i piss on thatcher’s grave
This. If you look very closely at police cars that say “Protect and Serve”, you’ll notice the fine print after that says “the wealthy”.
Barricade just looked around at US society and put the slogan on himself that made sense as a cop car. “To Enslave and Punish.”
I’m starting to think the autobots weren’t the “good guys.” At least in Micheal Bay’s Transformers.
Dying unhoused people don’t effect the economy which is why no one cares … unless we can use them as indentured servants or outright slaves, then we could care more about them.
Slavery 4 Change
Why is it weird?
Not asking why it is unfair, just why it is weird.
its weird seeing the facade crumble a little more
RTO? How about DTO (Death To Oligarchs)?
Sounds french
Now the French really know how to do civil upset
Any evidence for either number?
No, but you also never see a homeless man’s death make international news.
But the NYPD doesn’t control the news? Like, that has nothing to do with how much their spending on the investigation as far as I can tell.
The police didn’t control the news though.
Didn’t they raise bridges and try to create checkpoints all around the area? That never happens for anyone else.
I haven’t heard about that yet. An excellent counterpoint if true though.
The ambiguity of your comment leaves space for the reader to guess whether you are blaming the police for their (alleged) comparative spending or blaming the journalists for their comparative coverage.
whether you are blaming the police… or blaming the journalists
They could also just be saying a statement without forcing blame on anyone. If I say the sky is blue, I’m not blaming the sky for having moisture nor blaming my eyes for perceiving it as blue.
My intent was to convey that the existence of a media frenzy is not proof that the police are spending disproportionate resources on the investigation.
There was a media frenzy around the murder of George Floyd, but hardly any spending by the police in the investigation.
Indisputably true and society’s moral failure on its own, but the OP is questionable.
Why is it weird? This shit was always happening, you’re just now starting to finally notice it and wake up.
Have I missed something? I feel like the NYPD is investigating this the same way they do every murder.
Sure, the media is covering it like crazy, but I haven’t seen anything to indicate that the NYPD is doing anything different than their norm. And the NYPD can’t exactly control what the news covers.
At worst they’ve been told, “hey, there’s a lot of scrutiny on this one, so give it a little extra attention,” but that’s not “millions of dollars” they they otherwise wouldn’t have spent.
Have I missed something?
Yes, reality.
Have I missed something?
Nah. Just a bunch of terminally online living out their cyberpunk fantasy.
cyberpunk?
They don’t have press conferences, raise the bridges to stop traffic out of the city, put out (this many) ground units to question and collect evidence for every murder in New York. Not by a long shot. The location of the murder and identity of the victim are playing a big factor in this. Because coverage happened, they’re responding. If there were 270 news articles written about Non-Descript-Murdered-Citizen #6hey might give it the same attention.
There were 808 murders in New York in 2020. Did you see this response from those deaths, do you recall?
I mean, yes you’re correct on all points, but 2020 is a really bad year to pick. They kinda had people dropping dead all over the city to the point of mass graves. Pretty sure that might have stretched the emergency services just a teensy bit.
According to This, there were 29 murders in New York in October of this year. How many of those got the same treatment?
They don’t typically immediately deploy helicopters, drones, and dogs when someone gets shot.
Yeah dude, you’re the only one who thinks the power structure in this country is weird. Everyone thinks it’s good and normal. Even the killer never thought about that
How’s this a meme?
Check the description of the community.
It’s meant to be an inclusive version of “whitepeopletwitter”.
The meaning of “meme” continues to drift. It’s almost synonymous with “post” now.
Literally always has been.
You had to hit me with the word “literally?” 😆
I don’t know what you mean, though. “Meme” and “post” are two different words describing different things, even if they’re often related. They aren’t synonyms.
Maybe even to the point where it “means” “something that can be perceived with any sense”. It doesn’t mean that at all, but people keep using it that way so I guess at some point that is the new definition 🤢
Remember about a year and a half ago when no expense or resource was spared to try to rescue a billionaire with a deathwish from the bottom of the Atlantic while AT THE VERY SAME TIME over 500 refugees that could have been saved, who were still at the surface, were left to drown off the coast of Greece.
The ship had been in distress almost two days before it sank, but help didn’t come until it was too late. How many might have been rescued with one-tenth the resources that were rushed to save the five billionaires and millionaires on the Titan?
This isnt a healthcare problem. This is a global crony market capitalist problem.
This is a class
warfareoccupation problem.Fuck valuing human life on the basis of ego score.
crony market capitalism
also known as just capitalism
Doubt the US Coastguard is going to sail over to Greece though
Lazy bastards
I’m sure the navy doesn’t have any ships in that area with nothing better to do.
All capitalism is crony capitalism
I’d argue the allowance of passive shareholders is what causes the biggest problems. Shares of profits should go to active employees only, unless they’ve fulfilled the requirements of a pension, not entities that intend to collect capital while contributing no labor towards the products/services generating the profit.
Passive income should only be hard earned. The only passive income that should be legal should be after 20+ of laboring/supporting the means by which those profits were generated, so it cannot be gamed.
Not some random assholes with chips from their last trip to the exploitation, insider info casino. People have to earn a living, it’s perfectly reasonable to DEMAND skin in the game in order to make money.
This doesn’t address the core issue of capitalism:
Owners in general (of businesses, housing, everything) get all the money, thanks to the opportunity to mercilessly take advantage of workers/renters/everyone else. And taking advantage gets you more money to take more advantage of people.
The passivest of incomes goes to the owners, the ceos are just the highest paid guard dogs of those people.
Is that ok? Passive income being much harder to earn for everyone, unless you are rich enough to start your own business, that is.
Are we not going to end up in the same situation? Isn’t it basically the same situation we’re already in?
Shares of profits should go to active employees only, unless they’ve fulfilled the requirements of a pension, not entities that intend to collect capital while contributing no labor towards the products/services generating the profit.
So if my nephew wants to borrow $5k from me to start a business, I shouldn’t be allowed to lend it to him?
Keep in mind that all of these restrictions result in consenting adults being prevented from entering the economic arrangements they want to enter into.
Don’t you understand how serious it is to have any threats to oligarchy??? Even if 300m people would accept an offer to replace him in his job, and provide just as effective claims denials, a homeless person…
I know it’s not the point but Jesus fucking Christ then is not than. How fucking hard is it to notice that they’re two different words?
Direct correlation between people that use “then” instead of “than”, and people who don’t use “of” after “couple”
Laziness and ignorance
Edit - the same people that say LaNgUagE iS alWAyS eVolViNg 😂
Yeah and people who say “could of” instead of “could have”. Writing is not just mimicking sounds you make out loud but they don’t seem to know it
Eh, what’s wrong with omitting a couple words now and then 😝
*than
It’s actually then*, learn yourself before correcting others.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/every-now-and-then
Nikki up there was lampooning me by suggesting that there was nothing wrong with missing a “couple words now and then” in order to humorously goad me for my previous statement about missing the word “of” in front of the word “couple”
My riposte, as dull as it were, was to insinuate that they’d used the wrong “then/than”, thus harking back to the original subject of the admittedly pointless comment chain
But well done you for spotting the deliberate error, and my condolences for the difficulties you must encounter daily with your reading comprehension 😊
Direct correlation between
There’s a certain irony in complaining about improper grammar while speaking in fragmented sentences. Why is it bad to omit “of” but not “There’s a” like you did?
LaNgUagE iS alWAyS evolving
It is.
Idk maybe not everyone has a first language of english and had english lessons.
Like english is literally my fourth best spoken language. And I’m disabked with cognitive issues.
Guilt, much? Then = marks a condition or a point in time. Than = comparison.
I’m a native English speaker. Honestly… who cares? We can still understand them just fine. Do you speak four+ languages like they do? I studied a second language for 10 years in school and barely remember it. I self-studied a third for a couple of years and it’s HARD. What in the world do they have to be guilty for? Being way better at being multilingual than the average native English speaker?
I obviously care. There is also nothing wrong with having pet peeves. Zero people need to agree with what my pet peeves are allowed to be. I see this dumb mistake all the time and that’s not really related to the linguistic status of this one individual.
Sure, have your pet peeves. That’s perfectly fine. However, making someone feel bad about it and implying they should feel guilty, when they’ve already made a huge accomplishment in learning another language, isn’t. You’re not wrong, but you’re still an asshole.
The vast, vast majority of these simple mistakes are native speakers
ESL speakers know better
I guess someone finally got tired of the guillotine jokes and actually did it.
They probably got tired of seeing their family die from treatable diseases.
That could be correct, but potentially it could be more personal.
Maybe the shooter themselves had an illness or condition that was expensive to maintain, or treatment was rejected. If they had nothing to live for or weren’t super-concerned with getting caught, that could be an explanation.
You guys have been joking?
