This is a genuine question.
I have a hard time with this. My righteous side wants him to face an appropriate sentence, but my pessimistic side thinks this might have set a great example for CEOs to always maintain a level of humanity or face unforseen consequences.
P.S. this topic is highly controversial and I want actual opinions so let’s be civil.
And if you’re a mod, delete this if the post is inappropriate or if it gets too heated.
This was not a random or petty attack. Their message on the bullet casings makes it clear they were attacking this person because they’ve knowingly helped enable incomprehensible amounts of human suffering on a scale of millions.
I understand that vigilantism, speaking generally, has its own serious dangers. But speaking specifically, this person is clearly not a threat to people who aren’t legalized mass murderers. Who’s he going to pick next? Probably the CEO of the second most abusive healthcare insurer.
The police follow the law. The law is defined by politicians, who are effectively purchased by the owner class. The police were never going to arrest that CEO for their crimes against humanity, it would be illegal for them to do it out of the public interest. Direct vigilantism was the only realistic chance at deterrence in this situation.
Weird fantasy but ok.