• shiroininja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    335
    ·
    9 days ago

    Threatening the hospital that was denying my father care, leaving him to die, was the only way I got into the literal board room to reason with them. I got them to resume treatment after they dicked around for a month and he refused to leave because he was going to die if he left.

    He still died because he was so sick at that point that they couldn’t do the procedure he needed when he first arrived.

    So I threatened them in 2010, and I’d fucking do it again now for my child. We are supposed to stand up for our loved ones.

    • obre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      126
      ·
      9 days ago

      It’s disgusting. There needs to be legal recognition of all that is at stake for patients and their families. The denial of necessary care is structural violence and should be treated as such by everyone.

    • LillyPip@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      ·
      9 days ago

      got them to resume treatment after they dicked around for a month and he refused to leave because he was going to die if he left.

      I had to play this card once, too. I was in the cardiac unit for 28 days, and they were going to send me home because they couldn’t figure out what was wrong, and the insurance decided I wasn’t worth the expense anymore.

      I refused to leave until they gave me a diagnosis, because i would have just died otherwise.

      Pretty sure the healthcare system still wants that.

      • shiroininja@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        9 days ago

        Financial extermination. But threat of violence would’ve been my next step in trial and error. It’s my family… I’d do anything for them. People even told me I should’ve. It was a tough situation and I was young. A little younger than Luigi.

  • Stopthatgirl7@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    152
    ·
    9 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.

    • joker125@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      109
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      Funny part is insurance companies hear worse than this all day long however this is their trigger.

      L O L

      • shadowfax13@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        previously it was at some poor customer support agent in a 3rd world country, now the danger is to the mega donors oligarchy club members.

        won’t be tolerated.

    • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      9 days ago

      You people are next

      Yea this part is not gonna look good in court.

      Just those 3 words without adding more would sound less bad, might not have gotten out of the arrest, but adding “You people are next” just ensured the arrest and charges.

      • skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        76
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 days ago

        Yet, if some citizen tells another citizen directly, “I’m going to kill you until you are dead,” and that second citizen then goes to the police to report it, the police will respond, “we have no proof other than your hearsay, person one has to actually commit some act of violence before we can even issue a restraining order (worthless) let alone do any ‘police work.’”

        This is how it acts in citizen-to-citizen interaction in the real world. A business gets special treatment versus a citizen, yet again.

        (Regardless of how crass or inappropriate her angry comment was. Remember: America lets Nazis exist because “free speech” - it’s a huge hypocrisy.)

        • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 days ago

          In the Article:

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

          Her problem is that she said it over the phone, every company records all phone calls, they always have an automatic voice saying “this call will be recorded for quality and training purposes” that makes anything you say after implied to have given consent for the recording, bypassing any two-party comsent laws.

          I don’t dispute the fact that corporations and rich people have preferrential treatment, but having evidence like a phone call recording is what’s ultimately gonna get law enforcement to act.

          If you have a video of someone saying “I’m gonna get my gun and shoot you until your’re dead” to your face, that would probably have higher chances of getting law enforcement to act rather than just a “he said she said” heresay. No guarantees that they’ll act (cops are mostly lazy and don’t wanna do their jobs), but its much much better than just you claiming they threatened you without providing any evidence.

        • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          9 days ago

          If you have a recording of someone threatening to kill you, the police can absolutely act.

          Threatening to kill someone unless they give you what you want is not protected speech. Otherwise, you could walk into a bank, demand they give you money under threat of violence, then walk out having committed no crimes.

          • InputZero@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 days ago

            I’m sorry to say, but that’s not necessarily true. It would need to be a police recording or record of someone threatening you for them to actually have to do anything. You could walk into a precinct with a bona fide video of someone making a serious threat to your life and the police typically won’t do anything about it. That same person could make a clip about murdering you and post it online with a clear plan to kill you and the police still wouldn’t have to act. All of that is hearsay, regardless of how serious the intent is and the police can choose to ignore it. Unless it’s someone worth helping, someone who might be able to make a sizable donation.

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

              The police doesn’t have to act if a person drags another person into the precinct and murders them in front of all the cops according stupid US courts (Warren v. District of Columbia).

              That’s why 2a and self-defense are such important rights. You want to be safe? Better take care of it yourself (or elect a 3rd party that will change the status quo, but fantasy solutions don’t count).

          • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            9 days ago

            Remember the time Lemmy was so outraged at the elections that they, un ironically, became Unabomber stans

      • Verqix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        She didn’t say she was going to be involved in whatever the “next” thing ment. Might have been a heart-felt warning against vigilantes.Also, the “next” thing might well have been “…to get much needed care denied”.

        Legally this is so flimsy it’s a waste of time. Looking at wording from politicians there’s way more direct calls to violence which will never be prosecuted. In practice it shows the pull of big corporations with cops, and inconveniences the life of an already inconvenienced person.

      • SuperSaiyanSwag@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 days ago

        I was literally told by some dude that “if I see you again, I’ll fucking kill you” while I was walking my dog at night around my town’s library. I told the police and they didn’t do jack shit. Whereas this lady gets a hit by a $100,000 bond?

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

        It’s weird, because I took it to mean that the people she’s talking to are going to be denied insurance in some way next.

        I mean we can assume, and it’s fairly likely, that it was a reference to the assassination, but American court is fucked if this is enough.

      • FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        9 days ago

        Fear can be a very powerful motivator, as everyone one rent check away from the street knows. It’s time for the leeches to feel some of that fear

        • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          9 days ago

          You need to reread what the judge said when he set her bail. When the rich become afraid for their lives they send their law enforcement after those people they are afraid of and they fill the jails that they own with the people who have inspired their fear.

          All this fervor is not going to result in a changing of healthcare. Not with our newly minted Republican Congress and a douche canoe for a president. No all of this is going to result in a curbing of our free speech rights and a deadlier police state than we already live in. To say nothing of what’s going to happen to our voting rights in the next 4 years.

  • Erasmus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    85
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 days ago

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

    “I do find that the bond of $100,000 is appropriate considering the status of our country at this point,” the judge said.

  • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    83
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 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.

  • Spacehooks@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 days ago

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

    • orrk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 days ago

      please, the free speech brigade only protects important speech, like calling for minority executions

    • wagesj45@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      Yes, actually, I am. This is nowhere near an actionable threat and arresting her over it is insanity and should be criminal itself.

      • doingthestuff@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 days ago

        It was the, “You people are next”. If she had just used his catchphrase I doubt we’d be here.

        • wagesj45@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 days ago

          I didn’t think that holds muster either. It could mean many different things, even in context. The bar for true threats in the US is very high, as it should be. They clearly wanted to make an example of her to nip this class consciousness in the bud, and our legal system is certainly prone to bad decisions and practices, but in theory I can’t see this passing that high bar.

  • RoidingOldMan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 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
      27
      ·
      8 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.

    • Bronzebeard@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 days ago

      Depose is the assassin’s addition, not part of the healthcare tactics. You can’t depose someone who’s already at the bottom

      • Kitathalla@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 days ago

        Clearly what we all mean when we say depose is get them in front of a lawyer asking questions on the record.