3
submitted 1 month ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
all 48 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Luigi has become such an icon and crystallized so many frustrations that I'm hopeful his conviction will finally spark the rebellion this country desperately needs. Hopefully in time before it turns into a fully fledged dictatorship - so, pretty soon.

[-] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 1 points 1 month ago

It’s literally been the only light in the world of darkness for over a decade.

[-] Captainautism@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I started the Luigi Mangione “documentary” on HBO (I hesitate to call it that instead of what it is, propaganda)…and I didn’t even get 10 minutes into it and they were going on and on about how the UH CEO was such a good family man with so much good potential.

Gag!! 🤮

[-] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 1 points 1 month ago

Which is funny because everything I’ve heard about him is that he was a huge prick.

[-] Captainautism@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 month ago

I haven’t finished the doc, and I’m not sure I’ll be able to. It’s just offensive intellectually.

[-] Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 month ago

If they convict him there's likely to be mass riots.

[-] ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

There's no "if" here, it's "when".

Whether or not Luigi did it, somebody needs to made an example of by the ultra-rich class and the corporate world for murdering one of their own. That person is Luigi.

[-] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 month ago

If Luigi Mangione get killed he will live forever as a martyr of the workers. His name will forever be etched into history and a new wave of revolutions will arrive, a working class united against the rising tide of fascism.

[-] NoxAstrum@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 month ago

You'd think Trump would be aware of the martyrdom argument. Maybe not.

[-] Jumpingspiderman@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Trump cannot imagine anyone doing something for reasons that benefit anyone other than themselves.

[-] cows_are_underrated@feddit.org 1 points 1 month ago

Killing someone is exactly how you get a really fucking angry crowd who will remember his name seek revenge.

[-] BleatingZombie@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

I think there's even a word for it. Let me go ask my friend Marty R.

[-] snausagesinablanket@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

What comes around goes around Donnyboy. The next president could do the same to you for treason.

[-] hark@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Biden had the chance with the backing of the supreme court and their ruling on "official actions" on top of the already strong legal case, but he didn't because the ruling class sticks together no matter how much they talk about "danger to democracy".

[-] GaMEChld@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Good. They should try to get the death penalty which will put the jury under the maximum pressure to nullify.

I wonder if some of the legal fund can be used for public service announcements to educate the public on jury nullification. IIRC judges don't like to hear that kinda talk in court.

[-] Empricorn@feddit.nl 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

This is so ridiculous. He killed a dude. That's worthy of the death penalty (not in Texas)!? People have done worse to many people, or children, or... and not been sentenced to death.

Even if you're 100% against murder in all circumstances and feel he should be locked up forever, you have to see this is just CEO's exercising their outsized influence to discourage further punishment of the 1% and corporate leaders that prey on Americans...

[-] x00z@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Murder is legal in self-defense or to save the live of another.

That's how you need to look at this.

[-] Jumpingspiderman@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Homicide can be justifiable. Murder is a crime.

[-] Jumpingspiderman@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

It's not murder if it's done in self-defense or to save the life of some other innocent person. It's justifiable homicide.

[-] canajac@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 month ago

Depends on what country you live in. In Canada that is not a valid reason to kill.

[-] canajac@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 month ago

I call bullshit on that. Post the law that makes it legal.

[-] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

Trump freed 1500 criminals who wanted to kill elected officials in a terrorist-style seige of the capital.

But yeah, go punish a national hero.

[-] UncleJosh@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Question: Will "The Government's most solemn responsibility is to protect its citizens from abhorrent acts" be on the gates to the concentration camps?

[-] pivot_root@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Trump, in an executive order: "The Government's most solemn responsibility is to protect its citizens from abhorrent acts, and my Administration will not tolerate efforts to stymie and eviscerate the laws that authorize capital punishment against those who commit horrible acts of violence against American citizens."

Abhorrent acts like denying over 1/4 of healthcare coverage claims? Abhorrent acts like demanding surgeons scrub out and immediately call back the insurer to justify the surgery that they were in the middle of performing?

No, of course not.

[-] Nougat@fedia.io 1 points 1 month ago

The other side of that coin is that capital punishment doesn't protect anyone from anything. In fact, it puts us all in more danger for a variety or reasons, including:

  • The State can kill you with impunity if so desired
  • Where capital punishment exists, people who commit crimes are more likely to escalate to more heinous acts in order to evade capture
[-] pivot_root@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

I only wanted to point out the hypocrisy, but you make a good point:

Where capital punishment exists, people who commit crimes are more likely to escalate to more heinous acts in order to evade capture

[-] Nougat@fedia.io 1 points 1 month ago

I forgot:

  • Innocent people get executed a lot.

And this indirect effect, even when the person sentenced to death is undeniably guilty:

  • Opportunity cost. The legal process of appeals that goes on before a convicted person is actually executed is more costly than life imprisonment. The money spent on that process is not spent on constructive public good.
[-] RejZoR@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago

Rich fucks are afraid he might go after them if he gets out of jail one day.

[-] DickFiasco@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

Even moreso, I think they're worried this will normalize violence against their class, so they want to make an example of him. One Luigi can be imprisoned or executed; a thousand Luigis is a bigger problem.

[-] ieatpwns@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

I like the sound of one thousand Luigis

[-] Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

He killed one of the Kings white stags on his lands.

St. Luigi of Hood.

[-] Scrollone@feddit.it 1 points 1 month ago

He didn't even kill. He's innocent.

[-] blackn1ght@feddit.uk 0 points 1 month ago

He's innocent until proven guilty. But there does seem to be a strong case that he did kill him.

[-] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

If so, why is he pleading innocent?

[-] hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

He pled not guilty. You don't plead innocence in court.

He has to prove that he is not guilty of the case brought by the prosecution. That's what not guilty means. He only has to disprove the specifics of the case brought against him.

Its the procetutor's job to prove, it is the defendant's job to disprove.

Pleading not guilty is the right choice. Either his lawyers think he's not guilty, and this plea lets them beat the charges, or he is guilty and this plea delays the inevitable.

If he pled guilty that would skip the main part of the trial and go straight to sentencing. Pleading guilty is rarely a good idea unless you are making a deal for a reduced sentence.

[-] amon@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

It's all just game theory. It's a 2x2 grid of (actually guilty, actually not guilty) and (plea guilty, plea not guilty). You add up the risks and rewards for each box and usually not guilty is the better choice

[-] caboose2006@lemm.ee 0 points 1 month ago

Impossible. Luigi and I were white water rafting in Idaho on the day of the murder. Luigi and I love white water rafting.

[-] P1nkman@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Nah, you were with his brother, Mario. It's easy to mistake the two. I was with Luigi, he was vacationing in Denmark with me.

[-] LaunchesKayaks@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

No no no. You see, you couldn't have been with Luigi because he and I were horseback riding in Montana at that time.

[-] atx_aquarian@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

"I would have liked to have seen Montana."

[-] Slab_Bulkhead@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

perhaps Captain Borodin, in a another life. maybe even sometime say oh i dunno in the third arc of that life you'll be a professor and run a failing dig site at Fort Peck Lake, Montana for fossils!

[-] atx_aquarian@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

He did see Montana! 🤯

[-] gnomesaiyan@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

If he's actually put to death, he'll become a martyr. Saint Luigi Mangione. If this doesn't spark a revolution, we're fucking toast. I hate this fucking timeline.

this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2025
3 points (100.0% liked)

News

28808 readers
3115 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS