and his killing created a focus for the public's rage toward its predatory practices. Of course nobody should be murdered in cold blood, regardless of how harmful his business practices might be. However much a particular person might symbolize the excesses of a business, no one is entitled to appoint himself judge, jury and executioner of that person; Thompson's killer should be arrested and tried for murder. The real problem is that regardless of how immoral and harmful UHC's and other health insurers' practices are (and how immoral Thompson and other executives might be for implementing and supporting them), we have a health care payment system that preys on people's illnesses and injuries and it's perfectly legal.
The insurance industry, especially health insurance, is parasitic - and it's largely unregulated, and it has enough money and enough lobbyists to make sure it stays that way. The ACA improved the situation slightly but not nearly enough, because our Congress didn't want to derail the insurers' gravy train and had little incentive to do so. Killing off a few CEOs won't change a thing; they will be replaced by more CEOs with the same incentive to maximize profits at the expense of their captive customers by delaying claim reimbursements or denying coverage altogether. Maybe Thompson's murder will help focus the public's anger enough to get Congress to regulate these pirates, but I wouldn't count on it. Money doesn't just talk; it shouts more loudly than anything else.