• BigBenis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Remember folks, the company reps you interact with are generally not the ones making the rules they are paid to abide by. They’re working for a living, just like us.

    With that, calling this an “act of terrorism” is an incredulous overreaction that just goes to show how badly they’re shitting their pants right now.

    • chakan2@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      They’re working for a living, just like us.

      They’re part of the machine that sucks the blood of the people. I wouldn’t advocate violence, but they’re not worthy of our respect.

    • DrDystopia@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’ve quit jobs because of ethical concerns before, these people don’t make a living just like me.

      • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        Imagine having the privilege of not having to compromise your morals because you can get a job just like that in this economy

        • DrDystopia@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Imagine not compromising my morals cost me a lot. Time after time. But as someone with a strong consciousness, I know it will cost me more to compromise on my personal values. It’s just that it’s not a monetary cost.

          You sound like an economical slave, why do you accept the situation?

          • ThrowawayOnLemmy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            You sound like an economical slave, why do you accept the situation?

            Because I need food and shelter otherwise I die.

            • aquafunkalisticbootywhap@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              there is shelter and food, plenty to go around- it’s being locked behind an amoral paywall.

              do the moral things at your job and get fired over it. make it clear when you apply elsewhere why you were fired.

              if we’re being forced to choose between doing the right thing and surviving, the system is broken AND those hoarding obscene amounts, living in luxury, making the decisions to further screw customers and employees in the name of investors and executives need to be addressed, one way or another.

              …Im not saying any of this is easy, but the other option seems to be just try to be happy with the scraps they let us fight over? no thank you.

        • chakan2@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          I took that job and quit a month in for the same reason. I’d rather be in crippling debt than compromise my morals that badly. I couldn’t do it and look at myself in the mirror in the morning.

        • Blackrook7@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          That’s exactly how they want you to think and be.
          Angry at those with even a modicum more. But keep doing at Walmart and Amazon and every other conglomerate.

    • KeenFlame@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      We learned about individual responsibilities before, the slaying of poors is not just making a living, it’s not the corporate entity that is the evil it is the henchmen that have individual rights to say stop just like any soldier that is told to rape and plunder innocents

  • RangerJosie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    2 days ago

    They think they’re making an example. That this will have a chilling effect.

    They’re wrong. All this is going to do is radicalize even more people. As it should.

  • RoidingOldMan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    “You people are next” does seem pretty threat-ish, however:

    After being charged with threats to conduct a mass shooting or an act of terrorism, a judge set Boston’s bond at $100,000.

    That is completely out of touch with what happened. “You people are next” not an act of terrorism.

    • na_th_an@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s hard for me to agree this is a threat after media has spent years explaining why all of Trump’s language is actually never threatening or inciting violence, even after his language incited violence.

  • uis@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    First “witch” burned by inquisition of capitalism

  • Stopthatgirl7@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    173
    ·
    3 days ago

    Remember this the next time the cops tell someone they can’t do anything about a stalker or angry ex threatening to kill them until they actually act. They can do something. They choose not to.

  • Kalysta@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    3 days ago

    May the first amendment suit she files after this gain her the money she needs for her healthcare. And may whatever insurance company this is be dissolved.

  • Gammelfisch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    This occurred in Deregulated Fucking Florida and I thought the damn MAGATs are for freedom of speech.

  • NostraDavid@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    See, telling your supposed enemy your intentions was the first mistake. If you didn’t intend to go through with it, then it was just an empty threat. Either way it’s dumb.

  • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    87
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    Attorneys have said the insurance industry uses a “delay, deny, defend” tactic to withhold health care services.

    Jailed for using words to describe what insurance companies do?

    Judge is trying to fill their year-end quota.

    • dandelion@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      “Delay, Deny, Depose. You people are next,” she allegedly said near the end of the call.

      Let’s be real, the “You people are next” is probably the reason for jail.

      • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        “You people are next…”

        “… to hear from my lawyer!”

        “… to get bad press once I go to the newspaper.”

        “… <insert anything that doesn’t mean physical violence.>”

        I hope we don’t jail people based on what we think they meant.

        • dandelion@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          police jail people for even less than that, they will lie and frame innocent people to put them in jail

          She repeated the phrase written on the bullet casings used in the killing of an insurance CEO and then said “you people are next” on a phone call with her insurance - it’s clearly a threat given the context of the phrase and the killing. Denying that context is one of the less defensible positions here. What is more defensible is that her threat is clearly empty and the law has stricter requirements about what constitutes a crime.

          • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            She repeated the phrase written on the bullet casings used in the killing of an insurance CEO and then said “you people are next” on a phone call with her insurance - it’s clearly a threat given the context of the phrase and the killing.

            Here’s the thing, at least this is how I view it:

            Is it reasonable to believe she can actually carry out this threat? If not, then jail is waaaaay overkill. Shit, we have violent offenders and drunk drivers around here who don’t see the inside of a cell at all.

            This woman, denied insurance for either a health matter that her or a loved one is going through. She’s a middle-aged woman who doesn’t own a firearm, and is likely very frustrated for being put in a health (or financial) crisis by the denial of her insurance provider.

            Did she say “you people are next” in reference to the putting down of another insurance company CEO? Of course. Do people say things like that all the time out of frustration with no way they could realistically or literally carry out the threat? ALL THE TIME.

            This is an example of the justice system taking the side of a business, and not a person. It’s shameful, and this judge likely hasn’t considered the harm caused by insurance companies - actual harm, that actually kills real life people!

            Anyway, I don’t agree that she should have been arrested and jailed. I can empathize with her frustration, because I have sick American friends who always get shit on by their insurance company, delaying treatment or arguing against their doctor’s recommendations.

            • dandelion@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              Did she say “you people are next” in reference to the putting down of another insurance company CEO? Of course.

              Right, so not what you said originally, which is that she meant something else and the sheriff who ordered her arrest was just jumping to conclusions, a conclusion you now agree with.

              Anyway, I agree with you that it is an injustice that she was jailed, and I think we are all empathizing with her right now. We would all like the police to take more seriously dangerous stalkers and protecting people, and not serving as the militant arm of the 1%. Unfortunately, the police are an institution that historically have been put in place by the 1% to protect their interests, and there is a long-standing legal ruling that the police are not there to “protect and serve” (the common citizen).

              • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                Right, so not what you said originally, which is that she meant something else and the sheriff who ordered her arrest was just jumping to conclusions, a conclusion you now agree with.

                That could still be true, though. That’s the thing… you can’t make assumptions about other people’s intentions, even if the context seems to point one way in hindsight.

                From the article: “She reportedly said she used the phrase “because it’s what is in the news right now.””

                She may not have even known the full extent of the context, like someone repeating a meme without knowing the origin story.

                The officers interpreted what she said as an actual threat of violence, which is completely outrageous.

                After being charged with threats to conduct a mass shooting or an act of terrorism, a judge set Boston’s bond at $100,000.

                The judge made a HUGE FUCKING LEAP here! She had neither the means nor the intent to “conduct a mass shooting”, any more than if she claimed she would “nuke” their building.

                This judge is either being paid by the insurance company, or is acting in poor faith.

                Unfortunately, the police are an institution that historically have been put in place by the 1% to protect their interests, and there is a long-standing legal ruling that the police are not there to “protect and serve” (the common citizen).

                I couldn’t agree more, especially as it’s applied to this story.

      • Oijkuij@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Let’s say an elected official or candidate (bless em if any would actually do this) says this phrase in a speech. Would they be arrested? Or would they be given an interview for them to explain themselves, where they deftly state “obviously I’m not talking about doing it myself - but generally speaking these companies are heading in a concerning direction”. There would be debates over it, some people would be upset, but the story would fade and the politician would likely move on as well.

        Say that phrase with Trump’s voice in your head and it sounds like much of his political speech.

        Regular folks must be a lot more careful with their speech in the US, far less of it is free.

        • dandelion@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          that’s true for everyone in jail :-) but it’s also not the most proximate cause, it’s more like a background requirement, a necessary but not sufficient condition

      • 4lan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        Sure that’s the reason but is it a justification?

        Do you know how many people are saying shit like this everyday all day?

        This is the police protecting corporate America over the working class.

        I guarantee they are taking orders from the oligarchs. Squash any talks of more execution

  • Pandantic [they/them]@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    102
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    From the article’s source article:

    “She’s been in this world long enough that she certainly should know better that you can’t make threats like that in the current environment that we live in and think that we’re not going to follow up and put you in jail,” said Lakeland Police Chief Sam Taylor.

    I thought we had a legal definition of a real threat, and this isn’t it.

    • BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      3 days ago

      I’m not convinced it’s a threat. She didn’t say she was DOING anything, just that nobody is putting up with their shit anymore…

  • realcaseyrollins@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    According to the affidavit, 42-year-old Briana Boston used the phrase during a call with BlueCross BlueShield about a denied claim.

    “Delay, Deny, Depose. You people are next,” she allegedly said near the end of the call.

    The “You people are next” line certainly adds some context to this story.

    • Pazu900@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      A bit, but it still doesn’t explain how this warrants terrorism charges and $100,000 bail. A visit from the police and probation or anger management courses? OK I still don’t really agree but it makes some sense. But not prison time. She’s getting punished harder than many rapists and child molesters.

      • Wrench@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        MAGA paraded with more direct threats of violence on signs, after Jan 6th, with no accountability.

      • realcaseyrollins@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Why wouldn’t an insinuation of terrorism warrant a terrorism charge and a lot of bail money? That doesn’t make sense.

  • Spacehooks@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    70
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Nothing like jail time to radicalized someone more. Judge is playing 5d cheese by providing motivation.