I think you will find that many, many pharmacists are quite glad the CEO got got. A substantial number of pharmacists are unfortunately bourgeois-minded treat hounds, but the only thing they hate more than patients and technicians and non-pharmacy management and themselves is the insurance companies.
edit: unclear who got got in original phrasing
Libertarians 
Boomer Chuds
“They’re basically adults”
Sectionalism, isn’t that what JD Vance was up to?
this is that it is such a liberal standard that it can be applied to nearly everyone. There are scores of documented peasant rebellions throughout history, so by the same standard it is plausible that any given peasant may be at risk for launching a peasant rebellion down the line and thus, by that same standard, we are justified in liquidating them.
This folds under scrutiny. Any given peasant may pose a threat of revolt, but a royal heir poses a specific threat, and of a much greater magnitude in both likelihood and severity that the two cases are not comparable. There existed specific powerful groups who had a vested interest in putting an heir to the throne back onto it, and the means to attempt to do so in bloody fashion.
In this case, the specific qualities of the subject set them apart from the general population. I liken it to BRCA positivity. Yes, any given breast may cause cancer. However, it is not prudent to excuse every breast. It is prudent to excise one’s breasts if one is double BRCA positive. One does not have to do this, but it is a reasonable response to a specific threat that can prevent greater harm in the future.
Overselling Greenland is a proud historical tradition, no reason to stop now