An Assassination Thought Experiment

Do we want this to be the norm?

I wrote recently that too many physicians have applauded, publicly, the cold-blooded assassination of Brian Thompson, CEO of UnitedHealthcare. Their rationale, it seems, is that health insurance is problematic and that people are too often harmed by denials, refusals, premiums, etc. These things are not untrue. However, as such supporters of the act reason that murder is acceptable recompense for the harms caused.

I’m seeing more and more of this, not only among physicians but from the populace in general. I’m not sure how to explain it.

I have seen the killer described as a hero and the late Mr. Thompson named a ‘mass murderer.’ Never mind that he was never charged or convicted with the crime of murder, much less mass murder.

Never mind that suddenly, gun crime isn’t a problem but a solution.

I digress…let’s get back to the thought experiment.

So what if…

A recent former president, accused of war crimes during the war on terror, is killed by the father of children who died from drone strikes. He symbolically represents thousands of families. He is lauded as a hero in his native land and among many Western Muslims. Would this be acceptable? No?

OK, what if…

The national director of an organization providing abortion services is killed on the street by an anti-abortion activist. The killer, who is African-American, considers abortion an immoral act no better than slavery, a genocide against her race and believes that the death of millions upon millions of unborn children signficantly impacted the demographics and thus the political influence of her community. Would she be a hero? No?

How about this…

A highly placed public health official is ambushed and murdered by a man who lost his business during the COVID lockdowns. He and his family then lost their home and his children lost a full year of education and are still behind. Also, his mother died alone in the nursing home because she could not have visitors. The man is angry and feels wronged by the public health establishment. He feels that the individual he murdered was one of the prime drivers of the pain he and millions of other citizens suffered. He might be seen as a hero. Would he be?

Well the answer we have to give is “no, no and no.” To consider these justifiable acts is to descend into barbarism. It is to relinquish the rule of law.

It is to believe, as our ancestors in darker times believed, that justice is served best by revenge.

Life is hard enough. How much worse if this is the kind of morality to which we return.

As I struggled to sleep last night, pondering this (and apparently stimulated by some prednisone I took), I came back to this interaction from the Lord of the Rings.

Frodo: ‘It’s a pity Bilbo didn’t kill Gollum when he had the chance.’

Gandalf: ‘Pity? It’s a pity that stayed Bilbo’s hand. Many that live deserve death. Some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them, Frodo? Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. Even the very wise cannot see all ends.’ J.R.R. Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings.

Let me repeat:

‘Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment.’

That’s sound wisdom for all of us.